| Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines | |
| Trimester | T1 2024 |
| Unit Code | HI5013 |
| Unit Title | Managing Across Borders |
| Assessment Type | Group Assignment |
| Due Date + time: | October 4, 2024, 11.59 pm |
| Weight | 40 % |
| Total Marks | Assignment (40 marks) (if also presentation component, please add here) |
| Submission Guidelines | • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page. • The assignment must be in MS Word format unless otherwise specified. |
Academic Integrity Information | Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessments must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment. |
| Penalties | · All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time, along with a completed Assessment Cover Page. Late penalties apply. · Your answers must be based on Holmes Institute syllabus of this unit. Outside sources may not amount to more than 10% of any answer and must be correctly referenced in full. Over-reliance on outside sources will be penalised · Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing. Penalties are associated with incorrect citation and referencing. |
Group Assignment Guidelines and Specifications
Assessment Type
Weight
Date due
| Group Case Study Analysis Assignment Note: Groups of 3 – 4 students must be formed by week 6 and your lecturer must be informed in writing of each member’s name and student number. Once a group is formed, no changes are allowed. Students will also need to inform James Crowe (jcrowe@Holmes.edu.au) of their chosen case study. Each group must select a unique case study to research. This also needs to be communicated in writing or via email to James Crowe.
40%
Friday at 11.59 PM 4/10/2024 - for the Group Report. [Late submission penalties accrue at the rate of -5% per day] | |
| Assessment Title | Analysis of a Multi-National Corporation (MNC) Case Study (Report Format) | |
| Purpose of assessment and unit learning outcomes (ULO) mapping | the | Students are required to research and analyse a case study of a multi- national corporation (MNC) of their choosing, based on their own research and interest in the weekly topics or from the unit outline or from the list on page 7.
To adequately complete this assessment, students must follow the sequence of steps outlined below: 1. Identify the most important facts of the case study. 2. Identify the key problems and issues for the MNC. 3. Specify the main problem or the main challenge for the MNC. 4. Brainstorm and then state the alternative courses of action to show how the MNC can deal with the main problem or the main challenge. 5. Evaluate each course of action for the MNC in your group discussion. 6. Discuss and recommend the best course of action for the MNC.
This is strictly required to be your own original work. Plagiarism, collusion, copying and fabrication of references will be penalised. Additionally, Word documents must be uploaded, not PDFs. Students are required to apply the theories and knowledge derived from the unit materials, demonstrate critical analysis and problem-solving skills, provide a considered and comprehensive evaluation of their selected case study. Students must use correct in-text citation adapted Harvard referencing conventions. The following Unit Learning outcomes are relevant to this assessment:
1. Synthesise research and practice regarding international business and management issues and articulate possible solutions to a range of stakeholders.
2. Demonstrate an understanding business practice and research in the context of globalisation from a management perspective.
|
HI5013 Group Assignment Specifications
This group case study analysis is an opportunity for students to demonstrate their understanding of unit concepts, apply their knowledge of the theories and unit material learned and develop group- based problem solving skills and apply them to a contemporary multinational entity operating in different markets around the world.
Group Assignment Details:
The case study can be selected from those listed in the textbooks (Refer to page 5 below) as provided in the unit outline or from another source, provided that it is deemed an acceptable and credible academic source and is approved by your local campus lecturer.
The case study is to be based on a well-known multi-national corporation (MNC). Students must ensure that their case study has not been selected by another group. Analyse the selected and approved multi-national corporation’s (MNC) case study in terms of all of the following key topics, using each one of the following key topics:
• Corporate decision making
• Strategy and Globalisation footprint i.e. which markets has the MNC penetrated.
• Organisational Issues
• Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations
• Use sub-headings
• Use appropriate paragraphing
• Reference the sources used with correct in-text citation conventions / protocols.
• Provide a full list of references at the end using correct referencing conventions
• Check the safe-assign report and modify the submission if it is Medium or High risk.
· Firstly, students should familiarise themselves with the unit content from weeks 6 -11.
· Students will need to work in co-operative groups and select a case study after careful consideration. (Refer to page 7 below)
· Students should supplement their knowledge with wide research of the MNC in the case study and consider referencing other academic sources, which will support their case study analysis.
· Finally, students will need to discuss the case study and collectively determine the key problems and issues, specify the main problem / challenge, determine alternative courses of action for the MNC, carefully evaluate each course of action and lastly, make a recommendation as to what the best course of action is for the MNC, based on your group discussion.
· Students should then prepare and complete a group report, which covers the key topics within the overall case study analysis.
· Students must follow the correct in-text citation conventions / protocols and end of report referencing conventions using the Harvard referencing style.
1. Holmes Institute Cover Page [This is essential and must be completed accurately. This is available on BlackBoard]
2. Executive Summary - This should be a concise summary of the main argument and the conclusions made.
3. Introduction paragraph – A short paragraph which includes the background, scope and the main points raised in the report in order of importance. There should also be a brief conclusion statement at the end of the Introduction.
4. Main Body of the report contains clear Topic Headings for each paragraph provided.
5. Appropriate paragraphing must be used – each paragraph should include detailed information, which elaborates on the main points raised in the Introduction. This is where in-text citation is required and reference is made to specific references and other information obtained from research.
