Business Decision Making - Australia Assignments

In partnership with the University of Suffolk

BABS Assignment

Assignment Brief

Course/Programme:	BA Business
Level:	4
Module Title:	Business Decision Making
Assignment titles:	Essay on Business Decision Making
Assignment number:	1
Weighting:	Essay: 30%
Date given out:	April 2023
Submission date:	22^nd May 2023
Eligible for late submission (3 working days, with penalty)?	Yes
Method of submission:	X	Online only	Online and paper copy
Special instructions for submission (if any):	Task: Individual Essay
Date for results and feedback:
Employability skills assessed:	C1: Reading, selecting, analysing and synthesising information from a range of sources C2: Producing different types of document LP1: Develop a strategy for using a range of skills to improve own learning and performance IT1: Preparing information IT2: Processing and presenting information S1: Plan personal work schedules WWO2: Working towards identified targets
Learning outcomes assessed:	LO1: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding on key decision theories and principles and interpret different approach to business decision making processes. LO3: Evaluate and interpret results generated by data modelling and forecasting techniques, including those provided by specialised statistical computer software LO5: Apply, and demonstrate an understanding of, relevant management science techniques.

Referencing:

In the main body of your submission you must give credit to authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have read or quoted in order to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year of publication, title of book, edition, publisher: place of publication).

All assignments must be submitted to Turnitin.

Note: The Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt for the student.

Late submission of the electronic version of the assignment will result in a late penalty mark.

Penalties for late submission: Up to 72 hours late, maximum mark of 40%. Over 72 hours late, Refer.

Only the UoS Extenuating Circumstances Panel may grant an extension.

Requests for extensions must be submitted 5 days BEFORE the submission deadline

The grade awarded for this piece of work remains provisional until ratified by LSC Exam Board.

Your Tasks

Format:Essay

Word limit:1000

Assessment criteria: see grading criteria

Learning Outcomes tested (from module descriptor)	Assessment Criteria to achieve each outcome a student must demonstrate the ability to:
LO1: Develop knowledge and understanding of key theories, concepts and models in marketing to guide the development and execution of marketing strategies.	The essay task enables the student to demonstrate an understanding of how organisations make decisions based on the analysis of data.
LO3: Evaluate and interpret results generated by data modelling and forecasting techniques, including those provided by specialised statistical computer software	The essay enables the student to demonstrate an understanding of how the decision-making processes works and how they can be used to plan for the future.
LO5: Apply, and demonstrate an understanding of, relevant management science techniques.	In the essay the student is required to examine at the various techniques, with reference to a specific industry.

TASK DESCRIPTION: Assignment (Individual Essay) 30%

TASK

SDK plc is a food manufacturing company, operating in the UK and some parts of the Europe. Currently, some of their productions such as vegetarian croissants and vegan croissants have been outsourced due to lack of available resources. However, strategic management of SDK plc is looking to invest in a project manufacturing vegetarian croissants OR vegan croissants. They have called new business proposals and have finally, chosen two projects using managers’ discretion to make final decision.

Initial investment required for project A (vegetarian croissants) is £150,000 and for project B (vegan croissants) is £155,000. The discount rate required is at 8%. The net cash flows for two projects can be summarized as below:

Year	Project A – Vegetarian Croissants Net cashflow £	Project B – Vegan Croissants Net cashflow £
1	51,000	45,000
2	59,000	54,000
3	77,000	87,000
4	98,000	109,000
5	116,000	121,000

You are required to write an essay on business decision making, comparing the key aspects of the payback period and Net Present Value (NPV), and financial and non-financial factors used to aid decision making.

LENGTH REQUIRED

1000 words maximum.

FORMATTING AND LAYOUT

Please note the following when completing your written assignment:

Writing: Written in English in an appropriate business/academic style

Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment.

Ensure a clear title, course, and name or ID number is on a cover sheet and a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout is also provided.

Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer reviewed. The research should be extensive.

All referencing should be in Harvard style.

marking criteria and Student FEEDBACK – Assignment (30%)

This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark.

The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers will use the space provided to comment on the achievement

of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit

from development/improvement.

