MAR xxx-6

Management Dissertation
Unit Handbook
MA xxx and Management
2014/2015

MARxxx-6 Management Dissertation Unit Handbook 14-15

Introduction
Most students undertaking one of the Management Masters degrees have to
complete a Management Dissertation (hereafter referred to simply as the
Dissertation). This Handbook offers some guidance notes to help you research and
produce that Dissertation and the other two assessed components. The purpose of
the Dissertation unit is to give students the opportunity to complete an Academic
Poster, an Academic Critique, and finally to undertake an independent piece of work
of 10,500 words ( 10%) in length that focuses on a particular business or
management problem agreed between them and their supervisor. The Dissertation
enables students to develop their knowledge and abilities in a specific area and to
reach a high level of specialisation through the integration of theoretical and
conceptual insight within a practical context. It also gives students the opportunity to
develop project management skills through the process of instigating, carrying out,
monitoring, and controlling all aspects of the research.
This unit uses Enquiry Based Learning and independent study. It requires students to
think for themselves, to understand the research process by developing an individual
Academic Research Poster, to be analytical, concise, and able to synthesize
information/data in the Critique. Finally, to be responsible for the management and
direction of the research, though we assign you a supervisor to oversee and guide
you through the process on a regular basis via colloquies. Your receive agreement to
proceed on your proposed topic at the outset of the final semester, and it should
relate to a particular course specific issue.
The assessments in this unit consists of three components, Assessment One; an
Academic Research Poster, Assessment Two; a Critique of an academic piece of work
(book chapter or journal article), and finally, a Research Dissertation. In addition,
there are a number of touch points throughout the two semesters to ensure you
are 'on track' with your assignments and wider writing. These points are a
mandatory element as they allow you the opportunity to demonstrate your progress
(submitted via Turnitin) against each assignment, and for your supervisor to offer
formative guidance/assessment on the work submitted via mini viva voces.
The work you submit for formative feedback on an ideally fortnightly basis (or more
regularly as advised by your supervisor) through Turnitin is vital for you to
demonstrate your progress on every assignment and the Dissertation, and for your
supervisor to guide you appropriately.
The Academic Research Poster: Is an important part of academic discourse, it allows
you the opportunity to display an academic research proposal for critical discourse
by both academics and students and for you to have the opportunity to answer

questions/defend the nature of the proposal with academics and fellow students in
the Postgraduate Centre
The Critique: Is a specific form of writing; it is neither a report, nor an essay, in style
or substance. It is an opportunity for you to demonstrate you can be academically
critical. A critique is typically a precise analysis of an argument or set of arguments.
You are required to academically determine from the given book chapter or journal
article, what is said, how well it is said, what points were made, how well were they
made. Perhaps also who is the intended audience, is there any evidence of bias,
underlying assumptions or missing points? It is a systematic, but individual critical
response to a journal article/book chapter underpinned by academic literature.
The Dissertation: The expectation of a Dissertation is that it is the culmination of
your learning experiences during your time on the Masters programme, and a
demonstration of independent and individual research written up by you. Thus, the
Dissertation is the final output of the Dissertation unit.
A key element of this unit is the colloquy. The supportive environment of the
colloquy is such that every student has many opportunities to discuss their work and
receive regular feedback to optimise their mark/grade. The benefit of these sessions
is immeasurable. However, supervisors may request a formal viva voce after you
have submitted work (draft or final) or, if you fail to attend a colloquy. The viva voce
constitutes an important teaching and learning tool and is a recognised feature of
the Dissertation unit. Failure to defend your work successfully at a viva voce may
result in an additional viva voce on other work, an academic concern/offence, the
failure of the unit, or a referral to the Academic Conduct Panel.

To pass this unit you should be able to meet the following threshold standards:
Threshold standards
Assessment
Understand the context of a research topic, defining a research
question(s)/objectives with your own research topic, which has an
appropriate level of depth and breadth in your specific
business/course area.
The
Academic
Research
Proposal

Define the data requirements, identify an appropriate Methodology,

be aware of a comprehensive set of information and data sources,
identify appropriate literature for a Literature Review, and
demonstrate how the Academic Poster (Introduction, Literature
Review, Methodology, and Anticipated Outcomes) holistically might
answer a specific research question.
Justify critically arguments with appropriate evidence throughout
the work.
Synthesize and present proposed research using appropriate
academic or professional language in a coherent and persuasive
manner, displayed in a professional way.
Critically evaluate a single book chapter/journal article.

The Critique Identify and apply academic sources that both demonstrate and
evidence your critique
Understand the context of a research topic, defining a research
question(s)/objectives with your own research topic, which has an
appropriate level of depth and breadth in their specific
business/course area.
Define the data requirements, be aware of a suitably comprehensive
set of information and data sources, identifying appropriate
literature, and demonstrating how your Dissertation (Introduction,
Literature Review, Methodology, and Conclusions etc.) holistically
The
Dissertation answers your specific research question.
Review and prioritize the issues of the research topic, analyse
information and data in a systematic and critical manner, and be
able to justify your arguments with appropriate evidence. Synthesize
information and results with clarity and criticality, with a logical
development of argument. You should present the research with
appropriate academic or professional language in a coherent
manner.

You will also have to:

1. Demonstrate aptitude in the development and implementation of a
management based research investigation;
2. Demonstrate the ability to plan, monitor and control (project manage) the
research to a successful conclusion in a structured, skilled and professional
manner;
3. Produce an academically robust critique on a journal article or book chapter
4. Critically assess and determine a range of suitable research methods to
progress the Academic Research Poster and the Dissertation
5. Produce a critical and detailed review of literature pertinent to the topic
under investigation, both in the Poster and the Dissertation;
6. Implement and evaluate a suitable process of data gathering
7. Produce a written thesis that demonstrates a robust investigation, focus,
rationale, analysis, interpretation, and conclusions for an empirically based
business phenomenon.
You should also identify findings and conclusions with respect to the frame of
reference developed from the literature review and rigorously justify and defend the
research process, findings, and conclusions/recommendations within the
Dissertation.
In addition to generating a feasible research investigation, there are two other
components to this unit. In the first, you produce a professional academic research
poster. The poster comprises of the proposal (typically drawn from a case study you
discuss with your supervisor), brief literature review, methodology, anticipated
outcomes, and plan (e.g. Gantt chart, CPA), the Academic Research Poster element is
a summative element, initially with formative feedback. The second element, also
summative, although initially with formative feedback, is a Critique of a journal
article or book chapter. The Academic Poster element and the Critique together are
worth 25% of the total mark and the final submitted dissertation is worth 75% of the
total mark.
It is important that you try to define and develop a suitable topic as soon as possible.
You should discuss with you supervisors in your colloquies, they will offer guidance
and advice with respect to the chosen area of investigation, so that you receive
approval in the first week of the second semester of this unit.
You receive regular supervision/guidance from your supervisor via colloquies.
However, this time is limited to circa 30 minutes actual contact time a month for the
length of the dissertation (approx. 3.0 hours). We do appreciate that you will
probably require more supervision in the early stages and, as such all supervisors are

