- Veritas Academics

Student Assignment Brief

This document is intended for Coventry University Group students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this module. It must not be passed to third parties or posted on any website.

If you require this document in an alternative format, please contact your Module Leader.

Assignment Task

AMBER – AI Used to assist.

The expectations of AI use: AI can be used in exploratory stage of research to understand subject area but cannot be used to create finished content. This includes text, image, or template.

This assessment is in the Amber category for use of Artificial Intelligence (AI), which means that the use of AI is permitted to assist you in the development of the assessment in line with the student guidance. Please note that if using AI tools, you must reference which tools you have used and for what purposes you have used them. This information must be acknowledged in your final submission.

The below format is recommended:

Tool	How used in this assignment
e.g. ChatGPT-3.5	Eg Key word search on topics xxx
e.g. Microsoft Copilot	Eg Request for a suggested structure for xxx
Etc.

Assessment Brief:

This assignment is an Individual report and individual reflective assignment, designed to assess MLOs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

This assessment consists of TWO components: Component A and Component B. While component A is assessed as a group effort, component B is evaluated individually. Both parts must be submitted together as a single document using the official submission template available on the 7023SSL Aula module page.

Component A: Group Report (5,000 words)

•This component requires students to work in groups of 2 to 4.

•Although the report is developed collaboratively, each student must submit their own copy of the final report individually.

•The report should demonstrate thorough research, critical analysis, and collaborative input.

Component B: Individual Reflective Report (300 words).

After completing the 5,000-word group report for Component A, each student is required to submit a 300-word individual reflection for Component B.

•Limitations of applying the main frameworks

•The applicability of the frameworks to the case study and their relevance to the process of organisational internationalisation

•How you plan to use these frameworks in the future

•Your personal experience with the frameworks and the module 7023SSL

Assignment Task Component A: Your group have been hired to provide market research and consultancy services to any ONE of the following organisations.

•Anta Sports Products (China) https://ir.anta.com/en/index.php

•Creo Medical Group (UK): http://www.creomedical.com/en/

•Tier Mobility (Germany) https://www.tier.app/en/

You have been commissioned by the board of your chosen organisation to produce a comprehensive 5,000-word strategic report. The objective is to identify the most suitable international market for expanding one of the organisation’s existing products or services, and to develop a detailed market entry strategy for that country.

Your report must include:

•Company Situational analysis. (Framework Required).

•ONE product/service of the firm, determine its target market segments and potential for expansion into a new market(s), (Framework Required)

•For market comparison, your market analysis should consist of a minimum of TWO markets and a maximum of 5 (Two) new markets to which the company can expand into

•For the selected markets (countries) perform a screening of these markets using a selection of product/market criteria. (Framework Required).

•From the market analysis choose the two best markets for expansion, support your recommendation into these two markets with evidence from analysis. (Framework Required).

•Analyse how the country profiling of the market can impact on the entry strategy of the company. (Framework Required).

•Determine the new market potential for the selected product and service, including the evaluation of international and domestic competition. (Framework Required)

•Produce a marketing plan, including a profit forecast and funding plan.

Frameworks and Analysis

To achieve high marks, your report must apply a minimum of FIVE FRAMEWORKS OR MODELS (e.g., PESTLE, SWOT, Porter’s Five Forces, CAGE, Ansoff Matrix, etc.) to support your analysis and recommendations.

This assignment (Component B – 300-word-Individual Reflection):

Following the completion of the group report, each student is required to write a 300-word individual reflection. This reflection is not about what happened in your group: this reflection should critically evaluate the relevance and limitations of the analytical tools (e.g. frameworks, models, case study) used in the group report.

Key Guidelines:

•The reflective report is individual work. While the group report is a collaborative effort, each student must produce their own unique reflection.

•Copying or sharing reflective content between group members is strictly prohibited and will be treated as academic misconduct.

•The reflection should demonstrate personal insight, critical thinking, and an understanding of how the tools were applied in context.

•It should demonstrate a clear understanding of the 7023SSL module’s content and objectives, key takeaways from your experience of engaging with the module, reflection on how the knowledge and skills gained will be applied in your future academic, professional, or personal development.

•Your reflective report must be submitted as part of the same document as the group report. Please refer to the recommended assessment template available on the module’s Aula page for formatting guidance.

Note: Students are not required to use a formal reflective framework when writing their individual reflective report.

