Brunel Business SchoolMG3123 Issues and Controversies in M.docx

Brunel Business School
MG3123 Issues and Controversies in Marketing
Guidelines on preparing the Project Report for 2019/20
Assessment title:
Final Year Project Report
Module leader:
Lynne P Baldwin
Distribution date:
23 September 2019 (day 1 of Term 1)
Submission deadline:
12:00 noon on Wednesday 26 February 2020
Feedback by:
Within 25 working days. That is, by Thursday 2 April 2020
Contribution to overall module assessment:
100%
Indicative student time working on assessment:
350 hours
Word or page Limit (if applicable):
8000 words (not including references)
Assessment type (individual or group):
individual
Main objective of the assessment
To write a report of a piece of research. This involves being

able to use the literature in order to identify a suitable research
problem/issue or opportunity to explore, to design/implement a
study using suitable and appropriately justified research
methods, to present the findings and finally to provide
conclusions. You will also have demonstrated that the
requirements of responsible ethical behaviour in research were
taken into account. All of this encourages you towards
becoming an ‘independent’ researcher. Being independent
means (amongst other things) being capable of: (a) formulating
good questions; (b) developing and presenting well-informed
and well-supported arguments; and (c) defending your
arguments in open discussion. Learning to deal with complex,
open-ended problems and limited, often ambiguous, information
is an extremely valuable preparation for future challenges.
Description of the assessment
In this, you will have shown how you have “draw[n] on the
literature in the field, analyse[d] and interpret[ed] research
evidence of a discipline-specific phenomenon in order to
identify a suitable research problem/issue or opportunity to
explore”, that you have “identified a suitable research
problem/issue or opportunity, design[ed] and implement[ed] a
research investigation/study, use[d] suitable research methods,
appropriately justified, and report[ed] efficiently and
effectively on the findings, conclusions and (where appropriate)
proposals for appropriate action thereof”. You will also have
demonstrated “that the requirements of responsible ethical
behaviour in research [were] suitably taken into account”. You
need to provide evidence that you have understood and met “the
requirements of responsible ethical behaviour in research”.
These quotes come from the learning outcomes published in the
module block outline.
The Project Report should consist of a carefully-crafted account

of your Project. It is important to remember that this Report is
the only evidence that the markers are able to use when
assessing your work. These guidelines are designed to help you
to prepare the best document/Report possible, so that you do
full justice to the research you have undertaken. Please read in
conjunction with the marking scheme.
Format
· Project reports must contain no more than 8,000 words, as
measured by the standard word count available on Microsoft
Word. This includes all the text starting from Chapter 1
(anything before the first word of chapter 1 does not count) but
excluding the list of References list and the Appendices (if
any).
· Reports should have appropriate spacing (either single-line
spaced or 1.5 line spaced), with a 3.5cm left-hand margin (to
allow for binding) and 2.5cm top and bottom margins.
· The recommended fonts are: Arial (or any other standard,
modern font) or Times New Roman (should you prefer a more
‘traditional’ font). Text should be in 11 or 12 point. Chapter
headings should be larger, that is, in either 12, 14 or 16 point.
· Insert a page number at the bottom of the report (in Word,
click ‘insert page number’).
· Chapters, sections and sub-sections should be numbered using
standard report formats (for example, ‘Chapter 1: Introduction’;
‘1.1 The research problem’).
· The title page should include: Project title, your student ID
number. All title page text should be centred and presented in
18 point Arial font.
· The Abstract should be no more than 250 words, summarising
the whole Project and highlighting your key findings.
· It is essential to provide references for ALL source material
that you use in your Project, using the Harvard format (for
example, books, articles, reports, newspapers, webpages). This

includes citing sources in the text and providing full references
in the list of References. Additional guidance on how to
cite/reference can be obtained from the Library.
Structure
The precise structure and presentation of your Project will
depend in part on the research and the approach that you have
adopted. The following structure is typical (‘typical’ does not
mean ‘required’):
· Cover sheet. However, if you forget to do this, you will not
lose any marks, so there is no need to ‘take back’ any version
and upload a new one if you forget. As long as we have your
student ID number on the front, this is sufficient in order for us
to identify your work (this is the point of the coversheet).
· Title page
· Abstract (the equivalent term in business reports is ‘Executive
Summary’).
· Acknowledgements
· Table of contents page
· List of figures page
· List of tables page
· Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter is likely to include:
background to the research area, problem definition/research
gap, and Project outline.
· Chapter 2: Literature review (you may insert a more

