7MNST004W.Y Project (MSc IBM) Assessment Brief SEM2 2025-26 | University of Westminster

You can see the related solution of this brief: Management Assignment Example

7MNST004W.Y Project (MSc IBM) Assessment Brief 

Assessment Briefing

The Assessment

The assessment is a project report worth 100% of the total marks (8,000 words). The project aims to provide students with the opportunity to undertake supervised, independent research into a topic of their choice and to apply the full range of associated research skills required to produce a project report.  The assessment mark for the project will be based on a final project submission (100%).  The submitted project should be approximately 8.000 words, excluding appropriate appendices. References are not included in the word count.

Proposed Project Report Structure
 The following is a generic example of a project's structure. The word count given besides the chapters is indicative. 

Cover Page: The title of your degree, the title of your project, your name and student ID  

Abstract/ Executive summary:- Written once you have finished writing the report/dissertation, this short section of about 250 words gives a summary of what the report/dissertation contains. It should be succinct and include a summary of the research problem, the research approach, data collection methods, and findings. 

Acknowledgements:-If you wish to, you can use this section to thank individuals who may have helped you.  

Table of Contents:-You should include page numbers and titles for all sections and sub-sections. Contents Page - 3rd page (to include Table of Contents, List of Figures) 

Introduction (around 1000 words):-Here, you set the context for the proposal and provide a rationale for the choice of the research question (why the research question is worth investigating). You do so by including key theoretical and practical arguments. If researching an organisation, it is useful to include some background on the organisation, focusing on why the research question is interesting in that context. The contribution of the research must be clearly stated. This is a more developed version of the introduction included in your proposal and should be able to engage the reader. 

Literature review and conceptual framework, where applicable (around 2000 words):-A critical review of key literature on the topic. This should ideally include pioneering work in the field as well as empirical and theoretical work. Research gaps and theoretical contribution should be included.   If the proposed research study will be quantitative in approach, it is important to include a conceptual framework/ model. This section is expected to be far more in-depth and analytical than the one included in your proposal. The number of references depends on the topic, but as a general guideline, you can use around 25 scholarly references.   

Research Methodology and methods (around 1500 words)- This should include details about your research approach and must show that the process was rigorous and appropriate to the question you set out to answer. Information given here will include- research approach and rationale for it, method of collecting data, sample size, as well as participants/ respondents profile (and the rationale for this), if secondary sources of information (such as documents, previous surveys, etc.) were utilised and how and why this was done.  

Findings (Around 1500 words):- You explain what/how you have found. Some information may be presented in pictorial format, such as charts or tables, as appropriate. For instance, if your research project uses quantitative methods, you will need to include statistical analysis and a selection of results tables/graphs in this section. If you are using qualitative methods, you will include some verbatim statements from your respondents, usually written as quotations. Only representative and important results need to be included in this section.  (Tip: It might be useful to present your findings under sub-headings such as ‘research question#1, research question #2, etc.) 

Discussion (Around 1500 words): -You will also need to critically evaluate how/why your findings are significant and how they are aligned or different from the existing literature (you would show connections between the literature and your findings). You might choose to write this discussion as part of the previous section, the Findings. 

Conclusions and Recommendations (around 500 words):- This section is a summary of your project and the arguments made in it. You would highlight implications for practising managers as well as researchers and include methodological limitations of your work. Between 2 and 3 recommendations need to be included. These could be presented in a tabular format. 

References:- Using Cite Them Right, the Harvard convention and alphabetically ordered 

Appendix:- This would include a sample questionnaire/ interview or focus group transcript/ screenshot of secondary data, and evidence of ethics application and supervisory meeting log. You do not need to include all interview transcripts as one sample is sufficient. However, these documents need to be available should a viva be necessary. 