typically prepared to meet with you several times before completing your poster.
Remember all meetings will come from your allotted time, so use this time sensibly.
You are required to attend all your colloquies, as they are formal attendance
points, both for home, EU, and international students. You are also required to
submit regularly draft work prior to the colloquies for mini viva voces.
In addition to the mini viva voces, each student may be required to participate in a
formal viva voce examination of the submitted assignment in order to defend their
work.
A viva voce is an oral examination/defence of your partial or completed work. This is
typically by answering questions and queries relating to specific aspects of the work
and general defence of the methods, procedures, and processes adopted throughout
the ongoing investigation/assignment.
Re-assessment will be by resubmission of the failed component(s).
Poster hand in date 13th March 2015 (11.59pm) Presentation/Display 20th March
2015 (you are required to attend room and time TBA)
The hand-in date for the Critique 17th April 2015 (11.59pm)
The hand-in date for the Management Dissertation is

Unit Co-Ordinator
Name
Simon Reilly

Location

Email Address
Simon.reilly@beds.ac.uk

Supervisors/Course Coordinator
Name

Location

Email address

Sofia Reino

Sofia.reino@beds.ac.uk

Humphrey Shaw

Humphrey.shaw@beds.ac.uk

Rosemary Burnley

Rosemary.Burnley@beds.ac.uk

Linda Deigh

Linda.deigh@beds.ac.uk

Markus Haag

Markus.haag@beds.ac.uk

Programme Director
Colin Bradshaw

Colin.bradshaw@beds.ac.uk

Dissertation Elements Formal Deadlines

By When

Documents Required

13 March

Poster Submission a single correctly sized for A2

PowerPoint slide as a Poster (750 words)

17 April

Critique Submission - a single Word file (1000 words)

TBA

Dissertation Submission a single Word file (10,500-10%)

There will be a minimum 10% penalty for any student going over identified word
count in any element.
The remainder of this handbook discusses a number of issues that will guide
students through the various assignment and research processes.
There is a choice of two core text books
Brown, R. B. (2006), Doing Your Dissertation in Business and Management: The
Reality of Researching and Writing, Sage Publications, London.
Ridley, D. (2008), The Literature Review. A Step-By-Step Guide for Students, Sage
Publications, London.
Such is the potential for variety in your topic the two core texts are generic, designed
to assist you primarily in writing your Dissertation, although much of the information
contained you can apply to all of your assignments. You will however be expected to
draw upon a variety of useful texts depending on the nature of the scenario. It is
anticipated that you will consult books, academic journals, trade press, reputable
newspapers, industry reports and, if appropriate, company annual reports and other
information sources in the University Library, the Digital Library and reputable
sources in the public domain. The library also has an excellent selection of suitable
texts to help you through the process.
The following section provides detailed guidance notes and information on writing
your Dissertation.

Guidance Notes for the Preparation, Research, and Writing of a

Management Dissertation.
Selection of Dissertation Title
It is worth considering several broad areas of research at the outset that can be
based on your own knowledge of the subject, an interest in the subject or a
particular case or example. Work undertaken during the degree course may inspire
further investigation. Evaluating several alternatives can help focus on more detailed
issues such as; is there a 'real problem' to be investigated? What are the likely
difficulties of obtaining information, data and interviews? Is the subject/topic of
interest to you now and will it continue to hold your interest?
It should be noted that, whilst the choice of subject matter is effectively free, the
Management Dissertation is a significant and substantial piece of research and as
such must focus on your course/course related issue or problem; this means that the
work must be founded on and use as part of its structure, existing knowledge,
research, theories and concepts. Dissertations that try to incorporate a significantly
greater practical element - for example the production of a business plan - will not
be allowed. Primary research is not allowed, and fail grades will apply for students
undertaking primary research.
The final choice of subject area and a specific title will result from this refining
process. At this early stage, you should start to get a 'feel' for the subject:
background reading, discussion with tutors and fellow students, the assimilation of
facts, theories, expert opinion, and previous research should help you decide on a
particular perspective. Remember, there is no substitute for this stage of the process
- the more you research the subject the greater the chances of producing an
innovative and distinct project.
If you encounter problems in selecting a suitable topic, you supervisor will be able to
assist you socratically; but remember that ultimately the choice of topic and title
should be yours.

Dissertation Organisation
A properly organised Dissertation means being properly organised! As you read,
make notes, photocopy articles, and generally collect information, remembering to
reference everything as you do. Academic rigour is judged in part by the context and
relevance of referenced material. Try using a card index for bibliographical
references, quotations, or statistics. In particular always know when you are quoting

or paraphrasing or summarising someone else's work - it can prevent unintentional

plagiarism.
It is of fundamental importance that the project is not simply a descriptive story. It
must adopt an appropriate research methodology, which includes the identification
of an appropriate framework. A reasoned review of literature will be expected and
an explicit explanation of the research methodology chosen.
In order for the investigation to be distinct, you should develop a dissertation based
on the collection of good quality data. The generation of data is a crucial aspect of
the dissertation and must be fully considered at the preliminary stage outlined
above. A detailed plan and schedule of this activity, noting problems, bottlenecks or
likely pressure on you or your time, is an important part of organising the work.
It is never too early to start committing your thoughts onto paper. Whether in note
form or as a generalised overview, it is important to start to build from your
readings, discussions, and thoughts. A project of this size is a daunting task for most
students; don't allow time to slip by believing that what you are carrying around in
your head can easily be transcribed onto paper. Drafts are useful for both you and
your supervisor to follow the arguments, assess the progress, and comment on
problem areas. You cannot improve a draft unless it exists in some form. Remember
that a poor manuscript is better than no manuscript at all. It will probably be the
case that your final project will be the result of many drafts and much revision - that
is the nature of research. It is a continuous, sometimes iterative process, often with
many surprises. Be prepared for these surprises - they can be both depressing and
enlightening!