meaningful title, based on the research area). It is unlikely that
you will need two chapters for this, but if you do, then you are
free to do so. This guidance, in this document, assumes that
you will not (because, normally, you do not).
· Chapter 3: Research methods. Here you present and justify
your research approach, method used, and the rest, that is, what
data was gathered, and when, how).
· Chapter 4: Results/Findings. Here you present your analysis
and the results/findings from the data that you gathered).
· Chapter 5: Discussion (or, ‘discussion and conclusion’, or
‘conclusion’ or some other wording which tells the reader ‘this
is the final chapter’). Here you summarise the whole piece of
research, highlight what you have found/what contribution your
study has made, state the limitations, set out the future work
and, if there are any, state the practical or other implications to
research and/or practice.
· References (Harvard referencing style).
· Appendices (this may include, say, the questionnaire or other
instrument used, the letter from the Research Ethics
Committee).
There is no fixed allocation of words for particular
sections/chapters; it is a matter of judgement (your judgement,
not ours), within the overall word limit. When initially
allocating a word length to your chapters (and also when editing
chapters at a later stage), you should take into account the kind
of research you have undertaken (for example, some research
questions may justify slightly longer literature reviews; largely
quantitative research studies may require fewer words in the
Results/Findings chapter, as findings can be summarised using
graphs).

Appendices should be used for relevant material that cannot be
inserted in the main text without disturbing the logical flow
(this is normally related to evidence of the data that you
collected) that are cross-referenced in the Report. Transcripts
of interviews should be included in the Appendices; however, if
they are very extensive, they can be presented in font 10 or 9;
single spaced or on double sided pages. If you use Appendices
incorrectly (for example, if they contain parts of your main
argument that you could not ‘fit’ into the main Report, or large
amounts of raw evidence, such as printouts), you risk losing
marks.
Other sources of advice
We recommend that you read several research methods
textbooks, focusing on relevant chapters, and use these sources
to support your arguments in the Report. You can also learn a
lot about research – including theory, concepts, evidence,
methods, and presentation – by reading examples of published
academic research (for example, journal articles, dissertations,
theses and reports). Just one warning: remember that other
researchers may follow different sets of guidelines (for
example, for report structure and referencing), to those
specified for this Project.
Any questions?
If you have a question, in the first instance try to resolve it
yourself by looking at these guidelines, the marking scheme and
the study guide and by discussing them with colleagues in your
seminar group. If you are still unsure, speak to your seminar
leader.

Submission instructions
This Report must be submitted electronically via the
University’s WiseFlow system. The required file format is pdf.
Your student ID number must be used as the file name (e.g.
0123456.docx). You must ensure that you upload your file in
the correct format and use the College’s electronic coursework
coversheet.
· An electronic copy of your Project is to be uploaded by the
deadline, 12:00 noon UK time on the day/date stated above.
· The file MUST be saved in Word format (and then in pdf) and
should not contain any large graphics files (or similar), which
could affect the overall file size.
· Two identical paper copies of the Project to be submitted to
Taught Programmes Office (TPO) by 17.00 pm UK time on the
same day/date. Both copies must be soft bound (that is, not
loose sheets), single-sided with a standard cover sheet on top.
Marking scheme
This document provides you with detailed criteria that will
be/was used in marking the Project. This marking scheme, like
all marking schemes, draws on the University’s grade
descriptors to inform its design. Marking is evidence-based.
As markers, we make our ‘judgement of the academic standard’,
as it is called in Senate Regulations. A ‘judgement of the
academic standard’ is more usually shortened to/called our
‘academic judgement’. We use the evidence in front of us to
award the mark/grade that the work merits, in our academic
judgement. The marking scheme and the University’s grade
descriptors are used to assist us in making that academic
judgement when marking any work, including this Final Year
Project Report.

