ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Assessment
Individual Reflective Report
Assessment code:
011
Academic Year:
2022/2023
Trimester:
2
Module Title:
Business Strategy
Module Code:
MOD003337
Level:
6
Module Leader:
Benjamin Taiwo
Weighting:
50%
Word Limit:
3,000 words – excluding bibliography and any other attachments
such as appendices
Assessed Learning
Outcomes
1, 2, 3 & 5. Refer to the Module Information on VLE for detail.
Submission Deadline:
Please refer to the deadline on the VLE
WRITING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:
This is an individually submitted Reflective Report.
Completing the Business Strategy Game (BSG) is a prerequisite for undertaking the Business Strategy
Reflective Report.
The Assessment is an individual reflective strategy report that assesses the student’s active participation
and outcomes achieved on the Business Strategy Game.
SUBMITTING YOUR ASSIGNMENT:
In order to achieve full marks, you must submit your work before the deadline. Work that is submitted late – if your work
is submitted on the same day as the deadline by midnight, your mark will receive a 10% penalty. If you submit your work
up to two working days after the published submission deadline – it will be accepted and marked. However, the element
of the module’s assessment to which the work contributes will be capped with a maximum mark of 40%.
Work cannot be submitted if the period of 2 working days after the deadline has passed (unless there is an approved
extension). Failure to submit within the relevant period will mean that you have failed the assessment.
Requests for short-term extensions will only be considered in the case of illness or other cause considered valid by the
Director of Studies Team. Please contact DoS@london.aru.ac.uk. A request must normally be received and agreed by the
Director of Studies Team in writing at least 24 hours prior to the deadline.
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
See rules 6.64-6.73:
Exceptional Circumstances: The deadline for submission of mitigation in relation to this assignment is no later than five
working days after the submission date of this work. Please contact the Director of Studies Team – DoS@london.aru.ac.uk.
See rules 6.112 – 6.141: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
ASSIGNMENT
Following your active participation in the BSG, produce a 3,000-word Individual Reflective Report to
address the following tasks:
The Tasks
1. Provide a reflective account of your experience on the BSG. Your reflection must include (i) key decisions
made, rationale for such decisions and key lessons learnt.; and (ii) how various relevant theoretical
frameworks aided your activities in the internal, external and competitive environments of your BSG
organisation.
(60 Marks)
2. Critically evaluate the impact of one specific emerging technology on the future of your BSG
organisation and make useful recommendations to future managers.
(30 Marks)
3. Present a high standard and professional reflective report.
(10 Marks)
TOTAL: 100 MARKS
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
To pass this assignment you must satisfactorily complete all elements of the reflective report as prescribed
in the Report Structure – Please refer to the report structure in the assessment & assessment guidelines on
VLE.
Effectively, your reflective report must demonstrate:
Your active participation in the BSG, which is the essence of the reflective report.
Your ability to reflect on decisions and lessons learnt from outcomes.
Your applicable knowledge of theoretical frameworks relevant to strategy formulation.
The awareness of emerging technologies and their impact to business operations.
The ability to use Harvard referencing correctly.
ARU GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS: LEVEL 6 – the Depth stage
Level 6 is characterised by an expectation of students’ increasing autonomy in relation to their study and developing skill
sets. Students are expected to demonstrate problem solving skills, both theoretical and practical. This is supported by an
understanding of appropriate theory; creativity of expression and thought based in individual judgement; and the ability to
seek out, invoke, analyse and evaluate competing theories or methods of working in a critically constructive and open
manner. Output is articulate, coherent and skilled in the appropriate medium, with some students producing original or
innovative work in their specialism.
Mark
Bands
Outcome
Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band for ARU’s
Generic Learning Outcomes (Academic Regulations, Section 2)
Knowledge &
Understanding
Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and
Transferable Skills
90-
100%
Achieves
module
outcome(s)
Exceptional information base
exploring and analysing the
discipline, its theory and ethical
issues with extraordinary
originality and autonomy. Work
may be considered for publication
within ARU
Exceptional management of learning resources, with a
higher degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly
exceeds the assessment brief. Exceptional structure/
accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality
and imagination. Exceptional team/practical/professional
skills. Work may be considered for publication within ARU
80-
89%
Outstanding information base
exploring and analysing the
discipline, its theory and ethical
issues with clear originality and
autonomy
Outstanding management of learning resources, with a
degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the
assessment brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate
expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and
imagination. Outstanding team/practical/professional
skills
70-
79%
Excellent knowledge base that
supports analysis, evaluation and
problem-solving in theory/
practice/ethics of discipline with
considerable originality
Excellent management of learning resources, with degree
of autonomy/research that may exceed the assessment
brief. Structured and creative expression. Excellent
academic/ intellectual skills and practical/team/
professional/ problem-solving skills
60-
69%
Good knowledge base that
supports analysis, evaluation and
problem-solving in theory/
practice/ethics of discipline with
some originality
Good management of learning resources, with consistent
self-directed research. Structured and accurate
expression. Good academic/intellectual skills and
team/practical/ professional/problem solving skills
50-
59%
Sound knowledge base that
supports some analysis,
evaluation and problem-solving in
theory/practice/ethics of discipline
Sound management of learning resources. Some
autonomy in research but inconsistent. Structured and
mainly accurate expression. Sound level of academic/
intellectual skills going beyond description at times. Sound
team/practical/professional/problem-solving skills
40-
49%
A marginal
pass in
module
outcome(s)
Adequate knowledge base with
some omissions at the level of
ethical/ theoretical issues.
Restricted ability to discuss theory
and/or or solve problems in
discipline
Adequate use of learning resources with little autonomy.
Some difficulties with academic/ intellectual skills. Some
difficulty with structure/ accuracy in expression, but
evidence of developing team/practical/professional/
problem-solving skills
30-
39%
A marginal
fail in module
outcome(s).
Satisfies
default
qualifying
mark
Limited knowledge base.
Limited understanding of
discipline/ethical issues. Difficulty
with theory and problem solving in
discipline
Limited use of learning resources. Unable to work
autonomously. Little input to teams. Limited academic/
intellectual skills. Still mainly descriptive. General difficulty
with structure/ accuracy in expression. Practical/
professional/problem-solving skills that are not yet secure
20-
29%
Fails to
achieve
module
outcome(s)
Qualifying
mark not
satisfied
Little evidence of knowledge
base. Little evidence of
understanding of discipline/
ethical issues. Significant
difficulty with theory and problem
solving in discipline
Little evidence of use of learning resources. Unable to
work autonomously. Little input to teams. Little evidence
of academic/ intellectual skills. Work significantly
descriptive. Significant difficulty with structure/accuracy in
expression. Little evidence of practical/professional/
problem-solving skills
10-
19%
Deficient knowledge base.
Deficient understanding of
discipline/ethical issues. Major
difficulty with theory and problem
solving in discipline
Deficient use of learning resources. Unable to work
autonomously. Deficient input to teams. Deficient
academic/intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive.
Major difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression.
Deficient practical/professional/problem-solving skills
1-
9%
No evidence of knowledge base;
no evidence of understanding of
discipline/ethical issues. Total
inability with theory and problem
solving in discipline
No evidence of use of learning resources. Completely
unable to work autonomously. No evidence of input to
teams. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. Work
wholly descriptive. Incoherent structure/accuracy and
expression. No evidence of practical/professional/
problem-solving skills
0%
Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student
fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning
outcomes