Academic Poster and Project Management

Developing and implementing a piece of research requires not only specific research
skills but also the ability to manage the process from its inception to a successful
conclusion. As an independent piece of work (that is, not formally timetabled) you
need to be aware of the benefits of competently planning, carrying out, and
delivering the finished work within a prescribed timeframe.
Technically speaking a project is a set of related activities with a defined goal and
uses a defined set of resources. The Management Dissertation is a unique piece of
work undertaken by individual students; it has a defined objective, the development
and implementation of a research investigation; it is complex in that a range of
different tasks are undertaken that rely on a number of previously completed tasks.
You will have to set out a full research proposal, a plan of action, identify any ethical
issues, demonstrate to your contemporaries and academics that you appreciate all

the issues that go to creating a successful Dissertation. Successful project

management involves developing skills that allow you to set achievable objectives,
plan how the study is carried out and monitor progress in order to make suitable
changes where necessary.
Project management relates to your ability to access and use relevant resources
appropriately, be aware of and manage our time in respect of the activities being
undertaken, the order in which you carry them out, and the difference between your
time estimates and the actual time taken.
It is acknowledged that managing an individual research project requires a clear
understanding of the component parts of the project and the ability to be proactive
when problems are encountered that necessitate changes to the proposed schedule
of work as well as specific resource. It is important that a schedule is developed and
agreed with your supervisor. This will be reviewed during the life of the project and
should be discussed when you arrange meeting with your supervisor.

The Academic Poster should include (as a minimum):

The full academic proposal

Ethical details/considerations

A plan of action (Gantt Chart/Critical Path Analysis)

Possible problems you might encounter

Possible outcomes/findings

It should be well constructed, contain appropriate content, be well structured, well

designed, and clear. Note: it is an academic piece of work and will be marked
accordingly. The deliverable is for an A2 sized poster; full details were given in the
first lecture prior to induction. You should use your own judgement and be guided by
the range of information available on producing academic posters The word count is
750 ( 10%).

Role of Your Supervisor

Relationships between supervisors and students can, and do, vary enormously. Some
students see the relationship as being a formal teacher and student approach with
the supervisor directing the actions of the student; others see it as less formal, using
the supervisor in an advisory and/or mentoring capacity.
It is important at the outset to determine the type of relationship that you, the
student, prefer. For all students the initial phase of the project (particularly in the
final semester) will involve several meetings with the supervisor, in order for them to
clarify points, set standards and objectives and offer advice and expertise. As you
become more immersed in the investigation, and start to get a 'feel' for the material
involved, you will probably work more independently, setting your own work
schedule and taking responsibility for the dynamics of the project. However, the
nature of research means that no two Dissertations will follow the same pattern so
you must make appropriate use of your supervisor by considering such aspects as:

What (s)he expects of you and what you expect of him/her;

The most appropriate time scale for regular meetings;

Any potential problems or difficulties that you envisage;

Any questions that (s)he may need time to consider .

Remember that your supervisor is there for guidance, do not expect them to
organise, write, edit, or dictate the content of the work - only you will do that.
The sessions you have with the supervisor are monitored and limited to 30 minutes
per month. However, you might wish to negotiate more in the first and last months
and fewer in-between.

Style
Write as simply and as clearly as possible. If you think clearly, you will write clearly,
but if you are muddled or confused your written work may reflect it in incoherence,
ambiguity, and irrelevance. Check what you have written carefully to make sure it
says exactly what you want it to say and that you have developed your arguments
logically, in a reasoned manner. Avoid tautological arguments, which are, repeating
the same point in different way. Check your references and the particular convention
used (Harvard) - make sure it is consistent throughout the project; check
punctuation and quotation marks. Present your work as tidily and as professionally
as possible; graphs, figures, tables etc. can all be enhanced by the use of word
processing packages, as can the spelling and grammar of your text. Pay particular

attention to spelling, grammar and sentence construction; your arguments and

rationale need to be clearly and unambiguously stated. There is help available if you
think you may encounter problems in this area.

Typical Structure
The layout of most Dissertations follow a standard convention:

Title page (see Appendix V for Template)

Abstract

List of Contents

List of Figures and/or Tables (if applicable)

Introduction

Literature Review

Methodology

Findings/Analysis/Discussion

Conclusions (and Recommendations where appropriate)

References

Appendices

Title Page/s
The title page should contain only the basic information relating to your particular
Management Dissertation. The title should be clear and succinct and accurately
describe the contents of the Dissertation. Do not write the abstract or summary on
the title page or the recommendations or conclusions.
The title page must also include:

Your name

The date

The name of the course

The name of the department and University

Any statements of confidentiality (page ii).

NOTE: A template for this is in the Appendices of this document

Abstract
The abstract should succinctly set out what the Management Dissertation has
accomplished in terms of:

The stated aims and objectives

What it looked at (the problems)

How it looked at it (research methods, concepts, models)

What was found

The limitations of the research

What conclusions can be drawn and recommendations made.

Keep the abstract brief (around 250 words); it should not be too detailed, but must
provide the salient points of the research. Remember, you cannot write the abstract
until the report is finished!

Introduction
The introduction or foreword should state the purpose and intention of the project
by setting out:

The detailed aims and objectives

Identification of the problem

What the report intends to achieve

The conceptual/theoretical framework to be used

Any definition of terms (if no Glossary)

The general methodology to be used in the investigation

Background history, if necessary

Keep it brief and stick to the significant points only.

For those counting words, count everything from the first word of the introduction
up to and including the final word of conclusions/recommendations. Remember:
appendices are useful for providing supplementary information and backing up
arguments and discussions and can be excluded from the word count.

Literature Review
It will be necessary for you to understand the fundamental issues involved in the
chosen area of research therefore a substantial amount of reading is required. In
essence, a literature review offers,
" a selection of available documents (both published and unpublished) on
the topic, which contain information, ideas, data, and evidence written from
a particular standpoint to fulfil certain aims or express certain views on the
nature of the topic and how it is to be investigated, and the effective
evaluation of these documents in relation to the research being proposed.
(Hart, 1998, p. 13)
Be prepared to read a lot; be prepared to write a lot. The essence of a good
literature review is to be able to set out and critically develop the main themes or
schools of thought on the chosen topic. Once these have been assessed then you can
compare and contrast specific ideas, models or commentators within one of these
schools; or you can, if considered prudent, combine themes from various schools
and synthesise them into a coherent and rigorous analytical framework of your own.
Remember that the model or framework you ultimately end up with must be able to
shed some understanding on the topic under investigation so it must be able to be
defended.

