Get Best Dissertation Writing Help For BUS9711M At Affordable Prices !!

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Lincoln International Business School (LIBS)

LIBS Vision:

To provide an innovative, scholarly learning environment based on a commitment to responsible management practices and a global community mind-set.

LIBS Mission:

To develop socially responsible leaders ready to meet the challenges of 21st century business.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Details

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Code: BUS9711M-2

Credit Rating: 45

Level: M

Subject: Business

Pre-requisites: None

Co-requisites: None

Barred Combinations: None

Department: Department of Management

Module Lead: Dr Charlotte Smith

Teaching Team: Various supervisors

External Examiner: Various depending on programme

Contact Details

Module Co-ordinator: Dr Charlotte Smith [email protected]

Admin Support: [email protected]

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Introduction

The Professional Inquiry Project allows students to demonstrate their mastery of management within the field of their degree. It is an individual and independent project in which students can bring together and apply their learning from the programme to help to solve a chosen business problem or challenge, a real-world issue or a research topic. Through bringing together learning from across their degree programme, students will demonstrate their accumulated knowledge and understanding of management within their field and its application to organisations, through synoptic assessment.

This module seeks to enable and facilitate innovation and creativity in terms of project foci, form and output. Rather than being prescriptive, students are required to not only undertake an in-depth study of a topic related to the title of the degree but also to take responsibility for their own learning and negotiate the form and output of the final project. The choice of topic and format of the final assessment will be negotiated with the tutor, which will ensure mutuality of intent, process, practice and format of assessment. Although the foci and form of the final project are to be negotiated, the following are indicative of the potential formats students may choose: work-based project, client-based project; or other negotiated project such as the design of a new enterprise. Students will be responsible for finding an organisation and negotiating access where necessary with regard to client based projects.

Completing the Professional Inquiry Project gives you a unique opportunity to undertake an extended piece of personal research on a topic of your own choosing. By undertaking the project students will be demonstrating their ability to research and critically analyse and integrate complex information necessary in the world of contemporary management.

Learning Outcomes

On completion of the module you should be able to:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

LO3 Select, collect, analyse and interpret evidence from multiple sources in accordance with sound principles of research and investigation.

LO4 Synthesise and critically evaluate different sources of knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent argumentation.

LO5 Critically evaluate and apply theoretical and methodological approaches in ways which augment understanding of the topic.

LO6 Propose practical resolutions via conclusions and recommendations when appropriate.

LO7 Reflect critically on their own research practice and intellectual argument particularly in the context of contemporary debates in management.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Transferable Skills

In addition to the specific learning outcomes detailed above, the module also facilitates the development of a number of transferable skills; these are skills which will contribute to your own personal development as a ‘scholar’, but also in the world of work. These can be identified as:

• Problem solving and critical analysis: analysing facts and circumstances to determine the cause of a problem and identifying and selecting appropriate solutions.

• Research: the ability to analyse and evaluate a range of business data, sources of information and appropriate methodologies, which includes the need for strong digital literacy, and to use that research for evidence-based decision making. Conceptual and critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

• Self-management: a readiness to accept responsibility and flexibility, to be resilient, self-starting and appropriately assertive, to plan, organise and manage time.

• Self reflection: self-analysis and an awareness/sensitivity to diversity in terms of people and cultures. This includes a continuing appetite for development.

Principles of Responsible Management Education

Lincoln International Business School is a member of PRME (Principles of Responsible Management Education) and seeks to engage its students in critical debate about the implications of sustainability for the global business community and management practice. To that end, students are encouraged to integrate these principles into their research practice and reflect on the implications of PRME for their own work.

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Module Delivery

The module will be delivered primarily through individual supervision, but there will be an initial programme of academic skills lectures and research methods lectures to start the process of independent study. The full schedule of activity is available in Appendix 1.

Key Dates

• 6th September 2023- Deadline for completing the research topic survey (needed to allocate you to a supervisor with expertise in your chosen area)

• 20th September 2023- By this date, you will be allocated to a supervisor for your final project and you should contact them to arrange your first meeting

• 8th November 2023- Deadline for project proposal (10% of your mark)

• By the end of November 2023 (at the latest)- submit your LEAS ethical approval form (including supporting materials)

• 30th January 2024- Deadline for final project

Contact Time

There will be a series of online lectures and up to 6 hours of supervision.

Directed Study

Students will be allocated an individual supervisor, who will advise and facilitate the process of independent study. Preferred supervisors cannot be guaranteed.

Independent Study

Students are expected to invest approximately 450 hours of time into their Professional Inquiry Project. Most of this will be through independent study. You are expected to articulate your research focus and develop key research questions to guide your investigation. Supervisors will advise but will not direct the study.