UG grades and grade point bands [Senate Regulation 2 (2009
starters onwards)] are: A++ (17), A+ (16), A (15), A- (14), B+
(13), B (12), B- (11), C+ (10), C (9), C- (8), D+ (7), D (6), D-
(5), E+ (4), E (3), E- (2), F (1).
Below is the marking scheme and it provides an illustration of
each assessment criterion achieved at each of the grade
descriptors for this level:
1. Abstract and Introduction
Grade Descriptor
15%
There is a particularly clear and concise abstract covering all
key points, that is, purpose, background, rationale, method(s),
key finding(s), and contribution(s). Chapter 1 presents a
particularly excellent introduction, including an overview and
motivation for what follows. There is a particularly excellent
overview/summary of the literature which is to be discussed
later, that is, in the review of the literature chapter. Chapter 1
suggests that this FYP Report has a ‘story’ which identifies a
suitable ‘research problem/issue or an opportunity to explore’.
This chapter may or may not include (this is optional) a very
clear and concise summary of material to be covered in
subsequent chapters.
A*
90-100
marks
There is a particularly clear and concise abstract covering all
key points, that is, purpose, background, rationale, method(s),
key finding(s), and contribution(s). Chapter 1 presents an
excellent introduction, including an overview and motivation
for what follows. There is an excellent overview/summary of
the literature which is to be discussed later, that is, in the
review of the literature chapter. Chapter 1 suggests that this

FYP Report has a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable ‘research
problem/issue or an opportunity to explore’. This chapter may
or may not include (this is optional) a very clear and concise
summary of material to be covered in subsequent chapters.
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
There is a very clear and concise abstract covering all key
points, that is, purpose, background, rationale, method(s), key
finding(s), and contribution(s). Chapter 1 presents a very good
introduction, including an overview and motivation for what
follows. There is a very good overview/summary of the
literature which is to be discussed later, that is, in the review of
the literature chapter. Chapter 1 suggests that this FYP Report
has a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable ‘research problem/issue
or an opportunity to explore’. This chapter may or may not
include (this is optional) a very clear and concise summary of
material to be covered in subsequent chapters.
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
There is a reasonably clear and concise abstract covering all key
finding(s), and contribution(s). Chapter 1 presents a good
follows. There is a good overview/summary of the literature
which is to be discussed later, that is, in the review of the
literature chapter. Chapter 1 suggests that this FYP Report has a
‘story’ which identifies a suitable ‘research problem/issue or an
opportunity to explore’. This chapter may or may not include
(this is optional) a clear and concise summary of material to be
covered in subsequent chapters.

C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)
(58-59 = C+)
There is a somewhat clear and concise abstract covering all key
finding(s), and contribution(s). Chapter 1 presents a satisfactory
follows. There is a reasonable overview/summary of the
literature which is to be discussed later, that is, in the review of
the literature chapter. Chapter 1 suggests that this FYP Report
has a ‘story’ but that it may not clearly identify a suitable
‘research problem/issue or an opportunity to explore’. This
chapter may or may not include (this is optional) a reasonably
clear and concise summary of material to be covered in
subsequent chapters.
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
There is evidence of deficiencies which mean that the threshold
standard (D-) has not been met. This may be due to any number
of the following. Abstract is either missing or does not serve
relevant purpose. Chapter 1, which likely includes an overview
and motivation for what follows, is either inadequate or
missing. The overview/summary of the literature which is to be
discussed later, in the review of the literature chapter, is either
inadequate or missing. It suggests that this is not a ‘story’
which identifies a suitable ‘research problem/issue or
opportunity to explore’. If there is a summary of material to be
covered in subsequent chapters this is inadequate.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)