Methodology
This is, for some students, the most confusing part of the project. Defining and
articulating a methodology can be difficult, particularly when most of the subject
matter may also be new. All research employs some form of data and information
collection; how these are collected and the problems associated with such collection
are important factors to be considered within the context of the research.
A methodology can been defined thus,
A system of methods and rules to facilitate the collection and analysis of
data. It provides the starting point for choosing an approach made up of
theories, ideas, concepts and definitions of the topic: therefore the basis of a
critical activity consisting of making choices about the nature and character
of the social world (assumptions). This should not be confused with
techniques of research, the application of methodology (Hart, 2009, p. 28).
The precise methods of conducting the research will vary depending on the topic
and the question. There are advantages and disadvantages to all methods of data
collection, and (without getting into any philosophical debates) some may be
inappropriate for certain studies. It is important that you consider carefully the
methods you choose, as they must then be justified in terms of the approach taken.

Findings/Analysis/Discussion
This is the part of the project where the facts or evidence are presented. The
presentation should be structured around the conceptual framework chosen and
must incorporate references, views, ideas, and critiques from that perspective.
Beware of broadening the scope of the project outside the specified aims and
objectives. Remember: the Management Dissertation is meant to be an in-depth
piece of work focusing on a narrow issue or problem - do not try to fit in all your
discoveries, facts, histories and information that you generate, use only that which is
specific and relevant to the main issues and which meet the set objectives.
Try to:

Arrange material into groups of similar information and sub divide as you feel
necessary
Give each section a heading which indicates the contents
Ensure that all related ideas are grouped together and not scattered
throughout the report
See that sections follow each other logically: chronologically; geographically,
historically etc.
Present the facts then analyse the information.
Build your argument step-by-step towards your conclusions

Conclusions and Recommendations

Conclusions and recommendations can be combined or dealt with separately though
the latter is more usual in larger research projects. They should be clear and precise
and they are better listed with headings.
Conclusions should draw out the implications from the main body of the work. They
should always relate to the conceptual/theoretical framework of the report and you
should not introduce new material into this section.
Recommendations should be based only on the explicit conclusions and should
describe a clear course of action. Where there is some doubt (based on, perhaps,
insufficient evidence, contradictory facts or theoretical critique) always make sure
that these problems are fully evaluated in terms of recommendations offered.

References
All referencing should be wholly consistent with Harvard style. You should refer to
the various information/sources made available to you. There are study guides from
the University. There is also information in several research books in the library.
Note, there are a number of referencing styles used throughout academia, ensure
that you use Harvard, simply copying and pasting from another source and claiming
it is right will not be good enough if it isnt consistent with the Harvard style you use.

Remember; reference lists are written in alphabetical order.

Appendices
Appendices contain all the supporting information that would otherwise hinder
speed-reading of the report. It is also where you place all the information you have
collected in the form of data, letters etc. Appendices are used to present:

Information which is useful to the understanding of the presentation but not

essential to the text.

Information which is referred to continuously in the text and has therefore

no one logical position in the text.

Other supporting evidence not available in normal published sources and

held only by you. e.g.: letters, trade literature, survey information, etc., which
you will have collected.

Plagiarism
You are reminded that all assignments submitted for assessment should represent
your own work, in other words they should be based on and reflect your own
understanding of a problem and presented in your own words. Any work which is
seen to be based wholly or largely on material copied from unacknowledged
sources or consists of large chunks taken from cited sources is not acceptable and
deemed to be an act of plagiarism. Remember, it is acceptable to quote,
paraphrase or summarise the work of others - indeed, it is expected at this level but you must always fully reference.

Assessment Criteria and Marking Scheme

Your Management Dissertation is a substantial piece of work and gives the
opportunity to research a particular business related aspect in depth. Unlike a PhD
thesis, which is expected to make a significant contribution to knowledge, an
postgraduate (Masters) Dissertation seeks to assess your knowledge and
understanding of a current debate or perspective in respect of a practical
application. However, some students might undertake research that adds to the
overall understanding of a topic areas; and while acknowledging this is not
necessarily suitable or possible for all topics, students who achieve this are rewarded
accordingly.
Remember; the Dissertation should be a structured and rigorous piece of work that
is assessed on a number of criteria, including:

The concepts, ideas and arguments that you use

The originality of your approach to the above

The method(s) and rationale that you employ

The type of information, data and evidence that you generate

The inferences, conclusions and recommendations

Reference List
Below is a list of indicative general research texts that will help you begin the
research process. Remember that when your Dissertation becomes more focused it
requires the inclusion of more specific literature that should help you develop a
more rigorous and detailed set of arguments and drive the analysis.
Babbie, E. (2004), The Practice of Social Research, 10th edn, Thomson/Wadsworth,
Belmont, CA ; London.
Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. (2000), Qualitative researching with text, image and
sound: a practical handbook, Sage, London.
Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2007), Business research methods, 2nd edn, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Crotty, M. (2003), The Foundations of Social Research, Sage Publications, London.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989), 'Building Theories from Case Study Research', Academy of
Management Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532-50.
Hart, C. (2009), Doing a Literature Review: releasing the social science research
imagination, Sage, London.
Mason, J. (2002), Qualitative researching, Sage, London.
Neuman, W. L. (2000), Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative
approaches, Allyn and Bacon, Boston; London.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2006), Research methods for business
students, 4th edn, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, Harlow.
Sekaran, U. & Bougie, R. (2010), Research Methods for Business: a Skill-Building
Approach, 5th edn, Wiley; Chichester: John Wiley [distributor], Hoboken, N.J
These are just some of the books and articles that could help you. The library will
have a number of other titles along with many more journal articles.

University Regulations
The University regulations can be viewed in full at
http://www.beds.ac.uk/aboutus/quality/regulations

References
Hart, C. (2009), Doing a Literature Review: releasing the social science research imagination,
Sage, London.

