BMS0076 The Context of International Business PG Assessment Brief 2025-26

Published: 07 Nov, 2025

Category	Assignment	Subject	Business
University	University of Huddersfield	Module Title	BMS0076 The Context of International Business

Module Code:	BMS0076
Module Title:	The Context of International Business
Module Leader:	Dr Nan Zheng
Module Tutors:	Dr Nan Zheng
Assessment Type (Should match MSD)	Written Assignment
Academic Year:	25/26
Term Assessment Applies to:	Term 1
Main or Resit:	Main

Assessment weighting:	100%
Group/Individual:	Individual
Word Count/Duration:	4000
Module Learning Outcomes:	1, 2, 3 and 4

Arrangements For the Return of Work and Feedback
Submission Date	12/12/2025
Feedback Date	16/01/2026
Submission Time (if applicable) If you have any technical issues submitting your work, please contact the Module Leader as soon as possible.	3pm
Submission Method:	Electronically via module site in Brightspace

Assignment Specific Resources
Software	N/A
Equipment	N/A

Guidance on AI Usage.
☒	Level 1- Not Permitted The use of AI tools is not permitted in any part of this assessment.
☐	Level 2 – Some use Permitted Some use of AI tools is permitted in the research/early stages of this assignment, but you must ensure that the work you submit is your own. If you use AI tools, you should acknowledge or reference this in your work.  Use the Text reference builder to learn how to reference AI generated ideas. The sorts of questions to consider when using AI are: Is it accurate? Are the references genuine? Has it reproduced bias?
☐	Level 3 – Integrated The use of AI tools is integrated in this assessment. Further guidance is included in this assessment brief. Ensure any AI generated material is clearly identified and referenced both within the assignment and in the reference list, using: Image reference builder

Assessment Task of BMS0076

Assessment Task

Please answer all four questions

Q1: As of 1 January 2021, EU trade agreements no longer apply to the UK. UK has signed and/or is negotiating new trade agreements with other countries. What are the possible benefits for the UK to establish new trade agreements with other countries, and what might be the possible drawbacks?

Q2: Choose a MNE (i.e. headquartered in a non-UK country), critically discuss why the chosen MNE should undertake investment in the UK in the context of the OLI framework.

Q3: You are the CEO of a tech company that has to choose between making a $100 million investment in the UK or China. Both investments promise the same long-run return, so your choice is driven by risk considerations. Assess the various formal institutional risks of doing business in each of these nations. which investment would you favour and why?

Q4: While Hofstede's theory of cultural dimensions is useful to understand the differences in national cultures across the globe, considerations are needed when international managers apply this theory to their daily management and operations. Critically discuss the advantages and disadvantages of Hofstede's theory of cultural dimensions.

Word Count: For each question, you are expected to write up to 1,000 words. 4,000 words in total for the whole assessment (excluding tables, figures, references and appendices)

Task Specific Guidance

By answering these questions, you are required to

demonstrate clear understanding of the relevant concepts/theories
read and engage with relevant literature
use of evidence and sources to support the answer
present clear and logical arguments

Assessment reading:

Reading list will be provided in your regular lectures on a weekly basis.

Essay development:

You are advised to follow these steps to develop answers to your essays.

Stage 1 – broad reading

To answer the essay question, you will need to read widely around the topic. A few references are given above to give you a direction, but this is not an exhaustive list. You need to do your own literature search and review.

Stage 2 – selecting relevant material

Having undertaken wide reading, you need to bring your ideas together. Try to make a list of the theories/concept/arguments you have identified and ensure that you understand them (this might mean doing some further work). What issues are interesting here – do all of the authors agree with one another?

Stage 3 – organising the material you have identified into an argument

This is a creative part which demonstrates that you can undertake ‘critical’ and ‘evaluative’ work. Your task is to convey that you have understood the available literature, bring in your own arguments and put them together in a meaningful and original manner (not copying other people). You need to think about the logical way of grouping different ideas and how you can best convey that.