(38-39 = E+)
The work is unacceptable. The work presented does not show
achievement of some (or all) of the learning outcomes described
for this aspect of the task. This may be due to most of, or all of,
the following. Abstract is either missing or is not clear. Chapter
1, which likely includes an overview and motivation for what
follows, is either inadequate or missing. The overview/summary
of the literature which is to be discussed later, in the review of
the literature chapter, is either inadequate or missing. It
suggests that this is not a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable
‘research problem/issue or opportunity to explore’. If there is a
summary of material to be covered in subsequent chapters, this
is inadequate.
F
0-29 marks
2. Literature Review
Grade Descriptor
20%
There is a particularly excellent description and an equally
excellent critical discussion of the literature in the field and its
treatment demonstrates a highly sophisticated, critical and
thorough understanding of the subject matter. The literature is
plentiful and wholly appropriate. The particularly excellent
introduction includes an overview and motivation for what
follows. The discussion, drawing on a particularly excellent
interpretation and understanding of the literature gathered to
support the claim(s) made, is highly sophisticated in its critical
powers. The analysis demonstrates an exceptional insight into
the aspect(s) of business/management that have been chosen to
be explored. It is a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable research
problem/issue. If there is a framework of any type (there is no
requirement for one), this is particularly excellent. The ‘gaps’,
expressed as questions or hypotheses (or however “a … research
problem/issue or opportunity” is termed) are exceptional in

terms of how SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented,
Relevant, and Time-bound) they are.
A*
90-100
marks
There is an excellent description and an equally excellent
critical discussion of the literature in the field (the subject
matter) and its treatment demonstrates a sophisticated, critical
and thorough understanding of the subject matter. The literature
is plentiful and wholly appropriate. The excellent introduction
includes an overview and motivation for what follows. The
discussion, drawing on an excellent interpretation and
understanding of the literature gathered to support the claim(s)
made, is sophisticated in its critical powers. The analysis
demonstrates excellent insight into the aspect(s) of
business/management that have been chosen to be explored. It is
a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable research problem/issue. If
there is a framework of any type (there is no requirement for
one), this is excellent. The ‘gaps’, expressed as questions or
hypotheses (or however “a … research problem/issue or
opportunity” is termed) are excellent in terms of how SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented, Relevant, and Time-
bound) they are.
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
There is a very good description and an equally good critical
discussion of the literature in the field (the subject matter) and
its treatment demonstrates a well-developed, critical and
comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. The
literature is plentiful and wholly appropriate. The very good
introduction includes an overview and motivation for what
follows. The discussion, drawing on a very good interpretation
and understanding of the literature gathered to support the

claim(s) made, is very good in terms of its critical powers. The
analysis demonstrates very good insight into the aspect(s) of
a ‘story’ which identifies a suitable research problem/issue. If
one), this is very good. The ‘gaps’, expressed as questions or
hypotheses (or however “a … research problem/issue or
opportunity” is termed) are suitably SMART (Specific,
Measurable, Action-oriented, Relevant, and Time-bound).
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
There is a good description and an equally good critical
discussion of the literature in the field (the subject matter) and
its treatment demonstrates a systematic and substantial
understanding of the subject matter. The literature is sufficient
in terms of type/amount and is for the most part appropriate.
The good introduction includes an overview and motivation for
what follows. The discussion, drawing on a good interpretation
and understanding of the literature gathered to support the
claim(s) made, is good in terms of its critical powers. The
analysis demonstrates good insight into the aspect(s) of
a ‘story’ which, for the most part, identifies a suitable research
requirement for one), this is good. The ‘gaps’, expressed as
questions or hypotheses (or however “a … research
problem/issue or opportunity” is termed) are for the most part
suitably SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented,
Relevant, and Time-bound).
C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)

(58-59 = C+)
There is an adequate description and discussion of the literature
in the field (the subject matter) and its treatment demonstrates a
systematic understanding of the subject matter. The literature is
adequate in terms of type/amount and is for the most part
appropriate. The reasonable introduction includes an overview
and motivation for what follows. The discussion, drawing on a
reasonably adequate interpretation and understanding of the
literature gathered to support the claim(s) made, is adequate but
is likely limited in terms of its criticality. The analysis
demonstrates adequate insight into the aspect(s) of
a ‘story’ which, just about, identifies a suitable research
requirement for one), this is satisfactory. The ‘gaps’, expressed
as questions or hypotheses (or however “a … research
problem/issue or opportunity” is termed) are adequate in terms
of being SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented,
Relevant, and Time-bound).
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
of the following. There is an inadequate narrative and an
equally inadequate critical discussion of the literature and its
treatment demonstrates some, but an insufficient, understanding
of the subject matter. The literature is inadequate in terms of
type/amount and/or is for the most part inappropriate. The
follows is either inadequate or missing. The discussion, drawing
on an insufficiently appropriate interpretation and a too-limited
made, is inadequate. The analysis demonstrates an inadequate
insight into the aspect(s) of business/management. It is a ‘story’