Module Delivery	Total Hours
Lectures/workshops	24
Supervision (max.) Independent Study (nominal) Nominal Total (CATS)	6
	420 450 (45)

Assessment Summary

The module will be assessed through a portfolio comprising several interrelated elements. The initial project proposal will be a maximum of 1000 words. Students will be required to maintain an online supervision log used to monitor, gauge and feedback on student progress. The final project submission will be a maximum of 11,000 words, submitted as a single piece of written work. The final grade will be allocated either as a weighted average

of the two assessments or based on the final written submission (final project), whichever is the higher.

In summary:

• Project Proposal (10%) – LO1, LO2

• Final Written Submission (90%) LO1- LO7

Full assessment details are available in Appendix 3.

Assessment Method	Weighting (%)	LOs Assessed
Assessment Method	Weighting (%)	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Project Proposal	10	X	X
Final Project	90	X	X	X	X	X	X	X

Formative Assessments

Students will receive formative feedback through regular supervision meetings with their allocated supervisors. The Project Proposal will be assessed against assessment criteria, and students are expected to obtain feedback through supervisory meetings.

Assessment Criteria

Assessment Criteria Grids will be used to provide feedback on Blackboard and indicate how marks will be allocated. These can be found in Appendix 2.

Avoiding Plagiarism

The University Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own. Examples of plagiarism include the unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form. Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of dishonest means in assessment. Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of the procedures and penalties involved. Plagiarism is, however, easily avoided by the full and correct use of referencing.

When available, always check your ‘similarity’ rating index on Turnitin submissions to ensure you percentage rating is in the ‘green’. Please note however, that such a rating is indicative only and tutors will consider other evidence in assessing the academic integrity of your work. Where there are doubts about your work, you may be called in for an interview.

In submitting your work for assessment, in accordance with the University Regulations, you are certifying that this is entirely your own work without input from either commercial or non-commercial writers or editors, or advanced technologies such as Artificial Intelligence services, beyond that permitted by the proof-reading policy. You also confirm all sources have been correctly attributed or referenced. You may be required to evidence that the work submitted is indeed your own, through making available drafts and data to any integrity investigation.

Should such misconduct in assessment be detected prior to or following the final examination board, then the penalties imposed could be severe; including the revoking of any degree awarded. Academic offence proceedings initiated by the University may delay graduation and/or extend beyond the time frame of an academic year.

Recording your Supervisor Meetings

Once a month you must meet with your supervisor to discuss your progress.

If you do not complete a form for a particular month then the PGT admin team will send you a reminder to complete the form. If a form is still not submitted then you may be invited to an attendance panel meeting and, if you have a Tier 4 Visa, your visa may be at risk.

Below is the link to the Supervision Record online form which you need to complete once a month to evidence your engagement with the final project process. All students need to complete the form (both Home and International students).

Here is the link you need:

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=xEculd4FgkKDr19LRrFij4KpavX L2V9Hgoadw4QyfxJUOU9VNEtIWEMxREZHM0ZYUk9FVFY0SERDSi4u

You need to complete the online form every month in order to be able to submit the final project.

The University’s Student Engagement and Participation Policy states that students need to engage during the final project period as well as during the timetabled sessions.

Please remember: If you hold a Tier 4 visa and do not submit the online form each month to show your engagement then you are breaching the terms of your visa.

Returning Home

If you have a Tier 4 visa and wish to return home to work on your final project, you need to ask for your supervisor’s approval and then complete a Change of Circumstances form and Tier 4 will review the request. You must not return home until the absence has been authorised. The change form can be accessed via the link below and you need to select the category of ‘change of research location’.

Learning Resources

Reading

The key text(s) for this module are:

Chatfield, T. (2018) Critical Thinking: Your Guide to Effective Argument, Successful Analysis & Independent Study. London: Sage.

Cottrell, S. (2017) Critical Thinking Skills: Effective Analysis, Argument and Reflection. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P.R. and Jaspersen, L.J. (2018) Management and Business Research, London: Sage.

Gray, D.E. (2020) Doing Research in the Business World. London: Sage.

Moore, S., Neville, C., Murphy, M. and Connolly, C. (2010) The Ultimate Study Skills Handbook. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Other more specific references will be signposted in class. You are also expected to read independently for this module. This module requires that you follow the Harvard System of referencing.

Recorded webinars

Recorded webinar: Good academic practice at the University of Lincoln Recorded webinar: Finding information: successful searching

Recorded webinar: Resources for academic study

Recorded webinar: Accessing library resources and effective internet searching Recorded webinar: Evaluating information: is it CRAAP?