Stage 4 – drafting your work

It is likely that you will have to draft it and edit it a number of times. The first attempt may look very rough.

Stage 5 – polishing your work

Edit, edit, edit. Check that your arguments are linked fluently. Make sure your references are presented in the right format. What makes your work original and interesting?

WORD COUNTS – For each question, you are expected to write up to 1,000 words. 4,000 words in total for the whole assessment (excluding tables, figures, references and appendices)

PGT Marking Criteria

Distinction (A): 70-100

An exceptional approach to research and enquiry that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability appropriate to postgraduate level

General/Knowledge

Presentation

Understanding /Skills

Selection of cited material & Coverage

Structure

90-100

Outstanding and Insightful. Displays (for example): p

ublishable quality; outstanding research or critical potential in the context of current problems and/or new insights; originality and independent thought; ability to make informed judgements

Highest professional standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief

Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis; clear evidence of problem-solving skills

Full range of sources used selectively and skilfully to support argument. Accurate and consistent use of the agreed referencing system

Coherent and compelling argument well presented

80-89

Striking and insightful. Displays (for example): excellent research or critical potential in the context of current problems and/or new insights; flexibility of thought; possibly of publishable quality

Professional standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief

70-79

Excellent. Displays (for example): high levels of accuracy; evidence of the potential to undertake research; the ability to analyse primary sources critically in the context of current problems and/or new insights

Very good standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief

Merit (B): 60-69

A coherent approach to research and enquiry that meets all learning outcomes and demonstrates critical evaluation appropriate to postgraduate level

General/Knowledge

Presentation

Understanding/Skills

Selection of cited material & Coverage

Structure

60-69

Approaching excellence in some areas with evidence of the potential to undertake research and critical analysis of current problems and/or new insights. Well-developed relevant argument and a good degree of accuracy

Good standard of presentation; written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief with length requirement met and academic conventions followed

Independent, critical evaluation of full range of relevant concepts and theories with some evidence of originality; evidence of problem-solving skills

Complex work and concepts presented; key texts used effectively. Accurate and consistent use of the agreed referencing system

Argument concise and explicit

Pass (C): 50-59

A coherent and logical approach to research and enquiry that meets all learning outcomes and shows understanding of the basic principles appropriate to postgraduate level

General/Knowledge

Presentation

Understanding/Skills

Selection of cited material Coverage

Structure

50-59

A systematic understanding of knowledge; critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights; can evaluate critically current research and can evaluate literature and methodologies

Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. Written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief; possibly very minor errors in language which do not impede understanding

Practical understanding of how established techniques of research and/or analysis are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline; some evidence of problem-solving skills

Comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship. Consistent use of the agreed referencing system which is predominately accurate

The argument is developed but may lack fluency

Referred (R): 0-49

Some knowledge of core material and critical ability appropriate to postgraduate level, though learning outcomes are not fully met

General/Knowledge

Presentation

Understanding/Skills

Selection & Coverage

Structure

35-49*

knowledge of concepts within prescribed range but fails to adequately address the task posed by assessment

Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. The style of presentation is appropriately matched to the assessment brief. Minor errors in language which do not impede understanding

Some insight into the problem or topic; attempt to demonstrate problem-solving skills and originality

Limited sources. Use of the agreed referencing system contains some inconsistencies and inaccuracies

Argument not fully developed and may lack structure and coherence

Referred (R): 0-34

A superficial or inaccurate answer with only peripheral knowledge of core material and very little critical ability.

Learning outcomes not met. Not an appropriate submission for postgraduate level.

General/Knowledge

Presentation

Understanding/Skills

Selection & Coverage

Structure

0-34

Knowledge of concepts falls short of prescribed range and does not address the task posed by the assessment

Length requirements not observed, inconsistency in academic conventions and style. Minor language errors which occasionally impede understanding

Limited or no insight into the problem or topic; no evidence of problem-solving skills or originality

Some irrelevant and/or out of date sources.

