The Final Dissertation should be 12,000-15,000 words in length (+/- 10%) and should be presented considering the requirements below.
Assignment task
The Final Dissertation should be 12,000-15,000 words in length (+/- 10%) and should be presented considering the requirements below.
The Dissertation must follow the structure below: -
Title page: Each copy of the dissertation must have a title page, containing the title of the Dissertation, the full rubric e.g. 'Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of International Master of Business Administration' and the year in which it is submitted, the word count and your name and student number. In addition, please place the name of your supervisor on the title page and a declaration confirming that this is all your own work and that you are aware of the Plagiarism policy and that you have not contravened this. The word count (excluding Appendices) must be shown. A statement relating to confidentiality should be made where applicable should you not wish your dissertation to be used for educational purposes with subsequent students
Acknowledgements: You may wish to recognise the people involved in your primary research and others who have supported you through the completion of the dissertation
Abstract: on a separate page, you must include an abstract explaining what your dissertation is about - not just posing the question or describing the background, but summarising what you were investigating, your findings and conclusions. It should be about one to two pages long. This is not included in the overall word-limit.
Table of contents - with page numbers.
List of tables
List of figures
List of appendices
Glossary: These are definitions of any technical terms or full versions of any abbreviations used regularly in the Dissertation. If for example you refer many times to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) or the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) you can create a list of abbreviations that will save you repeating a longer form of citation in the text. The list should be in alphabetical order.
The main body of the dissertation - It will usually be appropriate to divide this into sections, with numbered chapters or sections.
It must have an Introduction, Literature Review (Review of Current Thinking), Research Methodology, Findings and Analysis, Conclusion and Recommendations
Further guidance on each section is given on Blackboard.
References All dissertations must include a full Harvard list of references for the sources cited in the body of the work and the Appendices.
Appendices (these should be in the hard copies of your dissertation, but in the interests of confidentiality you need not upload your full set of Appendices to Blackboard). Each Appendix should always start on a fresh page and be listed in the table of contents. Appendices will not be included in the word count, but should always add value to your dissertation.
Your Appendices must include clear evidence of originality e.g. interview transcripts, sample completed questionnaires, examples of your analysis such as coding of qualitative data, relevant spreadsheets and raw data input for survey work, e mails agreeing to participate in research or giving permissions for you to conduct research in a specific organisation, signed consent forms
You should also include a signed copy of the Research Ethics Checklist submitted with your Research Plan
Reminders:
All International MBA students are expected to collect some primary data for their final dissertations. Dissertations purely based on literature reviews will not pass.
Your dissertation may fail if you do not provide sufficient evidence of the originality of your work, especially your primary research. You should not assume that you will be invited to a viva (oral examination) to provide further evidence if the appropriate evidence is missing from your final dissertation.
A viva may be held if academic misconduct is suspected.
Do NOT throw away or delete any of your data or dissertation work until you have received your final certificate, if successful.
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:
LO 1 Critically evaluate and use a range of quantitative and qualitative methods for providing information and evaluating options in an uncertain business environment.
LO 2 Critically evaluate and use a range of quantitative and qualitative methods for providing information and evaluating options in an uncertain business environment.
LO 3 Conduct, under supervision, an independent piece of empirical research or problem- based learning demonstrating a mastery of the subject area.
Task requirements
You must also ensure you have submitted your work through Turnitin.
Use Arial font size 11 or 12 in the main body of the dissertation
Line spacing should be 1.5, except for indented quotations or tables, where single spacing is acceptable.
Margins (1.5 cms on both sides)
You must include a title page with your name, student ID Number, course code and your supervisors name clearly shown.
If the dissertation is confidential and is not to be used for display or consultation, include the word Confidential on the title page
All pages which follow the contents page, should be numbered. The page number should be placed in the centre at the foot of the page.
The appendices should be continuously page numbered using a numbering system that is distinct from that in the main text
The word count must be shown on the title page tables, charts, diagrams, references and appendices are not included in the word count
Citing and referencing should meet Harvard requirements
It is compulsory to
use academic texts, (journal articles rather than textbooks) which should be cited in the Harvard format (e.g. Bloggs, 2010). You should therefore ensure you access the universitys electronic databases such as ABI Inform (Proquest) and/or Emerald. Pay particular attention to how recent your sources are. The 1990s are now some twenty years ago so depending on your research topic, knowledge at that time may have been superseded.
IMPORTANT NOTE: If, after submission of the research plan, you want to change your dissertation to consider a completely different business problem or question, you would need to complete the Change of Topic or Core Focus form on Blackboard and have it signed by your supervisor before proceeding. This is because a major change to the direction and focus of the work would require different literature and different primary research.
Referencing and research requirements
Please reference your work according to the Harvard style as defined in Cite Them Right Online (http://www.citethemrightonline.com). This information is also available in book form: Pears, R. and Shields, G. (2016) Cite them right: the essential reference guide. 10th edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Copies are available via the university library.
How your work will be assessed
Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the Universitys institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend upon your use of academic referencing conventions.
This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 7.
The assessment rubric are available on Blackboard for this assignment should be read in conjunction with this document.
Submission details
This assignment should be submitted electronically. Please use the relevant submission point in the Submit your work area in your Blackboard module shell.
Please ensure that your work has been saved in an appropriate file format. Turnitin will only accept the following file types: Microsoft Word, Excel or PowerPoint, PostScript, PDF, HTML, RTF, OpenOffice (ODT), Hangul (HWP), Google Docs, or plain text. Your file must also contain at least 20 words of text, consist of fewer than 400 pages and be less than 40MB in size.
You can submit your work as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your work more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version.