Common Assessment Criteria	Marks available
1. Calculation of the payback period	10
Calculation of the payback period (years and months) in project A and B.
2. Calculation of NPV	20
Calculation of the NPV in project A and B.
3. Analysis:
The ability to evaluate and analysis the calculated results and make the final decision; Comparing and contrasting the payback period and the NPV. Using financial and non-financial factors and their implication on stakeholders and decision making process.	60
5. Overall presentation including correct referencing:	10
Use of Harvard referencing and overall presentation.
TOTAL	100

Assignment Mark (Assessment marks are subject to ratification at the Exam Board. These comments and marks are to give feedback on module work and are for guidance only until they are confirmed. )

72 Hours Late Submission Penalties (tick if appropriate)

LEVEL 4 INDICATIVE PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

An outstanding Distinction	90 – 100		Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard.
A very strong distinction	80 – 89		Work of distinguished quality which is based on a rigorous and broad knowledge base, and demonstrating sustained ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and interpret concepts, principles and data within field of study, using defined principles, techniques and/or standard formats and applications. This will form the basis for the development of sound arguments and judgements appropriate to the field of study/ assessment task. There will be strong evidence of competence across a range of specialised skills, using them to plan, develop and evaluate problem solving strategies, and of the capability to operate autonomously and self-evaluate with guidance in varied structured contexts. Outputs will be communicated effectively, accurately and reliably.
A clear Distinction	71 – 79		Work of very good quality which displays most but not all of the criteria for the grade above.
A Distinction	70		Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
A very strong Merit	67 – 69		Work of commendable quality based on a strong factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, including an assured grasp of concepts and principles, together with effective deployment of skills relevant to the discipline and assessment task. There will be clear evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application, and the ability to work effectively within defined guidelines to meet defined objectives. There will be consistent evidence of capability in all relevant subject based and key skills, including the ability to self-evaluate and work autonomously under guidance and to use effectively specified standard techniques in appropriate contexts.
A strong merit	64 – 66		Work of good quality which contains most, but not all of the characteristics of the grade above.
A clear Merit	61 – 63		Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
Merit	60		Work of sound quality based on a firm factual/ conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, demonstrating a good grasp of relevant principles/concepts, together with the ability to organise and communicate effectively. The work may be rather standard, but will be mostly accurate and provide some evidence of the ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and apply standard methods/techniques, under guidance. There will be no serious omissions or inaccuracies. There will be good evidence of ability to take responsibility for own learning, to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, selecting and using relevant techniques, and to demonstrate competence in relevant key skills.
A very strong Pass	55 – 59		Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of grade above.
A strong Pass	50 – 54		Work of satisfactory quality demonstrating a reliable knowledge base and evidence of developed key skills and/or subject based skills, but containing limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application.
A Pass	41 – 49		Work of broadly satisfactory quality covering adequately the factual and/or conceptual knowledge base of the field of study and appropriately presented and organised, but is primarily descriptive or derivative, with only occasional evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application. There may be some misunderstanding of key concepts/principles and limitations in the ability to select relevant material or techniques and/or in communication or other relevant skills, so that the work may include some errors, omissions or irrelevancies. There will be evidence of ability to operate with limited autonomy in predictable defined contexts, using standard techniques, and to meet threshold standards in relevant key skills.
A bare Pass	40		Work of bare pass standard demonstrating some familiarity with and grasp of a factual/conceptual knowledge base for the field of study, together with evidence of some ability to employ specialist skills to solve problems within area of study, but only just meeting threshold standards in e.g. evaluation and interpretation of data and information, reasoning and soundness of judgment, communication, application, or quality of outputs. Work may be characterised by some significant errors, omissions or problems, but there will be sufficient evidence of development and competence to operate in specified contexts taking responsibility for the nature and quality of outputs.
A marginal Fail		30 – 39	Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with area of study in relation to acquisition of knowledge and understanding of concepts and principles, and of specialist skills, but which is essentially misinterpreted, and misapplied and/or contains some significant omission or misunderstanding, or otherwise just fails to meet threshold standards in e.g. communication, application or quality of outputs.
A Fail		20 – 29	Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in relation to one or more area of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills. It may address the assessment task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with some of the subject matter, but such satisfactory characteristics will be clearly outweighed by major deficiencies across remaining areas.
A comprehensive Fail		0 – 19	Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal understanding, application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity with knowledge or skills appropriate to the field of study or task and/or demonstrate inadequate capability in key skills essential to the task concerned.
Non-submission/Nil attempt		0	Nothing, or nothing of merit, presented.