BA (Hons) Business Studies with Foundation
Foundation Year 0 (Level 0)
Year 2 Level 4
Year 3 Level 5
Year 4 Level 6
Year 2 Level 4
Business Decision Making
Individual Assignment – 25%
Date given out:
1st August 2022
15th September 2022
For late submission, please check CCCU Taught regulation (page 28 on late submission) and Extenuating Policy:
CCCU Taught regulation
CCCU Extenuating Circumstances Policy
Method of submission:
Online and paper copy
Special instructions for submission (if any):
Date for results and feedback
(please note the final grade is subject to the main CCCU assessment Board)
Learning outcomes assessed:
LO1: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding on key decision theories and principles and interpret different approach to business decision making processes.
LO2: Understand key sampling methods and basic statistical techniques in business contexts.
LO3: Evaluate and interpret results generated by data modelling and forecasting techniques, including those provided by specialised statistical computer software.
LO4: Understand and justify the adoption of appropriate data modelling and forecasting techniques in business contexts and make informed and effective decisions.
The penalty to be applied to late course work, which will include course work where the work is graded on a pass/fail basis and it is possible to give a numerical mark, will be 5 per cent (of the eligible marks) per day, for up to seven days, after which a mark of 0 will be recorded.
TASK DESCRIPTION: Assignment (Individual Essay) 25%
S&P plc is a bag manufacturing company, operating in the UK and some parts of the Europe. Currently, some of their productions such as synthetic leather bags and clothes bags have been outsourced due to lack of available resources. However, strategic managers of S&P plc are looking to invest in a project producing synthetic leather bags or clothes bags. They have called new business proposals and have finally, chosen two projects using managers’ discretion to make final decision. Initial investment required for project A (synthetic leather bags) is £185,000 and for project B (clothes bags) is £182,000. The discount rate required is at 11%. The net cash flows for two projects can be summarized as below:
Project A – Synthetic Leather Bags
Net cashflow £
Project B –Clothes Bags
Net cashflow £
You are required to write an essay on business decision making, comparing the key aspects of the payback period and NPV, and financial and non-financial factors used to aid decision making.
MARKING CRITERIA AND STUDENT FEEDBACK – ASSIGNMENT
This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the space provided to comment on the achievement of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Common Assessment Criteria
1. Calculation of the payback period
Calculation of the payback period (years and months) in project A and B.
2. Calculation of NPV
Calculation of the NPV in project A and B.
3. Analysis and Discussion:
The ability to evaluate and analysis the calculated results and make the final decision by comparing two main financial techniques used to evaluate projects.
Taking financial and non-financial factors and their implication on investment decision making process into the account.
5. Overall presentation including correct referencing:
Use of Harvard referencing and overall presentation.
Approximately 1000 words
Formatting and Layout
Please note the following when completing your written assignment:
Writing: Written in English using appropriate business/academic style
Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment.
Length: Approximately 1000 words
Document format: Essay
Cover page – Ensure a clear title, course, name and student ID number is on the cover sheet.
Reference list using Harvard Referencing Style.
Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive.
Assessment 1: 1000 words (+/- 10%).
An outstanding Distinction
90 – 100
Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard.
A very strong distinction
80 – 89
Work of distinguished quality which is based on a rigorous and broad knowledge base, and demonstrating sustained ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and interpret concepts, principles and data within field of study, using defined principles, techniques and/or standard formats and applications. This will form the basis for the development of sound arguments and judgements appropriate to the field of study/ assessment task. There will be strong evidence of competence across a range of specialised skills, using them to plan, develop and evaluate problem solving strategies, and of the capability to operate autonomously and self-evaluate with guidance in varied structured contexts. Outputs will be communicated effectively, accurately and reliably.
A clear Distinction
71 – 79
Work of very good quality which displays most but not all of the criteria for the grade above.
Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
A very strong Merit
67 – 69
Work of commendable quality based on a strong factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, including an assured grasp of concepts and principles, together with effective deployment of skills relevant to the discipline and assessment task. There will be clear evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application, and the ability to work effectively within defined guidelines to meet defined objectives. There will be consistent evidence of capability in all relevant subject based and key skills, including the ability to self-evaluate and work autonomously under guidance and to use effectively specified standard techniques in appropriate contexts.
A strong merit
64 – 66
Work of good quality which contains most, but not all of the characteristics of the grade above.
A clear Merit
61 – 63
Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
Work of sound quality based on a firm factual/ conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, demonstrating a good grasp of relevant principles/concepts, together with the ability to organise and communicate effectively. The work may be rather standard, but will be mostly accurate and provide some evidence of the ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and apply standard methods/techniques, under guidance. There will be no serious omissions or inaccuracies. There will be good evidence of ability to take responsibility for own learning, to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, selecting and using relevant techniques, and to demonstrate competence in relevant key skills.
A very strong Pass
55 – 59
Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of grade above.
A strong Pass
50 – 54
Work of satisfactory quality demonstrating a reliable knowledge base and evidence of developed key skills and/or subject based skills, but containing limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application.
41 – 49
Work of broadly satisfactory quality covering adequately the factual and/or conceptual knowledge base of the field of study and appropriately presented and organised, but is primarily descriptive or derivative, with only occasional evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application. There may be some misunderstanding of key concepts/principles and limitations in the ability to select relevant material or techniques and/or in communication or other relevant skills, so that the work may include some errors, omissions or irrelevancies. There will be evidence of ability to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, using standard techniques, and to meet threshold standards in relevant key skills.
A bare Pass
Work of bare pass standard demonstrating some familiarity with and grasp of a factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, together with evidence of some ability to employ specialist skills to solve problems within area of study, but only just meeting threshold standards in e.g. evaluation and interpretation of data and information, reasoning and soundness of judgment, communication, application, or quality of outputs. Work may be characterised by some significant errors, omissions or problems, but there will be sufficient evidence of development and competence to operate in specified contexts taking responsibility for the nature and quality of outputs.
A marginal Fail
30 – 39
Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with area of study in relation to acquisition of knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles, and of specialist skills, but which is essentially misinterpreted, and misapplied and/or contains some significant omission or misunderstanding, or otherwise just fails to meet threshold standards in e.g. communication, application or quality of outputs.
20 – 29
Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in relation to one or more area of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills. It may address the assessment task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with some of the subject matter, but such satisfactory characteristics will be clearly outweighed by major deficiencies across remaining areas.
A comprehensive Fail
0 – 19
Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal understanding, application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity with knowledge or skills appropriate to the field of study or task and/or demonstrate inadequate capability in key skills essential to the task concerned.
Nothing, or nothing of merit, presented.