Economic and Financial Management Assessment Brief

BIOETHICS CASE STUDY GUIDELINES
January 28, 2020
Policy analysis memo
January 28, 2020

*This document is for CU Group students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this
module and should not be passed to third parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of
this rule should be reported to registry.cuc@coventry.ac.uk
Module Title: Economic and Financial Management
Module Code: 216MANSC/216MANEL
Assessment Type:
Coursework
Assessment Number:
1
Study Mode:
Full-time
Weighting:
40%
Submission Date:
31/01/2020
Submission Time:
18:00
1,500 Word
Analysis
Introduction:
Managers and leaders in organisations may be expected to monitor and measure the performance
of an organisation to for fill its aims and objectives. Analysis of business performance, allows
managers to make informed decisions in the best interests of organisational success alongside its
long term strategy. You are required to select and research a commercial organisation, based in
the UK, which is currently in administration.
Completion of this assignment will address the following learning outcomes:
1 Identify and evaluate the impact the economy has on business organisations
2 Appraise and apply economic theory to a range of contemporary business contexts.
3 Analyse the micro and macro-economic forces on contemporary business.
Task:
Title: Economics and the business
You are required to identify and research an organisation that has failed. You are to produce a
1,500 word analysis in report format on the micro and macro-economic factors that led to the
failure. Your report should review and reflect your knowledge and theory of economics. It must
include an analysis of the impact of the mirco and macro environmental factors in relation to you
chosen organisation. Your audience are the attendees of a regional CMI workshop. You should cover
learning outcomes 1, 2 & 3. Your choice of organisation should be agreed with your tutor during
tutorials.
Guidance notes and considerations
Late Submission
If you are not able to complete your coursework on time due to extenuating circumstances, the ONLY
way to receive an extension (up to 5 working days) or a deferral (anything longer than 5 working days)
is to contact a Registry team member located at your specific CU site.
CU Coventry – Registry.cuc@coventry.ac.uk
CU London – Registry.cul@coventry.ac.uk
CU Scarborough – Registry.cus@coventry.ac.uk

  • Extenuating circumstances are defined by CU as ‘genuine circumstances beyond your control or
    ability to foresee, and which seriously impair your assessed work’.
  • Please note that you will need to provide third party evidence to support your reasoning for requiring
    an extension or deferral.
  • Your course tutor is NOT able to approve an extension or a deferral, if you have not completed the
    official forms and had your request approved your work will count as not submitted and receive a zero
    mark.
    Plagiarism and Malpractice
  • You are encouraged to check the originality of your work by using the draft Turnitin links on your
    Moodle Web.
  • Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other
    students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the
    academic conduct panel. This applies to all coursework and exam answers.
  • A marked difference between your writing style, knowledge and skill level demonstrated in class
    discussion, any test conditions and that demonstrated in a coursework assignment may result in you
    having to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assignment is entirely your own
    work.
  • If you make use of the services of a proof reader in your work you must keep your original version
    and make it available as a demonstration of your written efforts.
  • You must not submit work for assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full), either
    for your current course or for another qualification of this university, unless this is specifically provided
    for in your assignment brief or specific course or module information.
    Where earlier work by you is citable, ie. it has already been published/submitted, you must reference
    it clearly. Identical pieces of work submitted concurrently will also be considered to be self-plagiarism.
    Submission Guidelines
    There should be a title page which clearly identifies the following;
  • Student number * Name of the module
  • Title of the Assessment * Assessment number
  • Word count
    The word count identified includes quotations, but excludes the bibliography and unless specifically
    stated, encompasses a discrepancy of + or – 10%.
    Banding Knowledge and
    Understanding
    (30%)
    Analysis, Evaluation and Application
    of Theory
    (30%)
    Quality of Research
    (20%)
    Academic Writing
    (20%)
    90-100% Exceptional knowledge base
    exploring, analysing and
    evaluating the discipline and
    its theory with extraordinary
    originality and autonomy.