Recorded webinar: Acting on feedback

Recorded webinar: Getting organised and avoiding procrastination

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

The Library (www.library.lincoln.ac.uk)

Our Subject Librarians are Martin Osborne and Daren Mansfield. They can assist you to use the catalogue, do subject searches and so on. Contact details are:

Martin Osborne’s contact details:

Work telephone: (01522) 886316

Email: [email protected]

Room: University Library

Daren Mansfield’s contact details:

Work telephone: (01522) 886094

Email: [email protected]

Room: University Library

If you cannot find Martin Osborne or Daren Mansfield, any of the subject librarians will help you.

Digital Learning Resources (https://digitaleducation.lincoln.ac.uk/resources-hub/) In addition to the above it is recommended you make use of the digital learning resources to support your learning on this module:

Research Ethics

The University requires that all those carrying out research engage with the University’s commitment to conduct research to high ethical standards; understand the reasons for, and participate fully in, the ethical review process; and fulfil their moral and legal responsibilities in respect of the rights and welfare of participants.

Click here to download your Ethics Handbook.

Click here to download the Research Ethics Policy.

The conduct of students must always be overseen by their supervisor, who takes responsibility for ensuring that the Code of Practice for Research and all relevant policies and procedures are followed.

Please read the research code of practice.

The University of Lincoln is committed to ensuring that its research activities involving human participants and personal data are conducted in a way which:

• respects the dignity, rights and welfare of all participants in research; • minimises risk to participants, researchers and third parties;

• appropriately manages personal data;

• aims to maximise the public benefit of research.

Types of Research

Research is broadly viewed as ‘that involving humans’ and ‘that not involving humans’. Research not involving humans

No ethical clearance is required for any research that is:

• Desk or library based

• Reviews of existing publicly available data

• Systemic reviews of literature.

Research involving humans

For all other research designs, you will complete an individual application using the Lincoln Ethics Application System (LEAS).

You will need to liaise with your academic supervisor to complete the application before requesting the academic supervisor’s authorisation. Once your supervisor is happy that you have addressed all their comments, they will sign the form and you can then request authorisation from the second marker for a review of your application.

The second marker will only electronically sign the form when they are happy with it, otherwise they will add comments and reject the authorisation request, prompting you to reflect further upon their concerns.

Please note that you may be required to make amendments before your application receives a favourable outcome. The review process can take around four weeks and, in

exceptional circumstances, may take longer. Therefore, it is important to invest sufficient time and energy into completing your application, as this will ultimately delay the progress of your project since no data collection can commence until you have ethical approval for your research.

Please watch this short training video before you begin your application. Navigating LEAS – YouTube

You can also find a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) here.

Supporting Documents

To complete an individual application to LEAS you will need:

• Any participant information sheets

• Any questionnaire /interview questions and schedule

• Any schedule for focus groups of other data collection approaches • Have considered the risks and data management of your proposed work (generic guides are available to help you complete the risk assessment) • Have considered where your research fits within existing body of literature and developed an outline methodology before you commence your application. • Have considered the language used in your data collection instruments with your participants.

• Evidence of organisational approval for the research (see below).

These supporting documents and information must be submitted with your LEAS application, otherwise it will be rejected.

You cannot therefore undertake a successful LEAS application before you have reviewed the literature and considered your methodology.

Please note you may only use approved questionnaire services. Currently, this is MS Forms, JISC or onlinesurveys.ac.uk (where the University will create an account for you). You should contact [email protected] directly to set up your account.

Templates

There are approved University of Lincoln templates that you can adapt to suit your project (e.g., participant information sheet, consent form etc.) You can find these templates here.

Organisational Approval

Students conducting research in their own organisations need to submit evidence of organisational approval for their research. As long as it is not the NHS (there is a separate pathway for NHS research), then simply attaching a copy of an email or letter within the documents section of LEAS that states that the organisation knows about the research and is happy for it to take place will be sufficient in the vast majority of cases. There may be an issue in local government or social care organisations if they have their own internal research governance system in place, but you will usually be signposted to that internally. Please discuss this with your supervisor if you are unsure.

An example for context: A student doing research in their organisation, Tesco, would like to interview or give staff at the branch a questionnaire. In this instance, a short note from their manager would be sufficient, unless the organisation has an internal approval process (or it is the NHS).

LEAS Review Process

The outcome of an application to LEAS will be either:

o A favourable opinion – to support the work and allow it to proceed o An unfavourable opinion – whereby queries have been raised you need to address in your application.

This video shows you how to edit your application based on reviewer comments: Responding to reviewer comments – YouTube.

If your proposed research involves any aspect of a special human characteristic (such as working with children) then your LEAS application is reviewed by a committee in LIBS prior to a decision being taken. This will take more time to approve. Where this is the case, LIBS will allocate reviewers for projects that are vulnerable groups or sensitive topics (the second supervisor signature will not be available for those projects).

