Posted: September 10th, 2021

BUS703 Managing Research, Assessment Task 2: Research proposal

BUS703 Managing Research Student:
Assessment Task 2: Research proposal Rubric – Assessment Criteria
Communication skills: Spelling, word choice, grammar expression and adherence to word count. (10)
10 8 6 4 2
Excellent, well-written document with no spelling or grammatical errors, appropriate choice of words, with no ambiguity in meaning, and adherence to word count Good organisation of document, with minimal spelling or grammatical errors, generally correct choice of words, with limited ambiguity in meaning and adherence to word count. The document has a number of spelling and grammar errors and some sections are not well-expressed, making misunderstandings possible for the reader. The document and explanations are disorganised, with several spelling and grammatical errors, with ambiguous statements making it hard to understand. The document is poorly written, with several spelling and grammatical errors, with many ambiguous statements making it hard to understand.
Apply relevant research frameworks to develop applied research proposals
Introduction and background to the problem: The introduction clearly and succinctly states the purpose and outline the format of the proposal (around ½ page max). The background (about 200 words) briefly presents the circumstances that have led to the problem and explains why it is worthy of investigation and what benefits will result from the findings. The boundaries, or delimitations and scope of the study is specified. Feedback from Task 1 have been incorporated. (5)
5 4 3 2 1
The introduction succinctly and clearly outlines the format of the proposal in an original manner, within ½ page. The background briefly and clearly articulates what has led to the problem and the anticipated benefits from the findings. The scope, and delimitations are logically outlined, within 200 words. The feedback from Task 1 have been used to improve the background section.
The introduction clearly outlines the format of the proposal, within ½ page. The background clearly outlines developments that have led to the problem. The reason for the study and benefits from the findings are mostly outlined. The scope of study is outlined, and feedback from Task 1 have been incorporated, and the background improved. The introduction states the purpose of the research proposal and structure of the proposal. The background is somewhat vague, and few benefits of the anticipated findings are stated. The scope of the study is outlined, but limited are changes are made in relation to Task 1 feedback. The introduction and background are wordy. The introduction states the purpose of the research proposal. The background is too broad or narrow, with the benefits of findings are not mentioned. Feedback from Task 1 have not been addressed. The introduction is disorganised, and the purpose of the proposal is not mentioned. The background is hard to follow, and does not outline how the problem arose. No benefits of findings are mentioned. Feedback from Task 1 have not been addressed.
Problem definition (100 words): The management problem, research question and objectives are clearly stated. The management decision is stated in a question form and focuses on a management decision to be made. The research question is in question form and aligned to the management decision, while the research objectives provide more detailed sub-categories of the overall research question, allowing the question to be answered. Each is stated in terms that are measurable. Task 1 feedback have been incorporated. (10)
10 8 6 4 2
The problem is succinctly formulated in a question form and is clearly focused on a management decision, stated in terms the organisation can take further. The research question and objectives are logically aligned to the management problem, stated in researchable terms that is measurable and suited to the problem. Task 1 feedback have been incorporated and thoughtful changes were made. The problem is stated in a question form and focuses on a management decision, stated in terms the organisation can take further. The research question and objectives are logically related to the management problem, yet some objectives are too many. The objectives are mostly measurable and Task 1 feedback have been incorporated. A few problems are outlined, and it is somewhat related to a management decision. The research question and objectives are not clearly related, and too many objectives are stated. It is not clear how the research objectives will be measured, and only some of the feedback in Task 1 have been incorporated. The problem is not stated in a question form. Even though the management decision is stated, the relationship between the problem and management decision is not obvious. The problem can be addressed by desk research, planning or financial analysis. The objectives are vague and only somewhat related to the research problem. Limited changes have been made, based on Task 1 feedback. The problem is not stated in a question form, and the management decision is ambiguous. The problem can be addressed by desk research, planning or financial analysis. The research question and objectives are vague and it is not clear how these will be measured. Task 1 feedback have not been addressed.
Literature review (+/- 700 words): An overview of the current state of knowledge and research findings are presented, using relevant academic and practitioner based literature. At the minimum 10 references are used, including a mix of academic and practitioner sources, referring to the independent and dependent variables. The literature review is analytical, not descriptive. (20)
20 16 12 8 4
The literature review is well-structured, arguments are clearly presented, with recent findings from academic and practitioner sources analysed and integrated, showing a sound theoretical foundation. More than 15 highly credible sources are used to support the arguments made related to the expected relationships between dependent and independent variables. The literature review provides an overview of what is known about the research topic, using recent findings from academic and practitioner sources, which are analysed and generally well-integrated. The theoretical foundation, based on 12 credible source provides a basis for the study, referring to the relevant variables and good reasons are advanced for the expected relationships. The literature review provides an overview of the dependent variable, using a minimum of 10 academic and practitioner sources. The literature overview is generally analytical; however some sections merely describe other studies and limited integration of sources are used. Some sections contain theory, while it is not clear how other sections are related and the relevance to the problem definition is tenuous is some sections. The literature review is poorly organised and limited recent journal articles are used, and less than 10 sources are used. Few descriptor variables are discussed. There is limited relevance to a theoretical framework. The literature review is descriptive, with little integration of sources. The literature review is confusing. Less than 7 sources are used, generally relying on one source.
Research Design and Method (800-1200 words): The research design and method are expected to be executed in the managerial project course within 3 months. While the research question might require a multi-stage approach, it is important to select an achievable, first stage of the project, that may include a small group of subjects to study. The key questions to consider the in the research design and method stages are:
• Research design and justification
• Subjects for study and selection process
• Conceptualisation and measurement
• Data collection method; and
• Data analysis (45)
This rubric will distinguish between five sub-sections of the research design and method for ease of descriptor categories.
Research design and justification: Specify the selected research design (i.e. exploratory, descriptive, causal, or a combination) and justify why this design is appropriate to address the research objectives, given the data or evidence needed to answer the research question
10 8 6 4 2
The research design is concisely stated and suitable given the research question. The design is well-justified and is likely to produce the data or evidence needed to answer the research question. The research design is stated and suitable given the research question. The design is justified and is likely to produce the data or evidence needed to answer the research question. The research design is stated and suitable given the research question. The justification has relevance to the research question, but could be more clearly articulated. It is questionable whether the data or evidence produced will answer the research question. The research design is vague and contains too many different elements. The justification is not logically aligned to the research question. The research design is poorly articulated. No justification is given.
Subjects for study and selection process: This stage should be applicable to the type of research design selected. for secondary data consider the data sources needed for each objective, where the data will be source from, how valid and reliable are the data? For primary data – Exploratory or Descriptive – relevant sampling process, size of the sample and justification and selection of subjects.
10 8 6 4 2
The subjects for study and selection process are appropriate and relevant to the research design selected. These choices are clearly described applying research methodology theory to justify the choices made and taking care to ensure reliability (and generalisability, as appropriate) of subjects/ sources. The subjects for study and selection process are relevant to the research design selected. Generally, these choices are described applying research methodology theory to justify the choices made and taking care to ensure reliability of subjects/ sources. The subjects for study are appropriate, and generally the selection process is described. Some sections show evidence of how research methodology theory has been applied, and some choices are justified. The subjects for study are appropriate, and some of the steps of the selection process is described. Limited evidence is shown of applying research methodology theory. Justifications are not appropriate. The subjects for study are not well articulated and the selection process is vague. No appropriate justifications are provided for choices made.
Conceptualisation and measurement: The key constructs or variables in the study are clearly outlined, and is appropriate given the research topic. Suitable measurement methods, related to previous research on the topic, are proposed, with consideration given to reliability and validity of measurement.
10 8 6 4 2
The key constructs or variables in the study are clearly outlined, and are appropriate given the research question and objectives. Suitable measures, related to previous research on the topic, are proposed and cited, with consideration given to reliability and validity of measurement, and suitability for the subjects selected for the study. The key constructs or variables in the study are outlined, and are appropriate given the research topic. Suitable measures, related to previous research on the topic, are proposed and cited, apessay with consideration given to reliability and validity of measurement. The key constructs or variables in the study are outlined, and are aligned to the research topic. The suitability of the measures could be more clearly articulated. Suitable measures, related to previous research on the topic, are proposed and cited. The constructs or variables in the study are vague. Some measures are proposed and discussed, but this is unrelated to previous research on the topic. It is unclear how concepts in the study will be measured. No reference is made to previous measures.
Data collection method: The data collection method such as interviews, focus groups, observations, surveys or other methods are appropriately described, taking care to outline the relevant steps of research methodology theory. Choices are well-justified and can be practically executed within a 3-month time-frame.
10 8 6 4 2
The data collection method is appropriately and well-described, taking care to outline the relevant steps of research methodology theory. Choices are well-justified and can be practically executed within a 3-month time-frame.