Appendix I
Ethical Issues
Human Research Ethics Guidelines for Students and Supervisors
Identifying Ethical Issues in Human Research

Ethical issues arise in teaching or research when the conduct of the

teacher/researcher involves the interests and rights of others. The most obvious
cases concern people who act as subjects in medical research involving innovatory
and invasive treatments. Regardless of the humanitarian benefits and long term
prospects of the research, there may be immediate or impending threats to the
participants safety, comfort, or convenience.
The researcher (and research supervisor) must be aware that any research which
involves others as participants creates the possibility of an invasion of the
participants interests or rights. Thus, social research involving interviewing or
observation (especially where veridical records are kept, on audio or video tape for
example) may impinge on the confidentiality, privacy, convenience, comfort or
safety of others. Such threats constitute ethical problems.
Ethical issues may also be raised by research which makes reference to named
persons either living or dead with living relatives. Research which apparently impacts
only on the dead may raise issues of privacy and confidentiality.
The use of children as subjects necessarily raises ethical issues in that the researcher
cannot assume their capacity to comprehend the nature of the research and thereby
to freely and legitimately volunteer as a subject or freely opt out without prejudice.
Parents and guardians cannot consent to the possibility of their child being harmed.
They can give permission to participate in a study in which they have full confidence
that their childs rights will not be infringed and that they do not face the possibility
of harm or injury.
Research Raising Ethical Issues

In all cases where human research raises ethical issues approval must first be sought
before undertaking the project. Thus, approval must be gained by members of the
University who wish to engage in research, at the postgraduate or undergraduate
level, undertaken by:

1. Gathering information about human beings (and organisations) through;

Interviewing

Surveying

Questionnaires

Observation of human behaviour

Taking human tissue/fluids

Interfering in normal physiological and/or psychological processes

2. Using archived data in which individuals are identifiable

3. Researching into illegal activities
The Requirement of Ethical Practice

The adoption of an ethical position in respect of such research requires that the
researcher observes and protects the rights of would-be participants and
systematically acts to permit the participants to exercise those rights. Ethical practice
in such cases requires that participants, at a minimum, be fully informed, to
volunteer freely without inducement, free to opt out without prejudice, and be fully
protected in regard to safety to the limits of best practice.
It is a necessary requirement in the management of ethical practice in research that
the researcher seeks the approval of a body independent of the research team who
are qualified and able to examine the research design and the proposed system for
protecting participants interests with a view to adjudicating on their ethical
acceptability and their accountability.
Minimum Standards of Ethical Practice in Human Research

Research undertaken in the name of the University must take place in accordance
with routine procedures to protect participants interests and to highlight ethical
conduct. It is essential that the researcher/supervisor is able to satisfy the following
requirements before beginning any data collection for the study:

All participants volunteer without inducement and give their written consent
to participation (neither children, nor their parents on their behalf, can give
consent);

Written consent is given in the light of full awareness of the objectives of the
research, the procedures to be followed, and the anticipated outcomes
particularly in respect of publication of findings;

All participants are given a written description of their involvement in the

project, the demands to be made, their rights and how their rights and
interests will be protected, particularly in respect of confidentiality, privacy
and safety;

All participants are made aware of their freedom to withdraw consent and
discontinue participation at any time;

Appropriate documentation must be designed to meet these objectives and

to keep appropriate records, e.g. information regarding the project should be
given in writing and the participant should sign to acknowledge receipt of the
material.

NB: If any of these conditions cannot be met, the research must not take place. For
example, if it is not possible to explain in lay-terms the objectives of the research,
the procedures, and outcomes, then the subject cannot consent to participation.
In the case of children as subjects, it must be noted that consent is not a possibility.
The onus on the researcher to ensure that children are protected by the highest
standards of ethical practice is greater than with adult subjects. Parents and
guardians can and must give permission for their child to participate, but this is not
consent to potential harm. The susceptibility of the researcher to charges of
negligence is necessarily great. All research involving children (up to 16 years old,
and in some cases up to 18 years) must be approved by the appropriate ethics
committee.
Procedures for the Supervision of Graduate and Undergraduate Student Research

No research involving human subjects as outlined above may proceed without the
explicit approval in writing of the University Research Ethics Committee (UREC).
Supervisors must obtain from the researcher a specific proposal to undertake human
research. It is the responsibility of the supervisor, in conjunction with the researcher,
to submit the proposal to the ethics committee and to ensure that the proposal is
only submitted to the ethics committee if it satisfies the following guidelines
regarding the absolute minimum required information to approve the project:
I.

Statement of research objectives

II.

Rationale for undertaking the study

III.

Statement on research procedures and methodologies

IV.

Full details of arrangements for participation of human subjects, including

recruitment, consent and confidentiality procedures and documentation

V.

Details of intentions in respect of the publication of findings

VI.

Details regarding the storing or disposal of data on identifiable individuals

after completion of the study

The following form, provided for the above, must be completed by the researcher,
signed by the supervisor, and submitted to the Chair of the Faculty Research Ethics
Committee no less than one month prior to the proposed start of the research
element of the project.

Approval Code:

UNIVERSITY OF BEDFORDSHIRE BUSINESS SCHOOL

ETHICAL APPROVAL APPLICATION FORM

School/Unit:
Please indicate

Please Tick

Postgraduate Project

Undergraduate Project

(double click on the box then click Checked for a cross to appear in the box)

Project Title:

Researchers
Name(s):

Supervisor(s):

Date:

dd/mm/year

Applications should be submitted electronically to either the Secretary of the School Research Ethics
Committee as one single file.
One original hard copy must also be submitted with the signatures of all applicants and Supervisors.

Rationale: Please give a BRIEF description of the project in lay language This summary will be reviewed by
UREC and may be published as part of its reporting procedures.

Do NOT exceed 75 words - approx 5 lines (for database reasons). Further detail, if required, can be
given in Q 27.

Ethical Considerations: Please give a BRIEF description of the projects ethical considerations. Please
address, as required, questions raised specifically in the form, and also, where appropriate, that the basic
ethical criteria have been met in any use of (a) participant information sheet (b) consent form (c)
debriefing, and if not, why not. This summary will be forwarded to and reviewed by UREC and may be
published as part of its reporting procedures.

Do NOT exceed 75 words - approx 5 lines (for database reasons). Elucidation, if required, can be given in
Q 27.

RESEARCH INFORMATION
1. Estimated Start Date:

2. Estimated Duration of
Project:

3. Is this research solely concerned with

a. Published secondary data sources? If YES proceed directly to Q26 then
Q27.

Yes

No

b. With unpublished data but with the permission of the archive curator?

Yes

No

4. This project does NOT involve research with human subjects but has other
Yes
No
ethical considerations e.g. roles in research, intellectual property,
responsibilities of funders, research with policy or other social implications etc If YES please proceed
directly to Q27

5. Who are the Intended

Participants (e.g.
students) and how will
you recruit them?