which does not identify a suitable research problem/issue. If
one), this is not satisfactory. The ‘gaps’, expressed as questions
or hypotheses (or however “a … research problem/issue or
opportunity” is termed) are either inappropriate or are missing.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)
(38-39 = E+)
the following. There is an inadequate narrative and an equally
inadequate critical discussion of the literature and its treatment
demonstrates an insufficient understanding of the subject
matter. The literature is inadequate in terms of type/amount
and/or is for the most part inappropriate. The introduction is
either inadequate or missing. The discussion, drawing on an
insufficiently appropriate interpretation and a too-limited
made, is inadequate. The analysis demonstrates an inadequate
insight into the aspect(s) of business/management. It is a ‘story’
which does not identify a suitable research problem/issue. If
there is a frameworkof any type, this is not satisfactory. The
‘gaps’, expressed as questions or hypotheses (or however “a …
research problem/issue or opportunity” is termed) are either
inappropriate or are missing.
F
0-29 marks
3. Research Methodology
Grade Descriptor
20%
The research methods chapter is particularly excellent in terms

of its clarity, and its treatment of the issues involved
demonstrates a highly sophisticated, critical and thorough
understanding of research methods more generally. A
particularly excellent argument is made for the
instrument(s)/tool(s) which have been used to gather the data. A
particularly excellent justification is provided as to why
that/those selected have been chosen, and there is a particularly
excellent, comprehensive description of the data collection and
analysis process, including consideration of the ethical issues
involved. There is exceptional clarity as to how the literature in
the field (the subject matter) informed its/their design.
How/why data is gathered is crucial in a piece of research and
this Project demonstrates an exceptionally good treatment of
this issue.
A*
90-100
marks
The research methods chapter is excellent in terms of its clarity,
and its treatment of the issues involved demonstrates a
sophisticated, critical and thorough understanding of research
methods more generally. An excellent argument is made for the
instrument(s)/tool(s) which have been used to gather the data.
An excellent justification is provided as to why that/those
selected have been chosen, and there is an excellent,
comprehensive description of the data collection and analysis
process, including consideration of the ethical issues involved.
There is clarity as to how the literature in the field (the subject
matter) informed its/their design. How/why data is gathered is
crucial in a piece of research and this Project demonstrates an
excellent treatment of this issue.
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
The research methods chapter is very good in terms of its

clarity, and its treatment of the issues involved demonstrates a
well-developed, critical and comprehensive understanding of
research methods more generally. A very good argument is
made for the instrument(s)/tool(s) which have been used to
gather the data. A very good justification is provided as to why
that/those selected have been chosen, and there is a very good,
comprehensive description of the data collection and analysis
process, including consideration of the ethical issues involved.
There is clarity as to how the literature in the field (the subject
matter) informed its/their design. How/why data is gathered is
crucial in a piece of research and this Project demonstrates very
good treatment of this issue.
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
The research methods chapter is good in terms of its clarity, and
its treatment of the issues involved demonstrates a systematic
and substantial understanding of research methods more
generally. A good argument is made for the
instrument(s)/tool(s) which have been used to gather the data. A
good justification is provided as to why that/those selected have
been chosen, and there is a good description of the data
collection and analysis process, including consideration of the
ethical issues involved. There is reasonable clarity as to how the
literature in the field (the subject matter) informed its/their
design. How/why data is gathered is crucial in a piece of
research and this Project demonstrates good treatment of this
issue.
C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)
(58-59 = C+)
The research methods chapter is reasonable in terms of its

