Using the Global Integration – Local Responsiveness framework and suitable examples, critically discuss and evaluate the different strategies in international business.
1. Word count: Max 5000 words (tables of content, lists of tables and figures, appendices, list of references, tables and diagrams are not included in the word count).
– Penalties will apply for exceeding the word count.
– The work should demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation.
– There should be an evidence of a wide reading to demonstrate your understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of your analysis (i.e. textbooks and academic journals).
– Please take care on the presentation of your submission.
– Appendices can be used for essential information only and should be clearly referenced in the text.
2. Submission Instructions:
– Submit electronically via Turnitinuk by 15:00 (3 p.m.) on Friday 14/12/2018.
– Only ONE copy should be submitted by each group.
– Submissions MUST use the cover sheet provided on Brightspace for this project. This cover sheet includes the names of the members in each team, their student numbers, module code (BHS0003), the tutor name and word count.
– Please note that submissions after the deadline without an approved extension or extenuating circumstances, but within five working days of the submission date, will result in the mark being capped at 40%. Please refer to the student regulations and your student handbook.
– Your coursework must be word-processed. APA 6 referencing method should be used where appropriate. See the link: https://library.hud.ac.uk/pages/apareferencing/
– Attention is drawn to the rules on academic misconduct (including unattributed citations from textbooks etc); refer to your Student Handbook for the penalties for non-compliance.
Document type: Microsoft Word
Font size: 12
Font: Times New Roman
Spacing: 1.5 / Auto – Auto – Justified
Font size for the title: 12
Marking Scheme (generic)
Criteria 70+ 60-69 50-59 40-49 Below 40 (Fail)
Knowledge and understanding Excellent research skills demonstrated in a clear understanding of relevant theories/concepts Good research skills used to show knowledge and understanding of relevant concepts An acceptable level of understanding of the concepts of strategy selection and implementation shown The level of research and knowledge/understanding has fallen below expectations Lack of evidence of research on lacks knowledge of relevant concepts
Analysis All relevant theoretical concepts applied effectively A good selection of frameworks applied competently An acceptable level of theoretical frameworks used, but not always applied well. The analytical content has fallen below expectation. Text tends to be descriptive. Little or no evidence of analysis.
Synthesis, creativity, evaluation Shows ability to integrate theory and practice. Good link between theory and practice. An acceptable level of evaluation in evidence. Evaluation has fallen below expectations. Little or no evidence of evaluation
Recommendations and conclusions Conclusions and recommendations based on sound evaluation and logic. Conclusions and recommendations well founded Satisfactory conclusions and recommendations Conclusions and recommendations thin and not well substantiated. No recommendations conclusions, or
Referencing Comprehensive range of references used to support arguments Good range of references used to support arguments An acceptable range of references used to support arguments Use of references fallen below expectations No additional to the main textbook references
Generic communication considerations The answer is excellent in structure, clarity and presentation The answer is well structured. The content is clear and well presented. The answer is of an acceptable standard in clarity, structure and presentation. The answer has fallen below expectations in clarity, structure and presentation. Poor answer in terms of structure and presentation.