6. Estimated duration of
Participant
Involvement:

7. Location of
Research/Fieldwork to
be conducted:

8. Is this research funded by an external sponsor or agency?

If YES please give

details:

Yes

No

ETHICAL CHECKLIST
9. Have you obtained permission to access the site of research?

N/A

Yes

No

If YES state agency

/authority etc &
provide
documentation
If NO please indicate
why.

N/A

10. Does this research entail collaboration with other researchers? If YES state
names and institutions of collaborators below.

11. If the research is collaborative, have you considered issues to do with roles in
research publication strategies/authorship, and devised a framework to
ensure that all participants are given appropriate recognition in any outputs?

12. Will you tell participants that their participation is voluntary?

13. Will you describe the main project/experimental procedures to participants in

advance so that they can make an informed decision about whether or not to
participate?
14. Will you tell participants that they may withdraw from the research at any
time and for any reason, without having to give an explanation?

Yes

No

15. Will you obtain written consent from participants?

16. If the research is observational, videoed and taped, will you ask participants
for their consent to begin observed, videoed or taped?

17. Will you tell participants that their data will be treated with full
confidentiality and that if published, it will not be identifiable as theirs?

18. Will participants be clearly informed of how the data will be stored, who will
have access to it, and when the data will be destroyed?

19. Will you debrief participants at the end of their participation, i.e. give them a
brief explanation in writing of the study?

20. With questionnaires, will you give participants the option of omitting
questions they do not want to answer?

If you have answered NO to any question 12 - 21, please give a brief explanation in the statement of
Ethical Considerations on Page. 1, and expand in Q27 if necessary. If you answer YES, it must be clearly
illustrated in the relevant paperwork which must be attached i.e. Participant Information Sheet, Consent
Form, Debriefing Form, Questionnaires, Advertisement, etc

RISK AND SAFETY

N/A
21. Are any of the participants in a dependent relationship with the investigator
e.g. lecturer/student? If YES, please give full explanation in Q27.

22. Will your project involve deliberately misleading participants in any way? If
YES, give details in Q27 and state why it is necessary and explain how
debriefing will occur.

Yes

No

23. Is there any realistic risk to any paid or unpaid participant(s), field assistant(s),
helper(s) or student(s), involved in the project, experiencing either physical or
psychological distress or discomfort? If YES, give details in Q27 and state what
you will do if they should experience any problems e.g. who to contact for
help.

24. Is there any realistic risk to the investigator? If YES, have the appropriate risk
assessment forms been submitted to the appropriate Safety Committee(s)?

25. Do you think the results of your research have the potential to cause any
damage, harm or other problems for people in your study area?

WORKING WITH CHILDREN/VULNERABLE PEOPLE

Do participants fall into any of the following special groups? If they do, please tick the appropriate answer,
refer to the relevant guidelines and complete Q27.

Yes
26. a. Children (under 18 years of age)

b. People with learning or communication difficulties

c. Patients (including careers of NHS patients)

No

d. People in custody

e. Institutionalised persons

f. People engaged in illegal activities e.g. drug-taking

g. Other vulnerable groups

There is an obligation on the Lead Researcher & Supervisor to bring to the attention of the School Ethics
Committee (S.E.C.) any issues with ethical implications not clearly covered by the above checklist.

ETHICAL STATEMENT

27. Write a clear but concise statement of the ethical considerations raised by the project and how
you intend to deal with them. It may be that in order to do this you need to expand on the Ethical
Considerations on page.1.

DECLARATION

I am familiar with the ... (please insert appropriate guidelines for your discipline
e.g. BPS, ESRC, MRC and ASA) Guidelines for Ethical Research Guidelines for Research practices, and
have discussed them with the other researchers involved in the project. My supervisor has seen all
relevant paperwork linked to this project.
Researcher(s)
Print Name

Signature

Date

dd/mm/year

Supervisor(s)

The supervisor must ensure they have read both the application and the guidelines before signing
below.

Print Name

Signature

Date

OFFICIAL USE ONLY

dd/mm/year

STATEMENT OF ETHICAL APPROVAL

This project has been considered using agreed University Procedures and has been:

Approved

Not Approved

More Clarification Required

New Submission Recommended

Referred to UREC

Conveners Name

Signature

Date:

dd/mm/year

Appendix II
Management Dissertation Supervision Monitoring Form
Business Management
Student Name: . Date of Meeting: .
Supervisor: ...
General Progress Report since previous meeting

Specific Problems Encountered

Proposed Plan of Action

Next Scheduled Meeting: ...

Student signature: ... Supervisor Signature: .

Appendix III
Grade

Poster Marking Criteria

F (Fail)

E (Fail)

D (Range)

C (Range

B (Range)

A (Range)

Introduction/Rationale
(10%)

There is no
Rationale or
Introduction to
speak of

The Rationale or
Introduction has
major flaws

There is some merit

to the Rationale
although not
expressed very
well.

This is an
adequate
Rationale,
which explains a
basic outline of
the research

A good Rationale,
highlighting clear and
explicit links between
the question and the
why

An excellent
Rationale, clear
concise, and makes
the link between
the question and
the why Concise
and critical.

Literature Review

The Literature
Review is nonexistent /or very
poor

The Literature
Review is poor and
has little to
commend it

A cursory look at
literature is
apparent, not
necessarily all
relevant

Evidence of a
satisfactory
overview of the
literature is
apparent.

A detailed look at the

key literature is
evident on the
poster, it is well
written and critical

The Literature
Review is very
good, with the key
authors
represented and
critical throughout

Methodology is
missing or very
poor.

This is a poor
methodology
showing no
understanding of any
of the issues, or of
data collection.

This is a weak
Methodology, with
more missing
elements than
present, poorly
written, not critical,
or clear.

A reasonable
attempt at a
Methodology
perhaps has
several missing
elements. Has
little criticality.

Methodology,
demonstrates a
sound critical
understanding of the
methodological
issues, perhaps
missing an element.

An excellent
Methodology,
providing a clear,
concise, and critical
outline of all the
relevant
components.

Criteria/Weighting

(30%)

Methodology (30%)
(including methods,
where data gathered
from, and any proposed
analytical framework
etc)

(Including Project
Management/ Gantt
Chart element)

There is no
project
management
element
present

There is very little or

no indication of how
they intend to
manage the project

There is a
superficial attempt
at a project
management
element/timetable.

