Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

Individual Essay Assignment Remit (30%)

Programme Title

MSc International Business

Module Title

Disruptive Innovation and International Business

Module Code

38170

Assignment Title

Individual assignment

Level

Click here to enter text.

Weighting

30%

Hand Out Date

15/01/2024

Start of Submission Window & Time

25/01/2024

3pm

End of Submission Window/Due Date & Time

05/02/2024

12pm

Feedback Post Date

26/02/2024

Assignment Format

Essay

Assignment Length

1000 words

Submission Format

Online

Team

Assignment:

For this assignment:

Choose a specific organization with a new radical/disruptive innovation/technology. Develop an appropriate organisational and internationalisation strategy for growth outside the home  country using the new radical/disruptive innovation and taking into account the challenges of responsible business.

•   The chosen organization can be operating in one or more industries.

•   The chosen disruptive innovation can impact or have significance in one or more industries/markets.

•   The analysis can also involve the discussion on the relevance of home-country

market/institutions. However, please be aware that the home-country information without

relevance for internationalization strategy would not justify their inclusion in your submission.

•   For this assignment, you must refer to and apply the theories and academic literature discussed in the module. For a higher mark you can also use relevant academic

articles/theories not discussed in lectures or included in the Resource List.

•   The examples of organizations discussed in the lecture should not be used in the assignment.

•   For any analysis included in the assignment, use up-to-date empirical evidence (e.g., statistics, company examples, country examples, newspaper articles, media reports,   industry reports, etc.).

Marking Criteria

•   Please have a look at the marking criteria below. As you can see marks are awarded according to a number of criteria including: The clarity and focus with which you address the assessment task (for a good mark you must answer the essay question and be as focused as possible); the logical structure of your argument; evidence of knowledge of course material including the clarity of the explanation of key theoretical ideas and key concepts; the relevance and quality of the examples you use to illustrate your arguments; your independent and critical thinking.

Module Learning Outcomes:

LO 1   Discuss and critically analyse the nature of innovation processes across different industries.

LO 2   Explain the disruptive impact of radical technological change on firms, global value chains, international business eco-systems and business networks.

LO 3   Appraise the impact of disruptive innovation and technological change on international, national and regional innovation and business systems.

LO 4   Apply a system’s approach to the analysis of the complex societal challenges associated with disruptive innovation at global level.

LO 5   Develop problem solving skills for dealing with real world complexity, ambiguity and uncertainty.

LO 6   Develop critical thinking and communication skills.

Grading Criteria:

See rubric at the end of this document

Feedback to Students:

Both Summative and Formative feedback is given to encourage students to reflect on their learning that feed forward into following assessment tasks. The preparation for all assessment tasks will be supported by formative feedback within the tutorials/seminars. Written feedback is provided as appropriate.  Please be aware to use the browser and not the Canvas App as you may not be able to view all comments.

Plagiarism:

It is your responsibility to ensure that you understand correct referencing practices. You are expected to use appropriate references and keep carefully detailed notes of all your information sources, including any material downloaded from the Internet. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are not vulnerable to any alleged breaches of the assessment regulations.

Within this module you are permitted to use generative AI to support your learning experience. You may use it for the following activities:

•    Researching and refining your ideas.

•    Information retrieval or background research.

•    Drafting an outline to organise or summarise your thoughts.

•    Refining research questions.

•     Checking spelling and grammar.

You may not submit any work generated by an AI tool as your own.  Where you include any material generated by an AI program, it should be cited just like any other reference material. Alongside your assignment you should also upload a commentary detailing how generative AI has been used to develop your submission. If you have not used generative AI tools, you should clearly state so. Further guidance on how to do this can be found here [Student guidance on using Generative Artificial Intelligence tools ethically for study (birmingham.ac.uk)].

Plagiarism, including that which results from using generative AI, is a form of academic misconduct that will be dealt with under the University’sCode of Practice on Academic Integrity

Grading Criteria:

 

Evidence

70% and

above

An excellent understanding of key issues raised by question: A very clear, focused and relevant answer to the question; a logical and very well organised argument;

clear and in-depth definitions of all key concepts and ideas; evidence of in-depth

knowledge of course material; evidence of independent thinking and critical

analysis; very strong evidence of independent research with the use of focused and relevant empirical examples. Correct Harvard referencing style throughout essay.

Evidence of full engagement with course reading material and recommended references for this course plus correct references of appropriate sources for

empirical analysis.

65% and

above

A very good understanding of key issues raised by question: A clear, focused and    relevant answer; a logical and well organised argument; clear definitions of all key concepts; evidence of in-depth knowledge of course material; some evidence of

independent thinking; strong evidence of independent research with a very good

 

range of relevant examples. Correct Harvard referencing style throughout essay.

Evidence of engagement with course reading material and recommended    references for this course plus correct references of appropriate sources for empirical analysis.

60% to 65%

A good understanding of key issues: A clear and relevant answer; a logical and well organised argument; defines key concepts; tends to follow closely the content of

lectures; evidence of independent research that uses a good range of relevant examples. Correct Harvard referencing style throughout essay. Evidence of

engagement with some of the course reading material and recommended references plus correct references of appropriate sources for empirical analysis.

50% and

above

A weak but satisfactory level of understanding of issues raised by question: Essay  addresses the assessment task; the logic of the argument can be followed most of   the time; some key concepts have been clearly defined; follows closely the content of lectures; some evidence of independent research and the use of some relevant

examples. Correct though inconsistent Harvard referencing style. Evidence of   partial engagement with some of the course reading material and recommended references. Correct references of appropriate sources for empirical analysis.

 

40% and

above

A very weak of understanding of some of the key issues raised by question: Essay only partially addresses the assessment task; the logic of some of the arguments

can be followed but with difficulty; attempts to define and explain some key

concepts but with little clarity; evidence of some independent basic research and some knowledge of course material. Inconsistent and incomplete referencing

throughout essay. Evidence of weak and superficial engagement with limited

amount of course reading material and recommended references. Incomplete and inconsistent references of appropriate sources for empirical analysis.

30%

Does not answer question but some evidence of having benefitted from course

20%

No evidence of having benefitted from course