Learning Outcomes Addressed:

On completion of the project, the student will have demonstrated the ability to: 

1. Investigate in depth an area of International Business by analysing a particular problem systematically, identifying causes and constraints and finding appropriate solutions to the problem 

2. Apply the appropriate methodology of research (quantitative or analytical skills) proficiently to the analysis of an International Business problem 

3. Derive appropriate conclusions from research and offer viable recommendations to enable the organisation, business or institution to address the original problem 

4. Work independently, conduct research investigations, and present research findings in a professional manner

5. Communicate research findings, analysis and recommendations.

Assessment Criteria

The assessment criteria and weightings show you what is important in the assessment and how marks are shared across each criterion. When you are completing your assessment, remember you need to fulfil the brief and the assessment criteria below. 

The project (dissertation) should fulfil the following requirements and will be graded accordingly:

• Ability to identify a business problem/issue worthy of investigation and capable of investigation within the resource and time availability
• Design a methodology of enquiry appropriate to the investigation of the problem
• Development and execution of an appropriate methodology
• Development of an appropriate analytical framework from the relevant literature and theoretical learning to support the critical evaluation of the data collected
• Ability to integrate the relevant concepts, models and constructs covered in the course to the problem under investigation in a way that is both practical and analytical
• Critical evaluation of the data collected, together with assessment of its practical and wider implications, making use of the analytical framework developed
• Sound conclusions developed from the analysis of the data, in line with the research proposal
• Presentation of findings systematically and coherently, in the form of a written report
• Reflection on the research process and the feedback obtained during the supervision

Specifically, the project will be marked on the following criteria.

Generic Marking criteria for the assessments 

80-100 An outstanding piece of work: All assessment criteria have been met at an exceptionally high standard.

• Displays exceptional initiative, creativity, sophistication, and originality.
• Provides insightful analysis.
• Demonstrates originality and rigour of argument.
• Shows independent synthesis of ideas and understanding.
• Demonstrates reflexivity and critical analysis to generate transformative solutions/responses.
• Demonstrates substantial independent research.
• Communicates complexity clearly and succinctly with excellent standard of presentation.

70-79 An excellent piece of work: All assessment criteria have been met at a high standard.

• Demonstrates sophisticated understanding across the field of study and related areas.
• Draws on a range of techniques and information sources for independent analysis.
• Demonstrates creativity and flair in task/enquiry.
• Provides robust and insightful argument.
• Provides a high quality critical and reflexive analysis.
• Demonstrates substantial independent research
• Communicates ideas clearly and succinctly with good standard of presentation.

60-69 A good piece of work: All assessment criteria have been met at a good standard.

• Demonstrates breadth and/or depth of understanding across the field of study and related areas.
• Synthesises knowledge to address task/enquiry.
• Presents argument cogently and clearly.
• Demonstrates extensive research and critical use of resources.
• Communicates ideas clearly with a good standard of presentation.

50-59 A sound piece of work: All assessment criteria have clearly been met.

• Demonstrates understanding of appropriate range of concepts and theoretical approaches.
• Provides an argument to frame a response to the enquiry/task.
• Uses a range of relevant sources provided to undertake research.
• Undertakes meaningful analysis/reflection in relation to the enquiry/task.
• Communicates ideas using an appropriate format with few weaknesses in presentation. 

40-49 FAIL: An inadequate piece of work: One or more relevant assessment criteria are not met.

• Provides clear limitations in the range of concepts/principles explored
• Demonstrates a lack of clarity and depth of understanding in relation to the task/enquiry.
• Uses a narrow range of sources to support the task/enquiry. 
• Provides limited analysis/reflection.
• Communication is unclear, with significant weaknesses in presentation.

39-0 FAIL: A poor piece of work: Most of the relevant assessment criteria have not been met.

• Demonstrates poor understanding of key concepts and principles.
• Shows significant weaknesses and omissions in completing the task.
• Omits analysis/reflection.
• Uses inadequate information sources.
• Communication is unclear, with significant weaknesses in presentation.

The University has arrangements for marking, internal moderation, and external scrutiny. Further information can be found in Section 12 of the Handbook of Academic Regulations. 

Anonymous Marking

The coursework for this module is exempt from anonymous marking.