Please ensure you allow enough time between submission of an application and the intended start of your data collection. The review process can take around four weeks and, in exceptional circumstances, may take longer.

Remember you must not start to collect any primary data until you have received an email confirming your application has been given a favourable ethical opinion.

Final projects based on primary data that are submitted without ethical approval may be subject to an academic offence investigation and/or attract a fail mark.

Appendix 1: Schedule of Activity

Week	w/c	Lecture 1 Academic Skills Lecture	Lecture 2 Research Methods Lecture	Reading All available through the Online Reading List
35	29/05/23	Introduction to the module and business and management research	Generating ideas for research & Reviewing the literature	Gray (2020) Chapter 3 & Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 2
36	05/06/23		The philosophy of business and management research	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 3
37	12/06/23	Navigating the library services	Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 4
38	19/06/23		Research ethics	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 5
39	26/06/23	Harvard referencing & Presentation and academic conventions	Qualitative research approaches: interviews, focus groups and secondary data & Qualitative research approaches: observational and visual methods	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 6 & 7
40	03/07/23		Management and analysis of qualitative data & Writing up research findings	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 8 & 12
41	10/07/23		Quantitative methods: survey design and secondary data	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapter 9
42	17/07/23		Tour of SPSS statistics software	Gray (2020) Chapter 23
43	24/07/23		Statistical analysis of quantitative data	Easterby-Smith et al. (2018) Chapters 10 & 11
End of taught sessions and beginning of independent study

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Appendix 2a: Assessment Grid: Project Proposal

Clarity 12%	Excellent (5)	Good (4)	Satisfactory (3)	Fair – with risk of failure (2)	Poor – needs significant improvement (1)	Not Evidenced (0)
Is the focus of the project clear and suitable? Is there a central aim and related objectives? Is the focus suitable for the degree title?	Excellent Clarity	Aims and objectives clearly expressed but would benefit from further improvement/tightening	Aims and objectives apparent and workable, but some further clarification required	General aim apparent but are insufficient to provide the guidance or structure required	General aims weekly identified but need further refinement and objectives need to be articulated appropriately	Not Evidenced
Rationale 20%
What is the justification for and relevance of the topic in terms of academic literature, contemporary business practice and/or enterprise development? Is there scope for critical thinking and originality/creativity?	Excellent Rationale – clear and concise	Rationale fundamentally sound, but would benefit from further thought/stronger argument in some areas	Rationale as outlined is generally relevant but lacks originality and/or scope for creativity/criticality. The rationale needs to be clearer/stronger in some respects; to enable the work to make appropriate recommendations/develop stronger conclusions	Rationale is weak and arguments need strengthening in several important respects if the work is to meet a pass standard	Rationale unclear/inconsistent. The argument insufficiently supported and lacks clarity/relevancy	Not Evidenced
Suitability 20%
Is the approach to the problem or project sound? Are the potential sources of evidence identified and to what extent can this material be assembled? Have sources of evidence been evaluated? Are the sources/subject accessible?	Excellent – clear relationship between aims/objectives and chosen approach. If followed through competently the work should address all aims and objectives	The approach is generally suitable and, if carried out competently should enable the general aims and most of the objectives to be met. There are some minor concerns/potential improvements required	Approach being taken is broadly appropriate. However, there are some doubts about some aspects and further work is needed in several important respects. However, there is confidence that the approach should enable the work to succeed	There are significant doubts about the suitability of the approach being taken/proposed. Unless the issues are addressed then the work is unlikely to meet the standard expected	Methods/Sources are either inappropriate or ill defined. Unless the approach is changed/further developed, the work is likely to fail	Not Evidenced

References 12%

Is the scope and extent of the

literature

understood? Have the key sources been identified an accessed? Are the citations correct?

Excellent –

precise and

appropriate with no obvious

limitations

The references/sources are broadly and specifically

appropriate to the purpose of the research. If used well they should enable the work to reach a high standard. Some minor additions/adjustments are needed to improve the potential

The evidence presented confirms that the sources are broadly sufficient and accessible. Further work is needed to either identify more focused

material/sources and/or broaden the evidence base. If used appropriately, the evidence base is sufficient to enable the work to reach a pass standard

Basic sources

identified but

further sources are needed to scope the study. Unless the sources are

developed, the

work is unlikely to pass

References

inappropriate/insufficient, further literature search

needed. As it stands the evidence base is insufficient to enable the work to pass

Not

Evidenced

Structure 12%

Is the proposed structure logical and consistent

with the aims and objectives?

