MARxxx-6 Management Dissertation Unit Handbook 14-15

MAR xxx-6

Management Dissertation

Unit Handbook

MA xxx and Management

2014/2015

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

The Academic Research Proposal

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.

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.

The Critique

Critically evaluate a single book chapter/journal article.

Identify and apply academic sources that both demonstrate and evidence your critique

The Dissertation

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 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 Location Email Address

Simon Reilly 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

mailto:Simon.reilly@beds.ac.ukmailto:Sofia.reino@beds.ac.ukmailto:Humphrey.shaw@beds.ac.ukmailto:rosemary.Burnley@beds.ac.ukmailto:Linda.deigh@beds.ac.ukmailto:Markus.haag@beds.ac.ukmailto: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

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.

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). Further detail, if required, can be given in Q 27.

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

R E S E A R C H I N F O R M A T I O N

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.

b. With unpublished data but with the permission of the archive curator?

4. This project does NOT involve research with human subjects but has other 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

Yes No

Yes No

Yes No

E T H I C A L C H E C K L I S T

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

If YES state agency /authority etc & provide documentation

If NO please indicate why.

N/A Yes No

N/A Yes No

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?

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

R I S K A N D S A F E T Y

N/A Yes No

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.

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?

W O R K I N G W I T H C H I L D R E N / V U L N E R A B L E P E O P L E

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 No

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

b. People with learning or communication difficulties

c. Patients (including careers of NHS patients)

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.

E T H I C A L S T A T E M E N T

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.

D E C L A R A T I O N

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

Supervisor(s)

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

Print Name

Signature

Date

dd/mm/year

dd/mm/year

O F F I C I A L U S E O N L Y

S T A T E M E N T O F E T H I C A L A P P R O V A L

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 Poster Marking Criteria Grade

Criteria/Weighting

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

(30%)

The Literature Review is non-existent /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 (30%)

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

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.

(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

(10%)

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 first-rate in making full use of visual and textual elements to help present the proposal with economy and clarity

Design/Layout

(10%)

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

Overall 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 Dissertation Marking Criteria Section and % of mark for Section

Fail Fail Third Lower Second

Upper Second

First Mark and Comments

Introduction (10%) F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark and Comments

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

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

Literature Review (25%) F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark and Comments

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.

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

Methodology and Methods (20 %) F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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 understanding 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- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark &

Comments 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 understanding 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

Discussion of Results F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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 construct meanings from it commenting on the weight of evidence and opinions

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

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

Qualitative Analysis F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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.

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

Quantitative Analysis F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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

Coherence F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

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 %)

F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

The layout is as specified in the regulations with appropriate use of language, spelling, grammar, diagrams, tables, references, and appendices.

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

Abstract

F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

A succinct statement outlining the topic, describing the methodology and summarising the results.

No abstract Poor attempt at an abstract

Partial or weak statement of the research

Most points covered in adequate detail

All points adequately covered

A comprehensive statement that is within the word limit

Referencing/Bibliography F/F- E D (Range) C (Range) B (Range) A (Range) Mark & Comments

The formatting is correct and follows the Harvard system

No attempt at correctly referencing evident

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.

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.

MARxxx-6 Management Dissertation Unit Handbook 14-15

Additional Comments Student: .

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

(Delete as appropriate)

STRUCTURE

______________________________________________________________

APPROACH and ARGUMENT

______________________________________________________________

SOURCE MATERIAL

______________________________________________________________

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

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.

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

IntroductionUnit Co-OrdinatorSupervisors/Course CoordinatorDissertation Elements Formal DeadlinesGuidance Notes for the Preparation, Research, and Writing of a Management Dissertation.Selection of Dissertation TitleDissertation OrganisationAcademic Poster and Project ManagementRole of Your SupervisorStyleTypical StructureTitle Page/sAbstractIntroductionLiterature ReviewMethodologyFindings/Analysis/DiscussionConclusions and RecommendationsReferencesAppendicesPlagiarismAssessment Criteria and Marking SchemeReference ListUniversity RegulationsReferences

Appendix IEthical IssuesHuman Research Ethics Guidelines for Students and SupervisorsIdentifying Ethical Issues in Human ResearchResearch Raising Ethical IssuesThe Requirement of Ethical PracticeMinimum Standards of Ethical Practice in Human ResearchProcedures for the Supervision of Graduate and Undergraduate Student Research

Appendix IIManagement Dissertation Supervision Monitoring FormBusiness ManagementAppendix III Poster Marking Criteria

Appendix III Dissertation Marking CriteriaAdditional Comments

Appendix IVAppendix V