    Demonstrates an exceptional grasp
    of relevant analytical techniques,
    and the ability to apply these to new
    and/or abstract information and
    situations. Shows a highly developed
    appreciation of the limits and/or
    appropriate uses of particular
    analytical and evaluative
    approaches. Knowledge and
    understanding of theory, where
    relevant, is highly detailed.
    Exceptional appreciation of the limits
    of theory demonstrated throughout
    all assessment outcomes. Approach
    to assessment task is theoretically
    informed to an exceptional standard.
    Exceptional exploration of
    wider academic sources with a
    high degree of independent
    learning which exceeds the
    assessment brief. Sources
    have been accurately
    interpreted and integrated
    with flawless synthesis,
    leading to innovative and
    interesting ideas. With some
    adjustments, work may be
    considered for internal
    publication.
    Exceptional answer with coherent and
    logical presentation of ideas. The
    answer exhibits a clear argument/line of
    reasoning with flair and originality.
    Discipline specific vocabulary used with
    precision and academic style applied
    well throughout. No language errors
    present and referencing in the CU
    version of Harvard has been employed
    in an accurate manner. With some
    adjustments, work may be considered
    for internal publication.
    80-89% Outstanding knowledge base
    exploring, analysing and
    evaluating the discipline and
    its theory with clear
    originality and autonomy.
    Demonstrates an outstanding grasp
    of relevant analytical and/or
    evaluative techniques. Shows a
    developed appreciation of the limits
    and/or appropriate uses of particular
    analytical and/or evaluative
    approaches. Knowledge and
    understanding of theory, where
    Outstanding exploration of
    wider academic sources with a
    high degree of independent
    learning which exceeds the
    assignment brief. Sources
    have been accurately
    interpreted and integrated
    with a high degree of
    Outstanding answer with coherent and
    logical presentation of ideas. The
    answer exhibits a clear argument/line of
    reasoning with flair and originality.
    Discipline specific vocabulary used with
    precision and academic style applied
    throughout. No language errors
    present. Referencing in the CU version
    relevant, is detailed and
    sophisticated. Appreciation of the
    limits of theory demonstrated
    throughout the work. Approach to
    assessment task is clearly and
    appropriately theoretically informed.
    synthesis, leading to
    innovative and interesting
    ideas.
    of Harvard has been employed in an
    accurate manner.
    70-79% Excellent knowledge base
    that supports analysis and/or
    evaluation and problemsolving in theory and/or
    practice within the
    discipline, with considerable
    originality.
    Demonstrates a detailed, accurate,
    theoretical understanding.
    Appropriately selected theoretical
    knowledge is applied to the
    individual learning outcomes. Makes
    excellent use of established
    techniques of analysis and/or
    evaluation relevant to the discipline
    and applies these effectively. Shows
    developed ability to appraise
    alternative theories and/or analytic
    approaches, where relevant.
    Excellent exploration of wider
    academic sources with
    evidence of independent
    learning which may exceed
    the assignment brief. Sources
    have been accurately
    interpreted and integrated
    with an attempt made at
    synthesis, leading to
    interesting ideas.
    Excellent answer with coherent and
    logical presentation of ideas. The
    answer is entirely relevant and focused
    with a clear argument/line of reasoning
    throughout. Discipline specific
    vocabulary used with precision and
    academic writing style applied
    throughout. No language errors
    present. Referencing in the CU version
    of Harvard has been employed in an
    accurate manner.
    60-69% Very good knowledge base
    that supports analysis and/or
    evaluation and problemsolving in theory and/or
    practice within the
    discipline, with some
    originality displayed.
    Makes very good use of established
    techniques of analysis and/or
    evaluation relevant to the discipline.
    Shows developing ability to compare
    alternative theories and/or analytic
    approaches, where relevant.