Excellent – no

further

improvements required

The proposed structure is consistent with the proposed approach and follows

conventions. There are only minor improvements needed

The proposed structure of the work is consistent with the general principles of research. If the work was presented in the manner suggested it would be likely to meet a pass standard. However, the proposed structure could be

enhanced in some key respects

Structure needs more work and

unless

improvements are made the final

output is unlikely to pass

Structure flawed in several respects and unless these issues are resolved, the work is highly likely to fail

Not

Evidenced

Schedule 12%

Is the proposed structure of final output

appropriate? Is

the schedule fully outlined and

agreed with the supervisor? Is the schedule clear

and achievable?

Excellent – the schedule has

built in

contingency and is highly likely to succeed

The schedule is clear and logical. However, there are some minor concerns and/or limited evidence of

contingency planning

The workflow is generally clear and milestones

appropriate. The schedule may be ambiguous in part and have limited

contingency; or be

inconsistent with some of the supervisor’s

expectations. However, if all goes according to plan, the work has a high

probability of being

completed on time

More work needed to clarify workflow and milestones,

and more

importantly, the

work is at risk of failing to meet the deadline

Schedule flawed in several respects and the work is highly unlikely to be

completed satisfactorily

unless these are resolved

Not

Evidenced

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

Ethics 12%

Is the proposal ethically

responsible and consistent with the values of

LIBS?

Fully articulated and all

dilemmas

appropriately

resolved

Generally well-articulated and no significant issues unresolved. There may be some minor issues

associated with presentation and argumentation, but fundamental ethical issues have been dealt with. The work can proceed, and the relevant ethical approval can be signed off

Generally sufficient to enable the work to

proceed, but some

minor matters may still need resolving.

Formal ethical

approval is likely, and no significant issues exist

Some ethical dilemmas either need further

articulation or resolutions needed before the

research can proceed. Ethical approval cannot be granted at this stage for a variety of reasons

Limited awareness of ethical principles and/or principles of responsible management education. The research can’t

proceed further until these issues are addressed

Not

Evidenced

Appendix 2b: Assessment Grid: Final Project

Assessment Criteria

Exceptional

80+

Excellent

70-79

Good

60-69

Satisfactory

50-59

Fair with significant weaknesses

40-49

Poor with

fundamental

weakness

Less than 40

Communication

Communicates effectively the aims, objectives and relevance of the research project. (LO1)

The work is

exceptionally well communicated and goes well beyond the expectations of this level

Excellent with few significant errors

Aims and Objectives well communicated with only minor issues. The relevance of the work is clear, but some aspects may require some

further elaboration

Aims and objectives are stated and sufficiently clear but may require further refinement. The general relevance of the work is understood but not

necessarily fully articulated in the context of the study

Aims and objectives are

apparent but may not be

sufficiently coherent or logical. The broader relevance of the work may not be understood or weakly articulated

The aims and objectives remain vague and the work suffers from a lack of focus or clear sense of direction. The broader relevance is not

considered or articulated

Management

Reflects a well devised and executed adaptable plan, which was actively managed so as to achieve project objectives (LO2)

The student has

demonstrated

exceptional

management of the project, well

exceeding that

required at this level

The work was well planned, actively

managed and fully achieved the

objectives

The work was planned and managed so as to achieve most objectives

The project was managed satisfactorily but not

necessarily in an active

manner. Some issues may not have been sufficiently

addressed

There were significant

weaknesses at a number of stages that were addressed to varying degrees but significantly some remained unresolved

The project suffered from significant weaknesses at many stages and there was limited evidence that these were either

understood or addressed

Method

Selected, collected, analysed and interpreted evidence from multiple sources in accordance with sound principles of

research and investigation. (LO3)

The execution is

virtually flawless and demonstrates

competence beyond the level of study

The work draws

upon an extensive range of sources

and uses these

effectively following sound principles of research and

investigation

The work draws upon a wide range of sources and uses these

appropriately following the main principles of research and

investigation. There will be minor omissions or insufficient triangulation or cross-referencing

The work draws upon sufficient source material to substantiate argument. However, further data could have been collected and/or analysed to provide a fuller and more balanced

investigation. The work has followed the basic principles of investigation

Although the work has collected and analysed evidence the sources need enhancing and the interpretation is deficient in some ways. The work has not consistently followed the key principles of research design

There is insufficient

evidence and the

analysis lacks

sophistication with

virtually no interpretation. Key principles of

investigation have not been followed

Synthesis

Synthesised and critically

evaluated different sources of knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent

argumentation (LO4)

The work is

exceptional, and the powers of criticality and synthesis go

well beyond the

standards expected at this level

The work

demonstrates

criticality and powers of syntheses. The argumentation is

logical and coherent. There are strong

arguments of

advocacy as well as discovery

The work does

synthesise to a large extent and critically

evaluate key sources of knowledge. This is

robust but not fully

developed. The

argument is coherent and evidenced, but with a stronger emphasis on discovery than advocacy