6. Page Numbers must be used – this is best practice and ensures the report is well presented and formatted.
7. Reference the sources used with correct in-text citation conventions. Follow the Harvard method.
8. Reference List at the end must be in the adapted Harvard Style and be mainly academic Journal Articles.
9. The report must be within the 3,000 word limit.
10. Check the safe-assign report and modify the submission if it is Medium or High risk. You have up to three attempts. NOTE: Consult with your campus lecturer if you are unsure or need clarification about how to use safe-assign. The report must be submitted through safe-assign.
1. Sher-Wood Hockey Sticks: Global Sourcing
2. Jollibee Foods Corporation (A): International Expansion
3. Acer, Inc: Taiwan’s Rampaging Dragon
4. The Globalisation of CEMEX
5. The Global Branding of Stella Artois
6. United Cereal: Lora Brill’s Eurobrand Challenge
7. GE’s Imagination Breakthroughs: The Evo Project
8. ECCO A/S – Global Value Chain Management
9. Lundbeck Korea: Managing an International Growth Engine
10. Kent Chemical: Organising for International Growth
11. Applied Research Technologies, Inc.: Global Innovation’s Challenges
12. P&G Japan: The SK-II Globalisation Project
13. McKinsey & Company: Managing Knowledge and Learning
14. Sharp Corporation: Beyond Japan
15. Eli Lilly in India: Rethinking the Joint Venture Strategy
16. Levendary café: The China Challenge
17. Clayton Industries: Peter Arnell. Country Manager for Italy
18. Barrick Gold Corporation – Tanzania
19. IKEA’s Global Sourcing Challenge: Indian Rugs and Child Labor (A)
20. Genzyme’s CSR Dilemma: How to Play Its Hand
21. Airbus: how it is recovering from the Airbus 380
22. Wirecard: how it was found out and international impacts
23. General Electric: how did it almost go broke? How was it fixed?
24. McDonalds: expansion into India
25. Ford: distribution of vehicles in China
26. VW market entry into China: JV in 1984 with Shanghai Volkswagen
27. BWM: expansion in to Chennai
28. Mitsubishi Electric: setting up inverter manufacturing plant in Maharashtra
29. Bunnnings: what went so wrong in their exanision into UK and purchase of Homebase
30. McKinsey: South African scandal re links with Gupta Brothers who had supported Jacob Zuma
31. LendLease: what went wrong in overseas expansion
32. Qantas: what went wrong in the customer service function?
[Source: Bartlett, C. & Beamish, P. (2014) Transnational Management: Text, Cases and Readings in Cross- Border Management]
Marking Rubric
Excellent
6 marks | Very Good
5 marks | Good
4 marks | Satisfactory
3 marks | Unsatisfactory
2 or 0 marks | ||||||
| Executive Summary Max 6 marks | Well structured, complete, compelling and concise | Clear, concise and compelling | A good summary of the report | A basic summary of the report | Missing or a non- relevant summary is noted. | |||||
Case Analysis of the MNC’s corporate decision making
Max 6 marks | The MNC’s corporate decision making has been excellently described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is effectively integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s corporate decision making has been very well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is very well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s corporate decision making has been well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s corporate decision making has been adequately described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is integrated into the overall case analysis. | The attempt made to describe the MNC’s corporate decision making is unsatisfactory or of negligible relevance. | |||||
Case Analysis of the MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint.
Max 6 marks | The MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint has been excellently described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is effectively integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint has been very well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is very well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint has been well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint has been adequately described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is integrated into the overall case analysis. | The attempt made to describe the MNC’s strategy and globalisation footprint is unsatisfactory or of negligible relevance. | |||||
Case Analysis of the MNC’s organisational issues
Max 6 marks | The MNC’s organisational issues have been excellently described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is effectively integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s organisational issues have been very well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is very well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s organisational issues have been well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s organisational issues have been adequately described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is integrated into the overall case analysis. | The attempt made to describe the MNC’s organisational issues is unsatisfactory or of negligible relevance. | |||||
MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations
Max 6 marks | The MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations, has been excellently described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is effectively integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations, has been very well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is very well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations, has been well described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is well integrated into the overall case analysis. | The MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations, has been adequately described with appropriate evidence in a logically composed structure, which is integrated into the overall case analysis. | The attempt made to describe the MNC’s Human Resources Management, including training and employment relations is unsatisfactory or of negligible relevance. | |||||
Overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation.
Max 6 marks | The overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation is excellent. | The overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation is very good. | The overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation is good. | The overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation is satisfactory. | The overall Case Study Analysis Performed, including the courses of action and the final recommendation is unsatisfactory or has deficiencies. | |||||
Formatting and Professionalism of the Report Max 2 mark | 2 marks = excellence in formatting 1 mark = report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of a report format. 0 mark = the report format is unsatisfactory. | |||||||||
Referencing (in-text) and Reference List Max 2 mark | 2 mark = report prepared is in compliance with the correct referencing protocols / conventions. 0 mark = the report’s referencing is unsatisfactory. | |||||||||
Total Group Report =
40 Marks | Comments Specific feedback will also be provided by your local campus lecturer in Blackboard when grades are released. You should also consider seeking consultation prior to submitting your group assignment and prepare a draft hard-copy of the group report for lecturer review prior to final submission. Students are also expected to create their own power-point slides drawn from their assignment content in their in-class presentations. | The Final Mark awarded will be released on Blackboard two weeks after submission, unless it is submitted late. | ||||||||
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