References: (APA Referencing) You will need a wide range of references for your report. The style as outlined in the following web link;https://libguides.coventry.ac.uk/apa

Submission Instructions:

•Upload your individual/Reflective report as a single document on the module submission portal on Module Aula page.

•No paper copies are required. You can access the submission link through the module web.

•Your coursework will be given a zero mark if you do not submit a copy through Turnitin.

Please take care to ensure that you have fully submitted your work.

•All work submitted after the submission deadline without a valid and approved reason (see below) will be given a mark of zero.

•The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you can’t submit your coursework by the deadline – these events should be beyond your control and not easy to predict.  If this happens, you can apply for an extension to your deadline for up to two weeks, or if you need longer, you can apply for a deferral, which takes you to the next assessment period (for example, to the resit period following the main Assessment Boards). You must apply before the deadline.

•You will find information about the process and what is or is not considered to be an event beyond your control at https://share.coventry.ac.uk/students/Registry/Pages/Deferrals-andExtension.aspx

•Students MUST keep a copy and/or an electronic file of their assignment.

•Checks will be made on your work using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarismchecking websites.

Marking and Feedback

Your assignment will be marked by the module team.

Provisional grades will be released once internally moderated.

Feedback will be provided by the module leader alongside grade release.

You can expect to have mark work returned to you 10 working days after submission date . If for any reason, there is a delay you will be kept informed.

Marks and feedback will be provided online. As always, marks will have been internally only. and will therefore be provisional: your mark will be formally agreed upon later in the year once the external examiner has completed his/her review.

Details of the marking criteria for this task can be found at the bottom of this assignment brief.

Assessed Module Learning Outcomes

The Learning outcomes for this module align to the marking criteria which can found at the end of this brief. Ensure you understand the marking criteria to ensure successful achievement of the assessment task. The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task.

1.Critically evaluate a company situation analysis for international expansion.

2.Critically identify a potential market for a specific company’s product(s)/service(s).

3.Understand the Business environment of Global Business and conduct a competitive analysis in order to select the best country market.

4.Critically identify and determine best entry mode strategy for the target country and develop a market entry strategy.

5.Develop effective communication skills to be able to present key results and recommendations for the selected company in its international expansion.

Assignment Support and Academic Integrity

If you have any questions about this assignment please see the Student Guidance on Courseworkfor more information.

Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar:

You are expected to use effective, accurate, and appropriate language within this assessment task.

Academic Integrity:

The work you submit must be your own, or in the case of groupwork, that of your group. All sources of information need to be acknowledged and attributed; therefore, you must provide references for all sources of information and acknowledge any tools used in the production of your work, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). We use detection software and make routine checks for evidence of academic misconduct.

Definitions of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and collusion can be foundonthe Student Portal. All cases of suspected academic misconduct are referred for investigation, the outcomes of which can have profound consequences to your studies. For more information on academic integrity please visit theAcademic and Research Integritysection of the Student Portal.

Support for Students with Disabilities or Additional Needs:

If you have a disability, long-term health condition, specific learning difference, mental health diagnosis or symptoms and have discussed your support needs with health and wellbeing you may be able to access support that will help with your studies.

If you feel you may benefit from additional support, but have not disclosed a disability to the University, or have disclosed but are yet to discuss your support needs it is important to let us know so we can provide the right support for your circumstances. Visit the Student Portalto find out more.

Unable to Submit on Time?

The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you cannot submit your assessment by the deadline or sit a scheduled exam. If you think this might be the case, guidance on understanding what counts as an extenuating circumstance, and how to apply isavailable on the Student Portal.

Administration of Assessment

Module Leader Name:

Module Leader Email:

Assignment Category: Written

Attempt Type: Standard

Component Code: One Coursework Only

Assessment Marking Criteria

Theory, Concepts and Models

Analysis, Evaluation and Application

Critique, Conclusions and Recommendations

80 to 100

Exceptional understanding of knowledge and subject specific theories and concepts with evidence of originality and autonomy.

Exceptional level of research and engagement with relevant literature. Exceptional choice of theoretical frameworks with very strong justifications and application to the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Exceptional critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Exceptional evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Exceptional structure, delivery, and co-ordination between group members. The presentation is highly coherent, and the quality of slides is at a very high standard.

Individual Reflection: Exceptional reflection on personal performance, with in-depth evaluation of strengths, weaknesses, and personal growth. Demonstrates a clear connection between learning outcomes and personal development, offering valuable insights and strategies for future improvement.