The work tends to summarise quite extensively what is known about the topic rather than integrating the various sources into a more coherent and

logical argument. The

evidence base is sufficient but needed to be better deployed. Argumentation is emergent rather than developed

The work tends to present a summary of a somewhat

constrained knowledge set. There may be some critical comments, but these are not evaluative. Arguments are under-developed

The work is a summary of a limited knowledge

base. There is a limited basis from which to

develop either synthesis or evaluation. No

argumentation is

evidenced

Evaluation

Critically evaluated and applied appropriate theoretical and methodological approaches in ways which augmented

The work is

exceptional and

extends our

knowledge in a

manner which goes well beyond

The work is

appropriately

situated, critically

evaluates and

applies existing

frameworks and

The key conceptual,

theoretical and

methodological

frameworks are

reviewed and applied to the specific topic/project

The work identifies and outlines appropriate approaches but, does not assess their relative merits nor build an evaluation of their utility to the aims of the project

Although the work identifies and reviews key approaches, there are significant gaps. The focus is on accessible material rather

than that which challenges convention

There is limited

engagement with

conceptual,

methodological or

theoretical approaches that could inform the

understanding  of the topic (LO5)

expectation at this level

knowledge domains in a manner that

demonstrates a

sophisticated

understanding and capacity to augment current knowledge

There is some critical evaluation of these

frameworks

work. There is insufficient engagement with

contemporary

approaches, controversy or debate

Reflection

Critically reflected on the

research practice and

intellectual arguments

underpinning the work,

particularly in the context of contemporary debates in

management or business. (LO6)

The work is

exceptional and

exceeds the level of reflexivity normally expected at this

level.

The work is

reflective and

evaluates its

contribution within the context of wider debates, whether

academic or in terms of entrepreneurial, business and

management praxis. The work

demonstrates

justifiable self

confidence

The work is confident and demonstrates a

sound understanding of the limitations of the

research conducted and can position the findings within the contexts of wider debates.

Positionality may not be fully analysed

The work focuses on outlining strengths and limitations

without necessarily engaging in critical reflection. Some

reflection is applied to the work undertaken; there may be a lack of confidence or over confidence in the project. The work doesn’t explore all the lessons learnt

There is no critical reflection, rather there is a focus on some strengths and limitations. The

reflection tends to be broad rather than applied to the

specificities of the individual project

The work identifies some issues, but these

represent a partial

reflection on research practice. There is very little engagement with wider debates around business and

management practice

Conclusions

Proposed practical and

appropriate resolutions via conclusions and

recommendation, so as to demonstrate the benefit of the work undertaken. (LO7)

The work is

exceptionally

insightful in terms of how the implications and relevancy of the work are understood and articulated

The work proposes fully appropriate and practical resolutions via conclusions and

recommendations, so as to

demonstrate the

benefit of the work undertaken

The work reaches valid conclusions and makes relevant

recommendations. The full implications of the work may not be

articulated completely but what is proposed is evidence based

The work reaches an overall conclusion but lacks specific and/or considered

recommendations or practical resolutions. Not all

recommendations follow from the evidence

The conclusions are weakly articulated and limited. Where recommendations are made, they may not reflect evidence or be practical. The work does provide sufficient basis for more robust conclusions

The conclusion tends to be summative rather than integrative. The nature of

the findings is not fully appreciated or

understood in the context of existing debates or business and

management practice

Knowledge

Demonstrated a depth of

knowledge, expertise and

critical understanding of their chosen topic area. (LO8)

The work

demonstrates

exceptional

knowledge and

critical

understanding such that it goes well

beyond the

standards expected at this level

The work

demonstrates in

depth knowledge, expertise and critical understanding of

chosen topic. The work is authoritative and contains original insights

The work demonstrates a sound knowledge and developing level of

expertise in the field. There is evidence of

some critical

understanding of key areas, but this could be further developed. There are no significant gaps in the knowledge base, but originality is limited

The work demonstrates a

sufficient knowledge and

understanding of the

fundamentals of the topic or domain. The work tends to lack critical insight and

expertise is emergent rather than developed

The level of knowledge and understanding is not quite at the level expected. Expertise is limited and derivative rather than original

There is evidence that some knowledge has been accumulated but

this is very limited and there are significant gaps and fundamental

weaknesses or

misunderstandings

Presentation

Presentation and organisation of the project.