A decent
attempt at
providing an
achievable
Gantt
Chart/project
timetable

A good attempt at
managing the project
can be identified via
Gantt chart or similar

There is a Gantt
chart or similar
present offering a
doable proposed
time frame for the
dissertation

Potential Outcomes
(10%)

No conclusions
or possible
outcomes are
evident

No idea of any
possible outcomes,
or conclusions
whatsoever

A limited idea of
what might emerge
from their research

A few ideas,
linked to the
literature,
suggesting a
reasonable set
of outcomes

Good suggestions of
outcomes, perhaps
linked to literature,
own preliminary
findings (focus group,
pilot study etc)

Well reasoned
arguments setting
out possible
outcomes, based
on previous
research, own
research, pilot, or
focus group. Some
might have
preliminary
conclusions.

Visual and Textual

The poster is
very weak
poorly
presented, with
no thought
being put into it
whatsoever

The poster has few

redeeming visual or
textual qualities. No
attempt at producing
something
meaningful using any
textual or visual
elements

An inadequate
realisation of a
Poster presentation
using any visual and
textual devices to
present the
necessary
information.

The poster
makes a sound
attempt to
produce
something that
encompasses

The Poster makes a

good attempt at
seeking to use the
textual and visual
elements to enhance
the proposal.

This poster is firstrate in making full

use of visual and
textual elements to
help present the
proposal with
economy and
clarity

(10%)

Design/Layout
(10%)

Overall

The poster
appears to have
no design
elements
whatsoever

The layout or design

is confused or lacking
altogether.

Little thought has

been put into the
design, or any of
the recognised
design elements of
a poster to enable
the proposal to be
successfully
communicated

Some thought
into how the
design helps
communicate
the proposal
has occurred

The design elements

are sympathetic to
the proposal and
demonstrate a large
amount of thought
has gone into the
poster design

The design
elements of the
poster enhance the
proposal and work
to balance the
academic elements
well. All the
elements work
sympathetically to
produce an
imaginative and
creative academic
poster

The poster is of
a very poor
quality, there
are far too
many missing or
sections of poor
academic
quality. The
proposal and
the poster has
very little merit.

The poster would

require
comprehensive
reworking to make
the proposal doable.

Significant number
of improvements
can be made to a
range of areas to
make the project
doable. The
proposal has some
merit.

It would be
possible to
recommend
several areas of
improvement.
But overall a
solid effort
given the time
available to
complete the
work.

It would be possible
to recommend a
limited number of
improvements.
However, given the
time available to
complete the work,
this was a good
effort.

The Poster is of a
quality suitable for
an undergraduate
presentation at a
conference without
much revision and
it would be difficult
to recommend too
many
improvements. In
the time available
this is an excellent
effort

Appendix III
Section and % of mark for
Section

Dissertation Marking Criteria

Fail

Fail

Third

Lower
Second

Upper
Second

First

Introduction (10%)

F/F-

D (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

What you are going to do and why.

The dissertation is placed in the
wider context. Objectives are
stated. Research question is
stated.

Work is of
little or no
merit
whatsoever

There is no
real
evidence of
an intro.

Objectives
mentioned but
not clearly
stated and not
put in context.

Clear
statement of
objectives and
context, some
or few of the
key
components
are present

Clear statement
of objectives
with rationale,
many of the key
components are
present

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

Clear statement
of objectives with
comprehensive
and persuasive
rationale. A
complete and
thorough
introduction
outlining all the
required
components
A (Range)

Literature Review (25%)

F/F-

Summary of findings from previous

research, including a discussion of
omissions and contradictions. The
scope breadth and relevance of
these findings, the development of
a rationale for the conceptual
framework to underpin the work.
THE LITERATURE REVIEW MUST BE
CRITICAL; A SIMPLE DESCRIPTIVE
VERSION WILL NOT SUFFICE.

Work is of
little or no
merit
whatsoever

No
evidence of
a review is
evident. No
criticality
whatsoever

Evidence of a
limited
knowledge of
the relevant
literature. Some
critical
engagement
Several areas
key to the
research are
missing

Evidence of a
satisfactory
knowledge of
the extant
literature,
there is
substantial
critical
engagement

Evidence of a
comprehensive
knowledge of
the literature
with a rationale
for inclusion. It
is critical
throughout.

C (Range)

Evidence of a
comprehensive
and critical
understanding of
the relevant
literature and a
convincing
rationale for
inclusion.

Mark and
Comments
Mark and
Comments

Mark and
Comments

Methodology and Methods (20 %)

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

Specify the methodology and the

process for the research with
justification for choice. Evidence of
coherence and rigour,
appropriateness of methods of
data collection and clear evidence
of effective organising and
sequencing of work.

Work is of
little or no
merit
whatsoever

Shows no
understand
ing of the
issues at all

Evidence of
some use of
methodology

Evidence of
some
understanding
of
methodologies
used and how
they are
relevant to the
situation

Evidence of a
sound
understanding
of the
possibilities and
limitations of
the
methodology
being used

Evidence of a full
knowledge and
awareness of the
possibilities and
limitations of the
methodologies
being used

Results /Analysis/ Discussion (25%)

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

The relevance of the investigation

and the appropriateness of the
data collected. The standard of
presentation of the data and an
appreciation of the limitations of
the data. An ability to discover,
understand and analyse

Work is of
little or no
merit

Shows no
understand
ing of the
issues or
research at
all

Information of
little relevance
to the
research
question.
Some
evidence of
analysis to
back up ideas
but the criteria
not stated

Relevant
information
but
unprocessed.
Evidence of a
satisfactory
level of
analysis and
judgement
including a
statement of
the criteria

Relevant
information
clearly
presented.
Evidence of a
sound level of
analysis and
judgement
including a
statement of
the criteria.

Relevant
information
systematically
obtained, well
displayed and
with a realistic
appreciation of its
limitations.
Evidence of a high
level of analysis
which thoroughly
explores the topic
resulting in
judgement based
on evidence

Mark &
Comments

Mark &
Comments

Discussion of Results

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

How the data integrates with, and

questions, the issues raised in the
literature. How the primary data
relates to the literature. Where
appropriate, justification for the
choice of statistical techniques
employed. An ability to bring
together information and ideas
and to evaluate them. There is an
integration with issues raised in
the literature

Work is of
little or no
merit

Little or no
discussion
included

Evidence of
ability to
collate
information
from a variety
of sources and
construct
linkages but
with limited
comment on
the evidence
or opinion

Evidence of
ability to collate
information
from a variety
of sources and
synthesis it. A
clear
understanding
of how the
research data
fits with the
literature

Qualitative Analysis

F/F-

D (Range)

Evidence of
ability to
collate
information
from a variety
of sources and
construct
meanings
from it
commenting
on the weight
of evidence
and opinions
C (Range)

As for (2:1) plus

an ability to
perceive a novel
relationship
between the
literature, the
question, and the
research.
Additional credit
is given where
new ideas or
notions are
developed
A (Range)

Work is of
little or no
merit
whatsoever

No
evidence of
the use of
any coding
or
analytical
framework

Some
evidence of
the use of
some form of
analytical
framework or
coding to
analyse the
data

Partial use of
coding or
analytical
framework.

