Identify and analyse the key issues in international business activity in the context of contemporary globalisation.
2 Apply international business theory to a particular scenario.
Submission Deadline: Please refer to the deadline on the VLE
WRITING YOUR ASSIGNMENT
? This assignment must be completed individually.
? You must use the Harvard referencing system.
? Your work must indicate the number of words you have used. Written assignments must not exceed the specified maximum number of words. When a written assignment is marked, the excessive use of words beyond the word limit is reflected in the academic judgement of the piece of work which results in a lower mark being awarded for the piece of work (regulation 6.74).
? Assignment submissions are to be made anonymously. Do not write your name anywhere on your work.
? Write your student ID number at the top of every page.
? Where the assignment comprises more than one task, all tasks must be submitted in a single document.
? You must number all pages.
SUBMITTING YOUR ASSIGNMENT
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 at 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 upon by the
Director of Studies Team in writing at least 24 hours before the deadline. See rules
6.64-6.73: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
Exceptional circumstances: The deadline for submission of mitigation concerning 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 QUESTION
Identify, outline, and critically evaluate IKEA’s international expansion in operating an innovative, environmentally sustainable business in Japan and the Asian region.
Marks will be awarded according to:
Addressing the Task:
Identify and outline the extent to which the report has identified and outlined IKEA’s management of a global furniture and household goods company, including a discussion of design, production, foreign direct investment, joint ventures, management information systems, logistics, marketing, branding, and sales.
(40 marks)
Critical evaluation in which the report offers a coherently organised analysis of the operation of IKEA. The evaluation should be detailed and grounded in referenced factual evidence about the case company and its external environment, focusing on Japan and the Asian market in particular, together with the extent to which the report demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the required and recommended scholarly readings related to fast furniture and corporate social responsibility, stakeholder theory, corporate sustainability, and green and environmental economics.
(50 marks)
Demonstration of Academic Skills; including report structure and use of Haravard Referencing. .
(10 marks)
Required and Recommended Reading
i. Browaeys, M-J & Price, R. 2019, Understanding Cross-Cultural Management, Pearson.
ii. Forests and climate change. IUCN. (2021, February 17).
https://www.iucn.org/resources/issues-briefs/forests-and-climate-change.
iii.
iv. Hill, C. and Hult, T., 2022. International Business: Competing in the Global Marketplace (14th ed.). McGraw Hill
v. Marshall, T. 2022 Divided: why we are living in an age of walls, Elliott and Thompson
vi. Thomas, D. and Inkman K., 2022, Cross-Cultural Management: An Introduction Sage
vii. Thomas D.C. and Pearson M. F., 2022, Cross-Cultural Management: Essential Concepts, Sage
Journal articles
Forests and climate change. IUCN. (2021, February 17). https://www.iucn.org/re- sources/issues-briefs/forests-and-climate-change.
Porter, M. E. Clusters and Competition New Agendas for Companies, Governments, and Institutions Harvard Business Review Compendium 2020
Niinimaki et al. 2020 The environmental price of fast fashion.
Nature Reviews and Earth and Environment
To complete the report, students are expected to draw on a range of literature (scholarly journals and academic textbooks) as well as primary data sources.
1. As a minimum, submission students must demonstrate sustained engagement with and therefore command over the core introductory sources connected to contemporary international business issues and cross-cultural theory that pertain to this specific vertical concerning the specific countries they have selected for the essay. These core sources will be outlined and discussed in detail in class and supported extensively on the VLE. Insights from secondary texts must be applied and critiqued concerning the question and IKEA.
2. Students should draw on relevant parts of the module textbook, which is available via Kortext:
3. The academic report must also draw upon sources specifically connected to the company. This will likely include contemporary journal articles, journalism, and official documents/websites of the company itself.
4. You may also find that major consultancy and professional services firms such as McKinsey, PWC, EY, etc. have produced their analytical models for understanding the readiness/maturity of firms to undertake cross-border business, and this kind of resource may well be relevant.
5. It is recommended that students engage with the variety of texts and other learning materials that are included across the VLE.
6. As this is a Level 6 assessment, it is recommended that students go beyond the sources that have been provided via the VLE and Kortext, by conducting their independent research via the ARU Digital Library and/or Google Scholar. N.B. a minimum of 8-10 sources should be cited in the reference list.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA KEY CONTENT, and GRADING CRITERIA
1. Knowledge and understanding of the key issues in international business activity in the context of contemporary internationalisation and cross-cultural management.
2. Capacity to evaluate and select two appropriate national marketplaces in terms of cultural, political, economic, ethical, and legal framework.
Ensure your submission is sequenced as follows:
– Cover page
– Reference List
– Appendices (optional)
Please note:
– The overall word count should be 3,000 words
– You may include appropriate graphics to support your points if you consider they will add value to your answer
– Any tabulated data should be included within an Appendices section at the end of the document
– The cover page, Reference List, and Appendices are not included in the word count
– You should use scholarly works and reliable data sources to support your text; any theory used should be applied to the context of the scenario
– You must use in-text citations to evidence your work, in addition to producing a full reference list. All of these should conform to the Harvard Referencing format.
– The bulk of this text should be your original work and should not be excessively paraphrased.
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; the creativity of expression and thought based on 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% An 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 a 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% A 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