The work is

exceptionally well presented, and the organisation

exceeds that

expected at this

level

The work fully

complies with

presentation

guidelines and

conventions

Overall, the presentation is of a high standard but with a few minor

amendments required to bring it up to full

compliance

The presentation meets the pass standard but contains a number of errors and deviation from the guidelines and

conventions

The work is not quite up to the standard expected. There are numerous errors- whilst these

detract from the text they could have been easily rectified by re working or editing the work

There are significant

weaknesses in

presentation and the

work does not really meet expectations and falls short of convention in several important

respects. These errors would require significant reworking of the text

Levels of Achievement

Core Competency

Proficient

exceptional

Proficient

distinction

Proficient merit

Proficient pass

Not yet proficient

Not proficient

Non-weighted 0%

Synthesis

Synthesise information to contribute original insight tocontemporary challenges and domains (AoL CC8)

Integrates relevant and sufficient

information to

address the

challenge or

domain, gathered from multiple and

varied sources In

addition to typical sources, finds

unusual ways or

places to get

information

Promotes divergent or creative

perspectives.

Integrates relevant and sufficient

information to

address the

challenge or

domain, gathered from multiple and

varied sources In

addition to typical

sources, finds

unusual ways or

places to get

information

Promotes divergent or creative

perspectives.

Integrates relevant and sufficient information to address the challenge or domain, gathered from multiple and varied

sources In addition to typical sources, finds unusual ways or places to get information

Promotes divergent or creative perspectives.

Integrates relevant and

sufficient information to

address the challenge or

domain Finds one or two

sources that are not typical Offers new ideas but stays within narrow perspectives

Does not integrate information to address the challenge or domain Gathers too little, too much, or irrelevant information, or from too few sources Does not offer any new ideas.

Insufficient information, weakly organised and descriptive.

Appendix 3a: Assessment Brief: Project Proposal

Module Code & Title: BUS9711M Professional Inquiry Project

Contribution to Final Module Mark: 10%

Description of Assessment Task and Purpose:

The first assessment on this module is a 1,000-word project proposal, presented using the template provided on Blackboard.

The purpose of this assessment is to assess the relevance and feasibility of your proposed project. The introduction and literature review sections should demonstrate your understanding of the existing knowledge base and the methodology section should be as detailed as possible at this stage.

Learning Outcomes Assessed:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

Knowledge & Skills Assessed:

Knowledge and Understanding: topical issues in business and management informed by contemporary organisation (PO5)

Subject-Specific Intellectual Skills: assess and solve complex and unpredictable problems and make decisions based on identifying and evaluating appropriate alternatives (PO11)

Subject-Specific Practical Skills: effectively use information and communication technologies relevant to the Management discipline (PO15); ability to evaluate, integrate and apply theory, practice and reflection in an ethical and responsible way (PO16); acquire, evaluate and synthesise a range of information for diverse organisational purposes including new situations (PO17)

Transferable Skills and Attributes: plan and implement projects in an autonomous and independent manner, and take responsibility for acquiring new knowledge and skills (PO23).

Assessment Submission Instructions:

You are required to submit your assessment before 12 noon on 8th November 2023 using the Turnitin submission point on the Blackboard module site. Pay careful attention to instructions provided at the time of submission.

Late submission, where an extension has not already been granted, will attract penalties at the level stipulated in the University Regulations (i.e. a reduction of 10 percentage points for each whole or partial working day late)

Date for Return of Feedback: The expected date to return grades and feedback is 29th November 2023.

Format for Assessment:

You must use the template provided on Blackboard.

The Project Proposal is limited to 1,000 words. The word count includes everything in the main body of the text (including tables, citations, quotes etc.) It does not include your reference list or Gantt chart. Headings included in the provided proposal template are also excluded from the word count.

The word count should be clearly stated on the first page of the assignment. Please note that the word limit for this assignment is an absolute maximum. Misrepresentation of word counts in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage in assessment may be referred as an academic offence.

Students should be aware that the marker will not include any work after the maximum word limit has been reached within the allocation of marks. Students may therefore be penalised for a failure to be concise and for failing to conclude their work within the word limit specified. Likewise, a failure to meet the maximum word limit may result in lower marks based on the quality of the work because they may not have included the necessary information required for the assessment and met the intended learning outcomes.

Please follow these formatting guidelines:

– Font / Size: Arial / 12

– Spacing / Sides: 1.5 / Single Sided

– Page numbers required? Yes

– Margins: At least 2.54 to left and right and text ‘justified’

– Referencing: Full compliance with Harvard protocols

Marking Criteria for Assessment:

Please see Assessment Criteria Grid in Appendix 2a.

Please note that all work is assessed according to the University of Lincoln Management of Assessment Policy and that marks awarded are provisional on Examination Board decisions (which take place at the end of the Academic Year.

Feedback Format:

Grades and written feedback will be available electronically on Blackboard. If you have any specific questions relating to the feedback comments, please email your supervisor to discuss.

Additional Information for Completion of Assessment:

• Please ensure that you use the proposal template provided on Blackboard.

