craft research question and use theories to solve problems
craft research question and use theories to solve problems
I have chosen MARKET POSITION as my problem and it is important to craft it as a RESEARCH QUESTION.
There are examples provided in the attached.
PURPOSE OF THE ASSIGNMENT:
This assignment is designed to get you to think more deeply about how you might solve the management challenge and why your chosen approach is/is not the “best way.” The main focus is on you discovering the latest management thinking to help you determine cutting-edge solutions.
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT:
- Re-state the problem in the context of your chosen management perspective as a research question.
- You should do some research on ‘how best to formulate a research question.’
- Undertake a literature review of contemporary management literature that will help you to better understand the nature of the management challenge, how theory can inform a solution and what (if anything) has been tried before to solve this kind of problem (e.g. Has this challenge occurred before? Maybe in another industry? Has it been solved?)
- Continue to conduct industry and company research involving critically analysing and synthesising business information. (CLO3)
- Your information should be both broad and deep. Once you have collected the information, you have to critically analyse it.
- Identify and select appropriate tools, models and theories that will help you to understand the problem through the lens you have chosen.
- These should be from scholarly sources.
- Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the tools, models and theories you’ve selected. Suggest alternative methods to eliminate weaknesses.
- Again, rely on scholarly sources.
- Write a report justifying why your research approach to solving the management challenge should be adopted.
- Use a report format.
Appendix: Write a 500-word response to the feedback you received in your first assignment and what you did in reaction to that feedback to develop your approach to achieving success in this assignment (this does not count towards your total word count).
RUBRIC:
| High Distinction 80%–100% | Distinction 70%–79% | Credit 60%–69% | Pass 50%–59% | Fail 30%–49% | Serious Fail <30% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Problem definition(15%) | Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Identifies potentially significant yet previously less-explored aspects of the issue(s). Highly original or insightful work. | Demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of the subject. Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors considered and analysed. Appropriately addresses most relevant aspects of the issue. | Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors. The volume of reading of sufficient breadth and depth for a competent understanding of main issues, underlying principles and concepts but without the comprehensiveness of higher grades. | Demonstrates an ability in identifying a problem statement or related contextual factors. Important aspects of the problem not addressed. The depth of reading insufficient to award a credit grade. Problem statement may be factual and descriptive rather than analytical. | Develops a problem statement but lacks academic rigour, with material that is incomplete or irrelevant. Little evidence of knowledge of the relevant body of knowledge to make a persuasive case. | Unable to or poorly demonstrates an ability to write a problem statement or identify important contextual factors. Work may have failed for one or more of the following: non-submission, academic misconduct, answering a different question from the one asked, poor or incoherent vocabulary, no evidence of correct scholarly referencing. |
| Breadth and depth of research(15%) | Provides an in-depth synthesis of information from relevant sources, representing various points of view/approaches. | Demonstrated the ability to critically review, analyse, synthesise, and apply a theoretical and technical body of knowledge in a broad range of areas and diverse contexts perhaps with some synthesis. | Presents information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. Demonstrates some analysis of those views/approaches. | Presents factual information from some relevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Lack of analysis or critical appreciation of knowledge sources. | Little evidence of knowledge of the relevant body of knowledge to make a persuasive case. Failure to review critically, analyse, consolidate and combine knowledge and draw relevant conclusions. | Presents information from irrelevant sources or in very insufficient quantity. |
| Use of appropriate management theory (30%) | All elements of the theoretical frameworks are skillfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesised from across disciplines or from relevant sub-disciplines. Identifies flaws in published work. Identifies tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines. Performs a critical analysis of the tools and describes strengths and weaknesses in the context of the chosen management lens. Synthesises results and suggests alternative methods. | Shows reasoning and creative skills to use knowledge and awareness to exercise critical thinking and judgement in selecting and applying methods and technologies in identifying and solving problems with intellectual independence. Identifies tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines. Performs a critical analysis of the tools and describes strengths and weaknesses. Synthesises results and suggests alternative methods. Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are thoroughly developed, however, more subtle elements may be ignored or unaccounted for. | Identifies tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines. Performs a critical analysis of the tools and describes strengths and weaknesses, although work of this standard does not demonstrate the complexity and nuance required for the higher grades. Suggests alternative methods. The elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are developed but some elements may be missing, incorrectly developed, or unfocused. Coherent arguments supported by evidence and illustration from the work of other authorities or by direct empirical analysis, but without the intellectual independence found in the higher grades. | Identifies and describes tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines. Describes strengths and weaknesses. The work demonstrates a basic understanding of the methodology or theoretical frameworks. Theories and/or frameworks are applied in an unsophisticated manner. | Fails to identify tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines and/or work is of a poor quality. Work may contain factual errors. The work demonstrates a poor understanding of the methodology or theoretical frameworks. There may be basic errors in the application of the theories and/or frameworks. | Fails to demonstrate any coherent understanding or application of theoretical frameworks. Fails to identify tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines and/or work is of a poor quality. Work may contain factual errors. Work may be unrelated to the question. Work is unsubstantiated by references. |
| Analysis(15%) | Organises and synthesises evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to issues being addressed. | Organises evidence to reveal important patterns, differences, or similarities related to issues being addressed. The work is clearly structured and convincingly supported by appropriate evidence, argument or illustration. | The work is clearly structured and the exposition of knowledge and ideas is clear and competent. Organises evidence, but the organisation may not be effective in revealing important patterns, differences, or similarities in issues being addressed. | Lists evidence, but it is not well organized and/or may be unrelated to issues being addressed. The evidence is descriptive and factual in nature. | Use of insufficient evidence to support analysis. Students did not undertake enough reading or empirical data collection to allow conclusions to be made. | Fails to use evidence in a meaningful way. |
| Conclusions(15%) | States a conclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings. Evidence of formulated and sustained arguments with sophisticated analysis, inferences, synthesis of material. | States a conclusion focused solely on the inquiry findings. The conclusion arises specifically from and responds specifically to the inquiry findings. | States a general conclusion that, because it is so general, also applies beyond the scope of the inquiry findings. | States a conclusion that is not based on analysis and evidence, but rather represents a basic interpretation. | States an ambiguous, illogical, or unsupportable conclusion from inquiry findings. | Fails to state a conclusion or states a conclusion that is irrelevant. |
| Report structure and academic standards(10%) | Work is fully referenced according to accepted scholarly standards (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution). The report contains no flaws in spelling, grammar, format and exhibits high degrees of creativity and professionalism. | Work is fully referenced according to accepted scholarly standards (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution). The report contains no flaws in spelling, grammar, format, and is of a professional standard. | Work is fully referenced according to accepted scholarly standards (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) Report contains no flaws in spelling, grammar, format and is of a good standard. | Students use correctly some of the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution). The report contains minor flaws in spelling, grammar, format. | Improper citation of sources and referencing of work. (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) Report contains some flaws in spelling, grammar, formatting. | Students fail to use the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) Report contains extensive flaws in spelling, grammar, format, or the students failed to use a report format at all. |