Exceptional critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways. Exceptional level of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with very strong recommendations based on analysis and facts.

Personal Critique: Personal reflection is highly critical and leads to actionable recommendations for personal improvement. Insightful analysis of personal experiences and their impact on learning outcomes.

70 to 79

Excellent understanding of knowledge and subject specific theories and concepts with evidence of originality and autonomy.

Excellent level of research and engagement with relevant literature. Excellent choice of theoretical frameworks with strong justifications

Excellent critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Excellent evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Excellent

Excellent critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways. Excellent level of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with very strong recommendations based on analysis and facts.

and application to the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

structure, delivery and co-ordination between group members. The presentation is very coherent, and the quality of slides is at an excellent standard.

Individual Reflection: Excellent reflection on personal growth and self-awareness, with strong connections to learning outcomes. Clearly identifies areas for improvement and offers actionable insights.

Personal Critique: Reflective insights are critical and lead to clear recommendations for personal and professional growth. Actionable suggestions for future improvement are evident.

60 to 69

Very good understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories and concepts with some originality and autonomy. Very good level of research and engagement with relevant literature. Very good choice of theoretical frameworks with strong justifications and application to the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Very good critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Very good evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Very good structure, delivery and coordination between group members. The presentation is coherent, and the quality of slides is at a very good standard.

Individual Reflection: Very good reflection on personal strengths and weaknesses. Shows self-awareness and demonstrates growth, though some areas for improvement may not be fully explored.

Very good critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways. Very good level of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with strong recommendations based on analysis and facts.

Personal Critique: Reflection is insightful but may lack depth in identifying specific actions for future improvement. Some aspects of personal critique could be further developed.

50 to 59

Good understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories and concepts with some originality and autonomy. Good level of research and engagement with relevant literature. Good choice of theoretical frameworks with strong justifications and application to the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Good critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt.

Good evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Good structure, delivery and coordination between group members. The presentation is highly coherent, and the quality of slides is at a good standard.

Individual Reflection: Reflection shows awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses but lacks depth. Limited actionable insights are provided for future improvement.

40 to 49

Sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. Basic level of research and engagement with relevant literature. Acceptable choice of theoretical frameworks with weak justifications. Lack of critical evaluation of the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. Some critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Satisfactory evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Satisfactory structure, delivery and co-ordination between group members. The presentation has some coherent material, and the quality of slides is at a sufficient standard.

Sufficient critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways.

Sufficient level of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with sufficient recommendations based on analysis and facts.

Personal Critique: Reflection is mostly descriptive, with little evidence of critical self-assessment or actionable steps for improvement.

Individual Reflection: Reflection shows basic self-awareness but lacks meaningful examples and critical evaluation of personal performance.

Fail 30, 39

Learning outcomes not met. Limited research and engagement with relevant literature. Poor choice of theoretical frameworks with little or no justifications. Lacks critically evaluating the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Learning outcomes not met. Limited critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Limited evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Presentation has limited structure, delivery and coordination between group members. The presentation lacks coherent material, and the quality of slides requires improvements.

Individual Reflection: Reflection lacks depth and is largely descriptive. No meaningful self-critique or evidence of personal growth is provided.

Learning outcomes not met. Limited critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways. Limited levels of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with limited recommendations based on analysis and facts.

Personal Critique: Limited personal reflection with little critical selfassessment. No actionable steps are identified.

Fail 0 to 29

Learning outcomes not met.

Insufficient research and engagement with relevant literature. Very poor choice of theoretical frameworks with little or no justifications. Lacks critically evaluating the business portfolio and markets where it operates.

Learning outcomes not met.

Insufficient critical analysis of past and present challenges encountered by the organisation and risk mitigation strategies it can adopt. Insufficient evidence of in-depth research based on relevant and recent academic journal articles, and databases from legitimate sources. Presentation has insufficient

Learning outcomes not met. Insufficient critique and conclusion summarising the key takeaways. Insufficient levels of argumentation that leads to a conclusion with insufficient recommendations based on analysis and facts.

Personal Critique: No reflective content or self-assessment present.

Page

structure, delivery and co-ordination between group members. The presentation lacks coherent material, and the quality of slides requires improvements.

Individual Reflection: No

meaningful reflection. Lacks selfawareness, critical evaluation, and any indication of personal growth.