    Very good evidence of wider
    academic reading and
    independent learning. Sources
    have been accurately
    interpreted and integrated
    with some evidence of
    synthesis.
    Very good answer with coherent and
    logical presentation of ideas. The
    answer is relevant and focused.
    Discipline specific vocabulary is used
    and academic writing style applied.
    Minimal language errors may be
    present but do not impact on clarity of
    expression. Referencing in the CU
    version of Harvard is accurate.
    50-59% Good knowledge base that
    supports some analysis
    and/or evaluation and
    problem-solving in theory
    and/or practice within the
    discipline.
    Makes good use of established
    techniques of analysis and/or
    evaluation, relevant to the discipline.
    Sound descriptive knowledge of key
    theories with some appropriate
    application.
    Good evidence of academic
    reading, with attempt at
    moving beyond the
    recommended texts.
    Interpretation of sources is
    acceptable with evidence of
    integration.
    Good answer with coherent and logical
    presentation. The answer is largely
    relevant but lacks focus at points. There
    is an attempt at using discipline specific
    vocabulary and academic writing style.
    Some language errors are present which
    impacts on clarity at times. Referencing
    in the CU version of Harvard is mostly
    accurate.
    40-49% Satisfactory knowledge base
    demonstrating
    comprehension and
    formulation of basic
    knowledge with some
    omissions at the level of
    theoretical understanding.
    Limited ability to discuss
    theory and solve problems
    within the discipline.
    Makes satisfactory but limited use of
    established techniques of analysis
    and/or evaluation, relevant to the
    discipline. Selection of theory, if
    relevant to the assessment
    outcomes is satisfactory but
    application and/or understanding is
    limited.
    Satisfactory evidence of
    academic reading, with
    minimal attempt to move
    beyond the recommended
    texts. Interpretation of
    sources is acceptable, but
    there may be some instances
    of misunderstanding.
    Satisfactory answer with some attempt
    at coherence and logical presentation.
    The answer contains some irrelevant
    material and lacks focus at points. There
    is minimal use of discipline specific
    vocabulary and academic writing style is
    inconsistently applied. Some language
    errors may be present which impacts on
    clarity at times. Referencing in the CU
    version of Harvard is mostly accurate
    but with some errors.
    35-39%
    (Marginal Fail)
    Outcomes not or only
    partially met. Restricted
    knowledge base
    demonstrated. Limited
    understanding of discipline.
    Difficulty with linking theory
    and problem solving within
    the discipline.
    Attempts at analysis and/or
    evaluation ineffective and/or
    uninformed by the discipline.
    Knowledge of theory inaccurate
    and/or incomplete. Choice of theory
    inappropriate. Application and/or
    understanding very limited.
    Limited evidence of reading at
    an academic level. Sources
    used may be inappropriate
    and interpreted poorly. Little
    evidence of integration.
    Answer is attempted but limited. Lack
    of coherence and logical presentation.
    The answer contains mainly irrelevant
    material and lacks focus throughout.
    Language errors are present and impact
    on clarity of expression. Academic
    writing style is not adhered to.
    Referencing in the CU version of
    Harvard is inconsistent.
    0 – 34% Little or no evidence of
    knowledge base. Little
    evidence of understanding of
    discipline. Significant
    difficulty with theory and
    problem solving within the
    discipline.
    Absence of relevant theoretical
    content and/or use of theory, where
    relevant. Lacks any analysis and/or
    evaluation.
    Inadequate or no evidence of
    reading at an academic level
    with poor application of
    sources and ideas. Answer is
    likely to include inappropriate
    references which are
    misunderstood and not
    integrated. Possibility of
    plagiarism OR no evidence of
    academic research. Answer
    may not be research based.
    Answer is inadequate with serious flaws
    in coherence and presentation. Poorly
    structured with multiple language
    errors which impact on clarity. Weak
    application of CU version of Harvard
    referencing style.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Economic and Financial Management Assessment Brief
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay
                                                                                Place Order