Substantial
evidence of the
use of an
analytical
framework
(Grounded
Theory, Template
or Thematic
analysis for
example) and
substantial
evidence of
coding of the
data.

B (Range)

Fully coded
interviews, with
tables, and a
demonstration of
analysis based on
the coding. Use of a
recognised
analytical
framework e.g.
Thematic Analysis,
Template Analysis,
Grounded Theory
should be used

Mark &
Comments

Mark &
Comments

Quantitative Analysis

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

No analysis
at all has
taken place

Little or no
analysis of
the data

Some limited
evidence of
data analysis,
probably using
simple
descriptive
statistics

Partial use of
the correct
type of
analysis using
descriptive
statistics

Substantial
evidence of use
of appropriate
and relevant
data analysis
methods,
drawing on a
range of
statistical
techniques

Clear and
comprehensive
set of analysed
data, analysed
using the
appropriate form
of analytical tool
for the dataset.

Creativity, Originality, Coherence

and Reflection (10 %)

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

Ability to form a personal position

on the subject by linking and
combining different elements.
There is reflection on the processes
adopted and further implication
and developments as a result of
the study.

Little or no
evidence of
any
reflection is
identified

An attempt
at
reflection
has been
made

Evidence of
preparedness
to state a
position on an
issue but
limited use of
supporting
evidence

Evidence of
ability to state,
on the basis of
evidence, a
personal
position on an
issue

Evidence of
ability to state
and defend on
the basis of
evidence a
personal
position on an
issue

As for (2:1) plus

more flair and
imagination.
Cogent and clear
statements
reflecting findings
and future
direction

Mark &
Comments

Mark &
Comments

Coherence

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

Clarity of argument with

supporting evidence. The validity
of the study as a working
document.

Not a
coherent
piece

No
arguments
critical or
otherwise
made

Evidence of
selection of
mainly
relevant
material but
with the
argument not
presented in a
coherent or
critical form

Evidence of a
selection of
appropriate
material with
a logical
structure and
coherent
argument.
Some
criticality

Clear evidence
of a selection of
appropriate
material with a
logical structure
and coherent
argument, high
levels of
criticality

As for (2:1) but

commendably
lucid, critical
thinking and
writing
throughout

Format and Language (and

Abstract), Referencing and
Bibliography (10 %)
The layout is as specified in the
regulations with appropriate use of
language, spelling, grammar,
diagrams, tables, references, and
appendices.

F/F-

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

References
section is
missing,
badly laid
out, no
attempt to
use correct
format,
littered with
mistakes
Badly
presented.

Poorly
formatted,
imprecise
language,
spelling
mistakes
litter the
work, badly
labelled,
careless
and sloppy
work

Correct English
usage with
some
imprecise
statements.
Few if any
spelling
mistakes, and
the same with
grammar

Correct English
usage with
precise
statements
and within the
word target

Clear and
correct English
usage, correctly
formatted, with
precise use of
language
correct spelling
throughout,
clear
statements and
within the word
target

As for (2:1) but

with more
precision and
clarity throughout
in all aspects.
Well presented in
accordance with
good practice

Mark &
Comments

Mark &
Comments

Abstract

F/F-

D (Range)

A succinct statement outlining the

topic, describing the methodology
and summarising the results.

No abstract

Poor
attempt at
an abstract

Referencing/Bibliography

F/F-

The formatting is correct and

follows the Harvard system

No attempt
at correctly
referencing
evident

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

Partial or weak Most points

statement of
covered in
the research
adequate
detail

All points
adequately
covered

A comprehensive
statement that is
within the word
limit

D (Range)

C (Range)

B (Range)

A (Range)

Few if any
references
exist, or
where they
exist are
not in
accordance
with
Harvard,
either in
text or in
References
section.

A reasonable
attempt with
several errors
both in text
and in
References
section

Most
references are
correct in text,
with
appropriate
page numbers
and listed in
References
section

Almost all
references are
correct, both in
text and in
References
section. A few
minor omissions
or errors are
acceptable for
this grade.

All references are

correctly cited
both in text and
in References
section.

Mark &
Comments

Mark &
Comments

IMPORTANT: The dissertation is a complete piece of work, the culmination of all your training and education from your course. It is double marked by
two academics. Failure to complete all of the sections risks failure. Each of the sections is interlinked, for example, a poor or no literature review
compromises everything else, and similarly, a weak or no methodology does the same. You must ensure all the sections work together, a single
compromised section impacts on other sections, thus impacting the mark for every other section, no matter how well you think that section might be.

Additional Comments
Student: .

Marker: 1st/2nd marker Mark/Grade: ...

(Delete as appropriate)

STRUCTURE

______________________________________________________________
APPROACH and ARGUMENT

______________________________________________________________
SOURCE MATERIAL

______________________________________________________________
MARxxx-6 Management Dissertation Unit Handbook 14-15

METHODOLOGY

______________________________________________________________
STYLE and PRESENTATION

Marker: ...

Date: ..

Appendix IV
Management Dissertation (Business Management)
(BSS001-3)
Poster Assessment
______________________________________________________________
1. Introduction/Rationale (10%)

Literature Review (30%)

Methodology (30%)
(including methods, where data gathered from, and any proposed analytical
framework etc., including Project Management/ Gantt Chart element)

Potential Outcomes (10%)

Visual and Textual (10%)

Design/Layout (10%)

Overall Mark

______________________________________________________________
Student Name:

Grade:

1st Marker:

Date:

Appendix V

Title of the Dissertation

YOUR NAME
YOUR STUDENT NUMBER
THE BUSINESS SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF BEDFORDSHIRE

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF BEDFORDSHIRE

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
POSTGRADUATE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS XXX AND XXX
MANAGEMENT

Your name, Year.

All rights reserved.
All trademarks and registered trademarks mentioned in this work are acknowledged to be
the property of their respective owners.