Referencing system may be systematically inaccurate or absent

Argument not developed and/or may be presented in a manner that makes knowledge and understanding difficult to assess

Assessment Criteria

Unacceptable

A superficial answer with only peripheral knowledge of core material and very little critical ability

Unsatisfactory

Some knowledge of core material but limited.

Pass

A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles

Merit

A coherent answer that demonstrates critical evaluation

Distinction

An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability

0 – 9

10-19

20-34

35-49

50-59

60-69

70-79

80-89

90-100

Apply subject knowledge and concepts of subject area or area of professional practice	Entirely lacking in evidence of knowledge and understanding	Typically, only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts	Knowledge of concepts falls short of prescribed range Typically only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts	Marginally insufficient. Adequate knowledge of concepts within prescribed range but fails to adequately solve problems posed by assessment	A systematic understanding of knowledge demonstrating awareness of current problems and/or new insights	Approaching excellence in subject knowledge. Arguments are relevant and well developed, good degree of accuracy and technical competence	Excellent. Displays excellent subject knowledge	Outstanding demonstration of subject knowledge; timely and relevant insights within the field	Mastery in subject knowledge at the forefront of the field
Critically evaluate problems/insights within area of study or area of professional practice	Entirely lacking in evidence of knowledge and understanding	Typically, only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts	Knowledge of concepts falls short of prescribed range Typically only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts	Marginally insufficient. Adequate knowledge of concepts within prescribed range but fails to adequately solve problems posed by assessment	A systematic understanding of knowledge; critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights; can evaluate critically current research	Approaching excellence in some areas with evidence of informed critical awareness/insights.	Excellence Displays very high levels of accuracy and critical awareness of current problems/insights the ability to analyse primary sources critically.	Excellence in critical awareness of current problems/insights; originality and ability to make informed judgments.	Striking and insightful. Displays advanced mastery and understanding and critical awareness of current problems/insights at the forefront of academic discipline; originality and independent thought; ability to make informed judgements.
Presentation 10 marks (out of 100 marks)	Length requirements may not be observed; does not follow academic conventions; language errors impact on intelligibility	Length requirements may not be observed; does not follow academic conventions; language errors impact on intelligibility	Length requirements may not be observed; does not follow academic conventions; language errors impact on intelligibility	Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. Minor errors in language	Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. Possibly very minor errors in language	Good standard of presentation; length requirement met, and academic conventions followed	Very good standards of presentation	Professional standards of presentation	Highest professional standards of presentation
Understanding 30 marks (out of 100 marks)	Limited insight into the problem or topic	Limited insight into the problem or topic	Limited insight into the problem or topic	Some insight into the problem or topic	Practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline	Independent, critical evaluation of full range of theories with some evidence of originality	Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis	Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis	Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis
Use of evidence and sources to support task 30 marks (out of 100 marks)	Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources	Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources	Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources	Limited sources	Comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship	Complex work and concepts presented key texts use effectively	Full range of sources used selectively to support argument	Full range of sources used selectively to support argument	Full range of sources used selectively to support argument
Development of ideas30 marks (out of 100 marks)	Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent	Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent	Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent	Argument not fully developed and may lack structure	The argument is developed but may lack fluency	Argument concise andexplicit	Coherent and compelling argument well presented	Coherent and compelling argument well presented	Coherent and compelling argument well presented

Buy Answer of This BMS0076 Assessment Raise Your Grades

Pay for Assignment Help

Request Answer of this Assignment

Share this with your Friends

Facebook

Instagram

Are you facing problems with the BMS0076 Context of International Business Assignment? Our platform offers top-quality assignment writing services for university students, crafted to boost your academic success. Explore our Free Assignment Samples to understand structure, formatting, and content expectations. All assignments are AI-free and 100% human-written, ensuring original, high-quality submissions. Whether you’re struggling with analysis or research, our team provides the Best Assignment Help tailored to your university guidelines. Don’t let complex topics slow you down—get the academic edge you need with our trusted and professional assistance today!