• Your work should discuss the potential ethical dilemmas posed by your research and identify how it connects with the principles of responsible management education (PRME).

• Your proposal must include a Gantt Chart indicating your schedule of work and agreed meeting calendar with your supervisor.

• Ensure all sources referenced in your assessment are correctly listed according to the Harvard System of referencing.

• Include only sources that you have cited in the work. If you consult any sources which you have not cited, they should be listed in a Bibliography.

• It is very important to use appropriate academic books/e-books and journals/e journals as the basis for your research.

• Whilst you may use the internet, take great care to ensure that the sites are valid and appropriate for academic purposes. Sites such as Wikipedia, Businessballs.com, MindTools.com etc. are inappropriate for academic research.

Assessment Support Information:

Learning Resources which will support this assessment include:

Postgraduate Study Skills: Managing the Dissertation Process

Important Information on Dishonesty & Plagiarism:

University of Lincoln Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own…Examples of plagiarism include the unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form. Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work’.

Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of academic dishonesty. Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of the procedures and penalties involved.

For further information, see plagiarism.org

Appendix 3b: Assessment Brief: Final Project

Module Code & Title: BUS9711M Professional Inquiry Project

Contribution to Final Module Mark: 90%

Description of Assessment Task and Purpose:

You should undertake an extended piece of personal research on a topic of your own choosing. The length of this work should be a maximum of 11,000 words.

The choice of topic and format of the final assessment will be negotiated with your supervisor. Example formats include dissertation, work-based project, client-based project; or other negotiated project such as the design of a new enterprise.

This is an individual and independent project in which requires you to demonstrate your ability to research and critically analyse and integrate complex information necessary in the world of contemporary management. You will be supervised by a member of staff who will provide support and guidance, make useful suggestions and offer reassurance, but not give instructions on what to do. You are responsible for effectively managing your individual project to meet the learning outcomes of the module.

Learning Outcomes Assessed:

LO1 Communicate the aims, objectives and relevance of their chosen research project.

LO2 Develop achievable and logical plans to guide the implementation of their chosen research project.

LO3 Select, collect, analyse and interpret evidence from multiple sources in accordance with sound principles of research and investigation.

LO4 Synthesise and critically evaluate different sources of knowledge in order to articulate logical and cogent argumentation.

LO5 Critically evaluate and apply theoretical and methodological approaches in ways which augment understanding of the topic.

LO6 Propose practical resolutions via conclusions and recommendations when appropriate.

LO7 Reflect critically on their own research practice and intellectual argument particularly in the context of contemporary debates in management.

Knowledge & Skills Assessed:

Knowledge and Understanding: topical issues in business and management informed by contemporary organisation (PO5)

Subject-Specific Intellectual Skills: assess and solve complex and unpredictable problems and make decisions based on identifying and evaluating appropriate alternatives (PO11)

Professional Inquiry Project – BUS9711M-2

evaluate and synthesise a range of information for diverse organisational purposes including new situations (PO17)

Transferable Skills and Attributes: plan and implement projects in an autonomous and independent manner, and take responsibility for acquiring new knowledge and skills (PO23).

Assessment Submission Instructions:

You are required to submit your Final Project before 12 noon on 30th January 2024 using the Turnitin submission point on the Blackboard module site. Pay careful attention to instructions provided at the time of submission.

Date for Return of Feedback: The expected date to return grades and feedback is after the final Board of Examiners.

Format for Assessment:

The Final Project is limited to 11,000 words. The word count includes everything in the main body of the text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes etc). It does not include your reference list.

Please follow these formatting guidelines:

– Font / Size: Arial / 12

– Spacing / Sides: 1.5 / Single Sided

– Page numbers required? Yes

– Margins: At least 2.54 to left and right and text ‘justified’

– Referencing: Full compliance with Harvard protocols

Marking Criteria for Assessment:

Please see Assessment Criteria Grid in Appendix 2b.

Grades and written feedback will be available electronically on Blackboard. If you have any specific questions relating to the feedback comments, please email your supervisor to discuss.

Additional Information for Completion of Assessment:

• Ensure all sources referenced in your assessment are correctly listed according to the Harvard System of referencing.

• Include only sources that you have cited in the work. If you consult any sources which you have not cited, they should be listed in a Bibliography.

• It is very important to use appropriate academic books/e-books and journals/e journals as the basis for your research.

Assessment Support Information:

Learning Resources which will support this assessment include:

Research and Dissertations

Introduction to Postgraduate Study Skills

Postgraduate Study Skills: Being Critical at Master’s Level

Postgraduate Study Skills: Managing the Dissertation Process

Postgraduate Study Skills: Academic Writing and the Research Process Postgraduate Study Skills: In-depth Critical Literature Review

Postgraduate Study Skills: Reading Critically