clarity, and its treatment of the issues involved demonstrates a
systematic understanding of research methods more generally. A
reasonable argument is made for the instrument(s)/tool(s) which
have been used to gather the data. A reasonable justification is
provided as to why that/those selected have been chosen, and
there is a reasonable description of the data collection and
analysis process, including consideration of the ethical issues
involved. There is adequate clarity as to how the literature in
the field (the subject matter) informed its/their design.
How/why data is gathered is crucial in a piece of research and
this Project demonstrates adequate treatment of this issue.
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
of the following. The research methods chapter is inadequate in
terms of its clarity, and/or its treatment of the issues involved.
Whilst it demonstrates some understanding of research methods
more generally, it is insufficient. The argument made for the
instrument(s)/tool(s) which have been used to gather the data is
either inadequate or missing. The justification provided as to
why that/those selected have been chosen is either inadequate or
missing. The description of the data collection and analysis
process, including consideration of the ethical issues involved
is either inadequate or missing. How the literature in the field
(the subject matter) informed its/their design is either
inadequate or missing. How/why data is gathered is crucial in a
piece of research and this Project demonstrates inadequate
treatment of this issue.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)
(38-39 = E+)

the following. The research methods chapter is inadequate in
terms of its clarity, and/or its treatment of the issues involved.
The understanding of research methods more generally is
insufficient. The argument made for the instrument(s)/tool(s)
which have been used to gather the data is either inadequate or
missing. The justification provided as to why that/those selected
have been chosen is either inadequate or missing. The
description of the data collection and analysis process,
including consideration of the ethical issues involved is either
inadequate or missing. How the literature in the field informed
its/their design is either inadequate or missing. How/why data is
gathered is crucial in a piece of research and this Project
demonstrates inadequate treatment of this issue.
F
0-29 marks
4. Results/Findings
Grade Descriptor
20%
The presentation and analysis of the results is particularly
excellent. Findings/results are presented with exceptional
clarity and in an exceptionally effective manner. There is
evidence of originality and independence of thought, and the
work clearly demonstrates the exceptional ability to develop a
highly systematic and logical or insightful solution or
evaluation.
A*
90-100
marks
The presentation and analysis of the results is excellent.
Findings/results are presented with great clarity and in a highly
effective manner. There is evidence of independence of thought,

and the work clearly demonstrates the ability to develop a
highly systematic and logical or insightful solution or
evaluation.
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
The presentation and analysis of the results is very good.
Findings/results are presented with clarity and in a very
effective manner. There is evidence of independence of thought,
and the work clearly demonstrates the ability to develop a
systematic and logical or insightful solution or evaluation.
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
The presentation and analysis of the results is good.
Findings/results are presented well and in a sufficiently
effective manner. There is evidence of a significant degree of
competence in developing a solution or evaluation.
C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)
(58-59 = C+)
The presentation and analysis of the results is reasonable.
Findings/results are presented reasonably well and in a
reasonably effective manner. There is evidence of an acceptable
degree of competence in developing a solution or evaluation.
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
There is also evidence of deficiencies which mean that the

threshold standard (D-) has not been met. This may be due to
any number of the following. The presentation and analysis of
the results is inadequate. Findings/results are not presented
adequately and/or in a reasonably effective manner.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)
(38-39 = E+)
the following. The presentation and analysis of the results is
inadequate. Findings/results are not presented adequately and/or
in a reasonably effective manner.
F
0-29 marks
5. Conclusions and Recommendations
Grade Descriptor
15%
Conclusions drawn follow from the discussion of the
results/findings and demonstrate an exceptional ability to
synthesise the data/evidence with the literature in the field (the
subject matter). There is a highly sophisticated, critical and
thorough understanding of the limitations of the piece of
research identified and described, and suitably appropriate
future work which follows from this are presented. If there are
practical or other recommendations for business/industry (this is
not a requirement) these are not only targeted, specific and
realistic but follow directly from the preceding analysis of the
data/results presented.
A*
90-100
marks

results/findings and demonstrate an excellent ability to
subject matter). There is a sophisticated, critical and thorough
understanding of the limitations of the piece of research
identified and described, and suitably appropriate future work
which follows from this are presented. If there are practical or
other recommendations for business/industry (this is not a
requirement) these are not only targeted, specific and realistic
but follow directly from the preceding analysis of the
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
results/findings and demonstrate a very good ability to
subject matter). There is a well-developed, critical and
comprehensive understanding of the limitations of the piece of
research identified and described, and suitably appropriate
future work which follows from this are presented. If there are
practical or other recommendations for business/industry (this is
not a requirement) these are not only targeted, specific and
realistic but follow directly from the preceding analysis of the
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
results/findings and demonstrate a good ability to synthesise the
data/evidence with the literature in the field (the subject
matter). There is a systematic and substantial understanding of