The data collection method is appropriate, taking care to outline the relevant steps of research methodology theory. Choices are generally justified and can be practically executed within a 3-month time-frame.
The data collection method is somewhat related to the research question. Some steps are described, with limited application of research methodology theory. It is doubtful whether the proposed process can be practically executed within a 3-month time-frame. The data collection method is only partly aligned with the research question. Some steps of data collection process are described. The proposed approach would take longer than 3 months to complete. The data collection method is vague and poorly described, with no reference to data collection (research methodology) theory.
Data analysis: The data analysis is appropriate given the research objectives, and justified drawing on research methodology theory. The nature of analysis and explanatory constructs/variables are considered.
5 4 3 2 1
The data analysis is appropriate given the research objectives, and justified drawing on research methodology theory. The nature of analysis and explanatory constructs/variables are considered. The data analysis is suitable given the research objectives and justified by referring to research methodology theory. The nature of the analysis is described. The data analysis is broadly mentioned and is somewhat relevant to the research objectives. Choices are partly justified.
The data analysis is vague and has limited relevance for the research objectives. The justification is not logically aligned to the research question. The data analysis is poorly articulated, and not relevant to the research objectives. No justifications are given.
Ethical issues and limitations of the research: Ethical issues are identified, and mitigation strategies are outlined, applying research methodology theory. The limitations of the research are well-articulated and related to research design and method choices.
5 4 3 2 1
Ethical issues are identified, duly considered and appropriate mitigation strategies are outlined, applying research methodology theory.
The limitations of the research are well-articulated and related to research design and method choices.
Ethical issues are identified, and mitigation strategies outlined. The limitations are stated and is mostly related to the research design and method choices. Some ethical issues are identified, and mitigation strategies outlined. The limitations are stated and generally related to research design choices. Some ethical issues are identified, and limitations are stated. No ethical issues are identified. Some limitations are stated.

Proposed time schedule and approximate budget: An appropriate and realistic time schedule and budget is provided, aligned to the research method choices.
5 4 3 2 1
The time schedule and budget are realistic, appropriate and well-defined, logically aligned to the research method choices. The time schedule and budget are generally realistic, and well-defined. Some sections are aligned to the research method choices. Some sections of the time schedule and budget are realistic, and related to the research method choices. The time schedule is somewhat ambitious, and the budget unrealistic, with some costs related to the method, not captured in the budget. The time schedule and budget are incorrect, given the research method choices.
TOTAL

Order | Check Discount