Managing Innovation in Business 2015-16 CW1: Course Work 2 (Action Plan Roadmap) CW2 Assignment Brief

HOME MY TIMETABLE IT ACADEMIC SKILLS STUDENT EXPERIENCE
Managing Innovation In Business-17SBBRE Assignment Brief Information Course Work 2 (Action Plan Roadmap)
CW2 Assignment Brief

Faculty of Design, Media and
Management
Assignment Brief Academic Year 2018/19
Module Title: Managing Innovation in Business Module Code: BM627
Assignment No/Title:CW2: Individual Report: A full report
comprising an action plan roadmap for the
development and implementation of the
innovation capabilities of the chosen
organisation.
Assessment
Weighting:
60%
Submission Date: 15TH February 2019 (NB Subject to change) Feedback Target
Date:
3 weeks
Module Co-ordinator/
Tutor:
Nyerho Odje Odje Degree/Foundation Please Specify: UG
This assignment is to be submitted electronically using Blackboard
Submission Instruction:
1. This assignment must be submitted electronically using Blackboard by 2pm on the submission
date
2. To submit electronically you must upload your work to the e-submission area within the
Blackboard module concerned. Simple instructions are provided within the module.
3. Please do not attempt to submit assignments direct to lecturers as this is not allowed and will
result in a non-submission being officially recorded
4. You will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission. This will be sent to your Bucks e-mail
address; please keep this for reference.
5. You are reminded of the University’s regulations on cheating and plagiarism. In submitting your
assignment you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.
6. Late submission within 10 working days of the deadline will result in the mark for the assignment
being capped at 40%. Beyond this time the work will not be marked.
7. You are reminded that it is your responsibility to keep an electronic copy of your assignment for
future reference.
Assignment format and other relevant instructions to students:
For this second assignment, you are required to produce a 3000 word written report. From your findings
in CW1 you are to develop an innovation road map that outlines the preparation of the innovation
process. This audit will factor in the wider, operational environment of both up and downstream
suppliers and service providers, whilst developing a fuller picture of the organisation’s full innovation
capacity.
This assignment tests the following Learning Outcomes for the module:
Apply an evaluative approach to a range of business data, sources of information and
appropriate methodologies in identifying drivers of innovation within a business and its
environments;
Analyse and illustrate how organisations and their leaders can successfully plan and
prepare for innovation;
Critically discuss the importance of organisational knowledge, knowledge transfer and
cross functional co-operation in order to analyse and assess innovation capability and
blockages;
Actively engage in the identification of a new product/service for a chosen organisation
and identify the key activities required for its successful development;
Conduct an innovation/organisational development audit appropriate for the introduction
of the new product/service.
The Assignment Task:
This assignment leads on logically from the findings of CW1 and students are expected to use the same
organisation as CW1
From your findings in CW1 you are to develop an innovation road map that outlines the preparation of
the innovation process. This will factor in the wider, operational environment of both up and downstream
suppliers and service providers, whilst developing a fuller picture of the organisation’s full innovation
capacity.
Note: Words used in applied models, tables; charts etc… within the main body of the report are
NOT included in the reports word. Content placed in the appendices MUST have a clear
connection to the main body. Any work copied and paste into the report and/or the appendices
that is not discussed, analysed or mentioned will not be considered by the marker.
Suggested Report Structure.
Front Cover page
Executive Summary (NOT included in word count 400 words max)
Contents
Introduction, Purpose of the Report & Structure (200 words)
The Future of the Industry 2020 and Beyond (500 words)
The Organisations Innovation Requirements 2020 and Beyond (500 words)
Building the Future Innovation Capabilities for the Organisation (1,500 words)
Conclusion (300 words)
References – Harvard Format
Appendices
Assessment Criteria
Generic Marking Criteria for Managing Innovation in Business 2015-16 CW1 – 100% weighting
1st = >70% 2.1 = 60-69% 2.2 = 50-59% 3rd = 40-49% FAIL 0-39%
Overview
15%
Some excellent use of
up to date industry
Data. Student has
attempted to
Outline the context and
detail of the industry.
Reader learns from
students work.
Some very good use of
up to date industry
Data. Student has
attempted to
Outline the context and
detail of the industry.
Reader learns from
students work.
Some use of up to
date industry
Data. Student has
attempted to
Outline the context
and detail
Of the industry.
Limited use of up to
date industry
Data. Student has
attempted to
Outline the context and
detail
Of the industry.
No use of up to date industry
Data. Student has failed to
Outline the context and detail
Of the industry.
Knowledge,
Comprehension
& Application
25%
Excellent application of
the Models.
Use of additional
models evident and no
issues with
comprehension &
application of models.
Very good application
of the Models.
Use of additional
models evident and no
issues with
comprehension &
application of models.
Good application of
the Models. Some
use of additional
models attempted but
issues with
comprehension &
application of models.
Some application of the
Models. No evaluation
and
no use of additional
models & limited
comprehension &
Application of models.
Limited to no application of the
Models. No evaluation and
no use of additional models
And limited comprehension &
Application of models.
Analysis &
Evaluation
25%
Student has provided
an excellent and logical
argument for their work
and demonstrates clear
match to the research
throughout.
Student has provided a
very good and logical
argument for their work
and demonstrates clear
match to the research.
Student has provided
a logical argument for
industry
Their work and
demonstrates clear
match to their
research.
Student has struggled
to provide logical
argument their work or
argument doesn’t
match research.
Student has failed to provide
Logical argument for their
Work or argument doesn’t
Match research.
Synthesis 20% Objectives are
excellent & well thought
through with excellent
links to analysis and
evaluation.
Objectives are SMART
where required.
Objectives are very
good & well thought
through with very good
link to analysis and
evaluation.
Objectives are SMART
where required..
Objectives are good
& well thought
through with good
link to analysis and
evaluation.
Objectives are mostly
SMART where
required..
Objectives are weak &
poorly though through
and struggle to link to
Analysis and
evaluation.
Objectives are not
SMART where
required..
Objectives are poorly thought
Through and/or do not link to
Analysis and evaluation.
Objectives are not SMAR where
required.T .
Generic
Presentation
15%
Style and format are to
a very high
professional standard.
Good use of spelling
and grammar.
Research material is
current and from
reputable sources.
Very good use of
Harvard referencing.
Some creativity in the
presentation of work
within the publication.
Style and format are to
a very good
professional standard.
Good use of spelling
and grammar.
Research material is
current and from
reputable sources.
Very good use of
Harvard referencing.
Some creativity in the
presentation of work
within the publication.
Style and format are
to a professional
standard. Good use
of spelling and
grammar.
Some of the research
material is too old but
mostly from reputable
sources. Some
weaknesses in the
use of Harvard
referencing. Some
creativity in the
presentation of work
within the publication.
Style and format are
not quite to a
professional standard.
Poor use of spelling
and grammar.
Some of the research
material is too old
and/or not from
reputable sources.
Incorrect use of
Harvard referencing.
Limited personal diary
presented. No
creativity in the
presentation of work
within the publication
Style and format are not to a
Professional standard. Poor
Use of spelling and grammar.
Research material is too old
And/or not from reputable
Sources. Incorrect use of
Harvard referencing.
No creativity in the presentation
Of work within the publication.
University Generic Undergraduate Degree Grade Descriptors can be found on the University website in
the document ‘Assessment of Students- Appendix 1’
Quality Assurance Record
Internal Approval: External Approval:

Page 2 of 3

Salah Al-Khatib

Please follow and like us: