INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STRATEGY
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STRATEGY
Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: THEend8_
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS STRATEGY
Assignment Marking Scheme
You are required to write a critical review of an article which has made a
significant contribution to the field of business strategy. A number of articles
have been placed into SurreyLearn and students need to choose which article
they wish to review.
The reviews should be no more than 1,000 words and should be appropriately
presented (10 marks) and address the following issues:
1. The position of the article in the wider debate about processes of
strategy (with evidence from further reading to support this) – 45 marks
2. The main strength and weakness of the article – 45 marks
1. The position of the article in the wider debate (with evidence of
further reading) (45 marks)
Mark
range
The work places the article into a wider context of strategy theory
and uses a variety of sources beyond the main textbook to do this
with a focus on academic journal articles. The article under review is
compared and contrasted to other important research in strategy
and clear conclusions are drawn from this.
32-45
There is evidence of an understanding of where the review article
fits into the wider debates on strategy through reading a variety of
sources. A good attempt is made at comparing and contrasting the
review article with other literature.
31-27
There has been some engagement with the literature on strategy
but this is mainly in the form of textbooks. There has been only
limited comparing and contrasting of the review article with other
elements of the strategy literature.
26-22
Little attempt has been made to place the article into any kind of
wider context. There has been some additional reading but this is
mainly from the core textbook or the internet.
21-18
Little or no attempt has been made to place the work into a wider
context of strategy. There is no real evidence of reading outside of
the review article itself and the core textbook.
17-0
2. Discussion including strength and weakness of the article
(45 marks)
Mark
range
The main strength and weakness of the article is identified,
discussed and support is provided for the arguments made. The
review is critical and analytical and draws robust conclusions.
32-45
The main strength and weakness of the article is identified and
there is some discussion of them. Conclusions drawn are
supported and the article is critical and analytical
31-27
A strength and weakness is identified but there is limited
discussion of them. The work is descriptive in the main although
some attempt is made to be analytical. Conclusions tend to be
rudimentary in nature.
26-22
The work is main descriptive and there is limited critical
engagement with the article under review. There is no systematic
discussion of strengths and weaknesses and conclusions drawn
are unconvincing
21-18
The work is descriptive and represents little more than a rewrite of
the article under review
17-0
3. Presentation and Style (10 marks)
Mark
range
The work is well structured and has a logical and well ordered flow
between issues. Language used is sophisticated and articulate.
Referencing is consistent and uses the Harvard method.
7-10
There is a clear underlying structure to the work which makes it
easy to read and understand. Referencing is consistent.
6
The work is acceptably presented and has a clear structure. The
arguments are clearly expressed although the language and
terminology used lacks sophistication. Referencing is consistent.
5
The work lacks a central narrative which links the issues discussed
together in a coherent way. Referencing is haphazard.
4
The work has no real structure and is more a collection of loosely
related issues than anything. Referencing is haphazard and weak.
There are errors of spelling, grammar and punctuation.