the limitations of the piece of research identified and described,
and suitably appropriate future work which follows from this
are presented. If there are practical or other recommendations
for business/industry (this is not a requirement) these are not
only for the most part targeted, specific and realistic but follow
for the most part directly from the preceding analysis of the
C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)
(58-59 = C+)
Conclusions drawn for the most part follow from the discussion
of the results/findings and demonstrate a reasonable ability to
subject matter). There is a systematic understanding of the
limitations of the piece of research identified and described, and
some reasonably appropriate future work which follows from
this are presented. If there are practical or other
recommendations for business/industry (this is not a
requirement) represent an attempt, if not well executed, to make
these targeted, specific and realistic and to make them follow
directly from the preceding analysis of the data/results
presented.
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
any number of the following. Conclusions drawn do not follow
from the discussion of the results/findings, or are missing.
Whilst there is some evidence of some understanding of the
literature in the field (the subject matter), it is too limited.
There is insufficient understanding of the limitations of the
piece of research identified and described, and either the future

work which follows from this is inadequate or missing. If there
are practical or other recommendations for business/industry,
there is an attempt at providing them, but it is too poorly
executed.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)
(38-39 = E+)
the following. Conclusions drawn do not follow from the
discussion of the results/findings, or are missing. Whilst there
is some evidence of some understanding of the literature in the
field (the subject matter), it is too limited. There is insufficient
understanding of the limitations of the piece of research
identified and described, and either the future work which
follows from this is inadequate or missing. If there are practical
or other recommendations for business/industry, there is an
attempt at providing them, but it is too poorly executed.
F
0-29 marks
6. Overall Structure and Professional Presentation of Report
Grade Descriptor
10%
The work is presented in an exceptionally highly professional
manner in all respects. The work adheres fully to the
requirements described in the study guide/other documentation
associated with this. The reader does not have to work hard at
all in order to ‘follow the plot’ given the exceptional ‘story
telling’. The lay person can easily understand it. If there is
jargon, it is fully explained. Material taken from other sources
is accurately paraphrased; the text/style/content is that of an

exceptional report writer. There are no grammatical and/or other
errors at sentence level. There are no errors or inconsistencies
when it comes to the citations/references. The organisation of
the text at the structural level (paragraphs, sections, chapters) is
excellent. The ‘story’ is exceptionally well told; there is an
exceptionally high level of clarity, focus and cogency in
communication at all levels.
A*
90-100
marks
The work is presented in a highly professional manner in all
respects. The work adheres fully to the requirements described
in the study guide/other documentation associated with this. The
reader does not have to work hard in order to ‘follow the plot’
given the excellent ‘story telling’. The lay person can easily
understand it. If there is jargon, it is fully explained. Material
taken from other sources is accurately paraphrased; the
text/style/content is that of the report writer. There are no, or
hardly any, grammatical and/or other errors at sentence level.
There are no, or hardly any, errors or inconsistencies when it
comes to the citations/references. The organisation of the text at
the structural level (paragraphs, sections, chapters) is excellent.
The ‘story’ is excellently told; there is a high level of clarity,
focus and cogency in communication at all levels.
A+, A, A-
70-89 marks
(70-72 = A-)
(73-79 = A)
(80-89 = A+)
The work is presented in a very professional manner in nearly
all respects. The work adheres fully to the requirements
described in the study guide/other documentation associated
with this. The reader does not have to work hard in order to
‘follow the plot’ given the very good ‘story telling’. The lay
person can easily understand it. If there is jargon, it is very well
explained. Material taken from other sources is accurately