Referencing Requirements For The Assessment

Statements, assertions, and ideas made in coursework should be supported by citing relevant sources. Sources cited in the text should be listed at the end of the assignment in a reference list. Any material that you read but do not cite in the report should go into a separate bibliography. Unless explicitly stated otherwise by the module teaching team, all referencing should be in Cite Them Right referencing format. If you are not sure about this, the library provides guidance (available via the library website pages): 

The Deadline and Submitting Your Coursework - Checks

Unless indicated otherwise, coursework is submitted via Blackboard. Remember to keep the receipt of your submission carefully, for your records. The deadline for this assessment is 25 August 2026 at 13:00 UK time. This means that your work should be fully uploaded before 13:00. The University would treat your submission as late if your work has not been fully uploaded and stored on the server before 13:00. To avoid your submission being marked as late, we highly recommend you upload your work as soon as possible before the deadline and not wait until or just before the deadline to start uploading your work. Please note that at busy times, the coursework submission process may run slowly, and hence it is in your best interest not to leave submitting your work very close to the deadline.

To submit your assignment:

1. Log on to Blackboard at the University of Westminster
2. Go to the Blackboard site for this module. 
3. Click on the ‘Assessment’ area for the module. 
4. Click on the link MSc Project for the assignment to submit.
5. Follow the instructions, ensuring that you have selected the correct file to upload.

Academic Support & Feedback Arrangements

Students will receive academic support and feedback for their project from their supervisors. You can expect to have about 4-5 meetings of around 45-60 minutes each with your supervisor, during the course of the module. Please note that your supervisor is not allowed to read your final project or drafts. However, you can discuss with them parts of your project report (chapters) and receive feedback on the same.  
 
After submission, summative feedback will be provided online via Blackboard by the markers, where feedback takes the form of an indication of performance on an online grading form. You will also receive a number on key points of strength, weakness, and academic skills you can improve upon. 
 
We aim to provide you with this feedback within 15 working days, and after the feedback has been released online.  If you are unsure about how to see your provisional marks and feedback, the following LINK will explain how you can do this 
 
General feedback for the entire module will also be made via Blackboard to the module, which will discuss the key areas of shared strengths, weaknesses, and academic skills improvements. This general feedback is likely to be issued before your specific summative feedback, and we would strongly encourage you to read this feedback to improve your understanding of the module and potentially areas of weakness in your academic skills, which you could develop before your next submission within your course. 

Academic Integrity

What you submit for assessment must be your own current work. It will automatically be scanned through a text-matching system to check for possible plagiarism.

Do not reuse material from other assessments that you may have completed in other modules. Collusion with other students (except when working in groups), recycling previous assignments (unless this is explicitly allowed by the module leader) and/or plagiarism (copying) of other sources, including Generative AI (unless allowed within the module), are all offences and are dealt with accordingly. Please see the detailed guidance on Academic misconduct.   If you are not sure about this, then speak to your module leader.

University of Westminster Quality & Standards statement

Plagiarism is a particular form of cheating. Plagiarism must be avoided at all costs, and students who break the rules, however innocently, will be penalised.  It is your responsibility to ensure that you understand correct referencing practices. As a university-level student, you are expected to use appropriate references and keep carefully detailed notes of all your sources of material, including any material downloaded from the web.

Plagiarism is defined as submission for assessment of material (written, visual or oral) originally produced by another person or persons, without acknowledgement, in such a way that the work could be assumed to be your own. Plagiarism may involve the unattributed use of another person’s work, ideas, opinions, theory, facts, statistics, graphs, models, paintings, performance, computer code, drawings, quotations of another person’s actual spoken or written words, or paraphrases of another person’s spoken or written words.

Plagiarism covers both direct copying and copying or paraphrasing with only minor adjustments:

• A direct quotation from a text must be indicated by the use of quotation marks (or an indented paragraph in italics for a substantive section) and the source of the quote (title, author, page number and date of publication) provided.
• A paraphrased summary must be indicated by attribution of the author, date and source of the material, including page numbers for the section(s) which have been summarised.