IBUS201 T1 Assessment 3: Written Assignment 2: Planning the Global Business Enterprise

IBUS201 T1 Assessment 3: Written Assignment 2: Planning the Global Business Enterprise

This individual written assignment, due by the end of Week 11, involves an all-inclusive 2500-word essay, with a permissible 10% upward leeway. It focuses on the content from the second half of Module 2 and Module 3, aligning with CLOs 1, 2, and 3. This assignment accounts for 35% of the total course mark, evaluating students' depth of analysis and capacity to apply subject knowledge to real-world, practical scenarios.

Assignment Instruction

Task One: Comprehensive Global Market Analysis

Select a company from the top 500 in the list of the worlds largest companies by market capitalization, or choose a company approved by the course coordinator.

Identify two potential international market or host countries for the companys existing or proposed goods and services.

Analyze international competitors by identifying both domestic and international companies engaged in similar global business activities.

Assess the economic-geographic environment by examining geographic and economic factors that affect the business environment of a nation.

Assess the social-cultural environment by researching social institutions, customs, traditions, and beliefs that influence business.

Task Two: Choosing a Host Country and Strategizing FDI Decisions on Timing and Scale

Evaluate the opportunities and risks associated with investing in the two potential international markets or host countries and recommend only one country for the company's prioritized foreign direct investment.

Provide strategic recommendations regarding specific FDI decisions (timing and scale) for this chosen destination.

Assignment Template

You may submit your Assignment 2 using the following template: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/1328370/Business-report-writing.pdf. This document will be attached as well.

Assignment Two Marking Guide

3.1 Marking Rubrics

Section Weightage

Executive Summary 3%

Absent or Lacking (0%): Missing or fails to summarize key points.

Fair (1%): Provides a basic overview but lacks detail or clarity.

Good (2%): Summarizes main points well, with some insights.

Excellent (3%): Clearly and concisely summarizes key findings and insights. Introduction 3%

Absent or Lacking (0%): Missing or fails to introduce the topic.

Fair (1%): Provides a basic introduction but lacks depth or clarity.

Good (2%): Offers a clear introduction with purpose and some context.

Excellent (3%): Delivers a comprehensive introduction with clear purpose, context, and relevance. Discussion 18%

Company Selection (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No company selected or rationale provided.

Fair (1%): Company selected with minimal rationale.

Good (2%): Company selected with clear rationale, showing some understanding of its relevance.

Excellent (3%): Thoughtful selection of company with comprehensive and insightful rationale. Market Identification (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No markets identified or justified.

Fair (1%): Basic identification of markets with minimal justification.

Good (2%): Markets identified with clear rationale, demonstrating understanding of potential.

Excellent (3%): Strategic market identification with detailed justification and insight into potential. Competitor Analysis (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No analysis of competitors.

Fair (1%): Basic competitor analysis with limited insights.

Good (2%): Competitor analysis that provides clear understanding of the competitive landscape.

Excellent (3%): In-depth competitor analysis with comprehensive insights into strategies and market positioning. Economic-Geographic Assessment (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No assessment provided.

Fair (1%): Basic assessment with minimal economic-geographic context.

Good (2%): Clear assessment demonstrating understanding of economic and geographic factors.

Excellent (3%): Detailed and insightful assessment of economic-geographic environment affecting the business. Social-Cultural Assessment (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No social-cultural analysis conducted.

Fair (1%): Basic analysis of social-cultural factors with limited depth.

Good (2%): Good analysis demonstrating understanding of social-cultural influences on business.

Excellent (3%): Comprehensive analysis with deep insights into social-cultural environment and its impact on business. Evaluation of Opportunities and Risks (3%)

Absent or Lacking (0%): No evaluation conducted.

Fair (1%): Basic evaluation with minimal insights into opportunities and risks.

Good (2%): Clear evaluation, demonstrating understanding of key opportunities and risks, with some linkage to previous analyses.

Excellent (3%): Detailed and insightful evaluation, directly informed by and well-integrated with the findings from previous sections. Conclusion 3%

Absent or Lacking (0%): No conclusions drawn.

Fair (1%): Basic conclusions that provide minimal insights into the findings.

Good (2%): Clear conclusions that summarize key findings and insights, with some linkage to the analyses.

Excellent (3%): Detailed and insightful conclusions, directly informed by and well-integrated with the content from all sections. Recommendations 3%

Absent or Lacking (0%): No recommendations provided on FDI timing and scale.

Fair (1%): Basic recommendations provided, with minimal detail or practical application regarding FDI timing and scale.

Good (2%): Clear and practical recommendations on FDI timing and scale, showing a good understanding of the findings with some linkage to the analyses.

Excellent (3%): Comprehensive and insightful recommendations on FDI timing and scale, directly informed by and well-integrated with the findings from all sections, demonstrating a deep and practical understanding of how to strategically apply these insights. References 3%

Absent or Lacking (0%): No references provided.

Fair (1%): Provides references, but they are minimally relevant and/or improperly formatted.

Good (2%): References are relevant and mostly properly formatted, with minor errors.

Excellent (3%): Provides comprehensive and relevant references, all correctly formatted according to a recognized academic standard. Formatting 2%

Absent or Lacking (0.5%): No adherence to formatting guidelines.

Fair (1%): Minimal adherence to formatting guidelines with significant errors.

Good (1.5%): Generally follows formatting guidelines, with some errors.

Excellent (2%): Fully adheres to all formatting guidelines, demonstrating meticulous attention to detail.