paraphrased; the text/style/content is that of the report writer.
There are no, or hardly any, grammatical and/or other errors at
sentence level. There are no, or hardly any, errors or
inconsistencies when it comes to the citations/references. The
organisation of the text at the structural level (paragraphs,
sections, chapters) is very good. The ‘story’ is very well told;
there is clarity, focus and cogency in communication at all
levels.
B+, B, B-
60-69 marks
(60-62 = B-)
(63-67 = B)
(68-69 = B+)
The work is presented in a professional manner in most
respects. The work mostly adheres to the requirements
described in the study guide/other documentation associated
with this. The reader does not have to work too hard in order to
‘follow the plot’ given the good ‘story telling’. The lay person
can understand it. If there is jargon, it is explained. Material
taken from other sources is for the most part accurately
paraphrased; the text/style/content is for the most part that of
the report writer. There are likely some, but not many,
grammatical and/or other errors at sentence level. There are
likely some, but not many, errors or inconsistencies when it
comes to the citations/references. The organisation of the text at
the structural level (paragraphs, sections, chapters) is good. The
‘story’ is well told; there is clarity and focus in communication
at all levels.
C+, C, C-
50-59 marks
(50-52 = C-)
(53-57 = C)
(58-59 = C+)
The work is presented in a reasonably professional manner. The
work mostly adheres to the requirements described in the study
guide/other documentation associated with this. The reader does

not have to work too hard in order to ‘follow the plot’ given the
reasonable ‘story telling’. The lay person can understand it for
the most part. If there is jargon, it is explained reasonably well.
Material taken from other sources is for the most part
reasonably accurately paraphrased; the text/style/content is for
the most part that of the report writer. There are likely some or
many grammatical and/or other errors at sentence level. There
are likely some or many errors or inconsistencies when it comes
to the citations/references. The organisation of the text at the
structural level (paragraphs, sections, chapters) is adequate. The
‘story’ is adequately told; there is effective communication at
all levels.
D+, D, D-
40-49 marks(40-42 = D-)
(43-47 = D)
(48-49 = D+)
any number of the following. The work is presented in an
unprofessional manner. The work does not adhere to the
requirements described in the study guide/other documentation
associated with this. The reader has to work too hard in order to
‘follow the plot’ given the poor ‘story telling’. The lay person
has great difficulty understanding it. Jargon is either not
adequately explained or is not explained at all. Material taken
from other sources is not sufficiently well paraphrased. There
are too many grammatical and/or other errors at sentence level.
There are too many errors or inconsistencies when it comes to
the citations/references. The organisation of the text at the
structural level (paragraphs, sections, chapters) is inadequate.
The ‘story’ is not adequately told; there is a lack of effective
communication at all levels.
E+, E, E-
30-39 marks
(30-32 = E-)
(33-37 = E)

(38-39 = E+)
the following. The work is presented in an unprofessional
manner. The work does not adhere to the requirements described
in the study guide/other documentation associated with this.
The reader has to work too hard in order to ‘follow the plot’
given the poor ‘story telling’. The lay person has great
difficulty understanding it. Jargon is either not adequately
explained or is not explained at all. Material taken from other
sources is not sufficiently well paraphrased. There are too many
grammatical and/or other errors at sentence level. There are too
many errors/inconsistencies in citations/references. The
organisation of the text at the structural level (paragraphs,
sections, chapters) is inadequate. The ‘story’ is not adequately
told; there is a lack of effective communication at all levels.
F
0-29 marks
Academic misconduct, plagiarism and collusion
Any coursework or examined submission for assessment where
plagiarism, collusion or any form of cheating is suspected will
be dealt with according to the University processes which are
detailed in Senate Regulation 6. You can access information
about plagiarism here. The University regulations on
plagiarism apply to published as well as unpublished work,
collusion and the plagiarism of the work of other students.
Please ensure that you fully understand what constitutes
plagiarism before you submit your work.
University’s coursework submission policy

Please refer to the College’s Student Handbook for information
on submitting late, penalties applied and procedures.
College’s coursework submission policy
relating to the College’s Coursework Submission Policy and
procedures.
* this can be found at the bottom of the page under the
‘Documents’ section *
Extenuating circumstances policy
relating to extenuating circumstances and procedures.
Page 1 of 13

Brunel Business SchoolMG3123 Issues and Controversies in M.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Brunel Business SchoolMG3123 Issues and Controversies in M.docx

Similar to Brunel Business SchoolMG3123 Issues and Controversies in M.docx (20)

More from jasoninnes20

More from jasoninnes20 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Brunel Business SchoolMG3123 Issues and Controversies in M.docx