Once you have submitted your work, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be sent to your forwarded e-mail address (provided you have set this up). Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original electronic copy of your assignment.
Submission date and time
MBA Dissertations - Assessment Grid
Criteria 70% + 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% Fail
Defining and contextualising the research problem Very clear definition of research problem, objectives and rationale. Thoroughly related to an appropriate academic area of business / management in a wider context. Strategic importance of problem very clearly presented. Clear definition of research problem, objectives and rationale. Well related to an appropriate academic area of business / management in a wider context. Strategic importance of problem clearly presented. Research problem is stated, objectives and rationale are reasonably clear. Related to an appropriate academic area of business / management, and reasonable links are made to the wider overall context. Strategic importance of problem is explicit, although requiring some assumptions by the reader. The student is able to define the research problem, although the objectives and rationale lack clarity. Some links are made to an appropriate academic area of business / management, even if contextualisation is limited. Strategic importance of dissertation is stated, but with little substantiation. The nature of the research problem is not clear and must be largely assumed. Objectives and rationale are absent or ill-defined. Relationship to an appropriate area of business / management is tenuous. Strategic importance of problem reads like a corporate brochure.
Evaluation and application of theoretical concepts Material selected from a wide range of appropriate sources; scholarly level of evaluation and critique, many original insights. Excellent use of journal articles. Material followed logically, systematically and persuasively with direct relevance to objectives Material selected from a good range of sources, level of evaluation and critique is mainly but not consistently high, some original insights. Good use of journal articles. Generally systematic presentation with a high degree of persuasiveness, generally relevant to objectives. Reasonable range of sources consulted and demonstrates reasonable ability to evaluate and critique complex concepts, with mostly sensible relevance to the argument. Reasonable range of journal articles. A few original insights. Relevance to the objectives is clear, even if not always consistent. Shows evidence of ability to identify assumptions and to evaluate and critique complex concepts, although much of the literature review borders on the descriptive side. The material selected is partially related to the objectives set. Very limited range of sources consulted; few or no journal articles. Many key sources are omitted; literature review is largely superficial and descriptive. Material likely to be drawn mainly or wholely from web sites. Literature review bears little relation to the objectives set.
Design and execution of research methodology Methodology is well explained and entirely justifiable in relation to objectives, high level of reflection on and critique of own approach. Sampling is appropriate and very fit for the purpose. Demonstrates a high level of scholarship in identifying, gathering, analysing and presenting authoritative and relevant data. Methodology is sound and student shows ability to identify limitations and critique own approach. Sampling is appropriate and complete enough for the purpose. Demonstrates good ability to identify, gather, analyse and present authoritative and relevant data. Likely to show a range of strengths and weaknesses rather than an overall consistent approach e.g. good methodology, evaluation and critique of approach but sampling could be improved. Demonstrates reasonable ability to identify, gather, analyse and present authoritative and relevant data. Shows ability to learn from own mistakes. Demonstrates a problem solving orientation in the design of methodology even if the execution of it is weak. Offers some critical reflection on research design and execution. The student must have collected both secondary and primary data and made some effort to abstract meaning from it. Demonstrates little ability to conduct a major piece of self-managed research. Methodology is ineffective for producing useful findings, or, approach taken does not take methodology into account. Scanty primary research data gathered, limited analysis, overall superficial attempt which would not be passed at undergrad level, let alone Masters.
Criteria 70% + 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% Fail
Integration and Argument The dissertation is clearly focused and the line of argument consistently and explicitly reflects this focus. Argument displays much originality and is highly persuasive. Each chapter builds logically on the foregoing and drives the argument forward. Theory, secondary and primary data are carefully rigorously integrated. Conclusions and recommendations are logically derived from and fully supported by previous evidence. Objectives are fully met. The dissertation is clearly focused and there is a clearly discernible line of argument running through the work. Argument shows some originality and is convincing. Some of the linkages in the argument are more explicit than others. Theory, secondary and primary data show a high level of integration, mainly rigorous. Conclusions and recommendations are logically derived from and mainly supported by previous evidence. Objectives are mostly met. The dissertation is mainly focused with a reasonable line of argument, although the reader needs to make a few assumptions as it develops. Theory, secondary and primary evidence are reasonably well integrated, stronger in some areas than others. The conclusions and recommendations are related to the foregoing but the linkages between other chapters are less clear. Objectives are largely met. The dissertation begins with a focus and there are some linkages back to the original objectives. There is evidence of an intelligible argument, even if patchy and inconsistent. Some clear attempts are made to integrate theoretical ideas and the findings from secondary and primary research. Some of the conclusions and recommendations follow logically from the foregoing. Objectives are partially met. The dissertation lacks focus and comprises several individual elements with little or no integration between them. Conclusions and recommendations largely unrelated to findings. Organisation of the material and flow of the argument suggest a piecemeal and rushed approach. Objectives are not met, or scope and nature of the work is shallow and show little evidence of in-depth investigation. Argument lacks rigour.
Written presentation Within word count +/-10%. Sources appropriately cited and referenced. Clearly written English, very well structured and presented. Within word count +/-10%. Sources appropriately cited and referenced. Well written and presented. Within word count +/-10%. Most sources appropriately cited and referenced. Reasonably well written and presented. Some effort to structure appropriately. Meaning can be understood even if use of English is poor. Greatly exceeds word count with much largely irrelevant data. Most sources are cited and referenced, although the Harvard system has not been consistently followed. Very badly written and presented, thrown together with multiple spelling and grammar errors. Meaning often obscured through poor use of English. Either far too long or far too short. Incorrect citing and referencing of material, several references missing. Ineffective structuring
