BU7002 Management Research Methods Assessment Brief 2024-25 | UoC

Published: 28 Jul, 2025
Category Assignment Subject Management
University University of Chester Module Title BU7002 Management Research Methods
Word Count 3000 words, 10% (+, -)
Assessment Type Research Proposal
Assessment Title Management Research Project
Academic Year 2024-25

Assessment Brief

BU7002 Assessment Task

Assessment: (3,000 words with 10% + (3300), 10% -(2700); 100% weighting) a research proposal for the management research project. [L.O. 1-4]

Firstly, you are to identify a research area and then generate a specific research topic in that area or field. Secondly, develop a concise and focused research title. Thirdly, you are required to develop clear and focused objectives following a SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Timebound) approach. Prepare a 3,000-word research proposal document containing a brief introduction including background to the research, specific research question, aim, and objectives to the research, vital preliminary sources of literature review, a methodology section outlining a good understanding of the research approaches (e.g., research onion) and justification for the selected data collection techniques, ethical evaluation, and a Gantt Chart. A reference list following the APA 7 Citethemright referencing style is available at the end of this document.

Any relevant appendices should also be provided. A coherent structure must be provided throughout the research proposal.

Your research topic must be selected from within your MSc pathway.

Specific Criteria Guidance & Support

Research Proposal

The proposal requires you to identify your main research question, aim and objectives. You are also required to demonstrate initial engagement with the relevant existing literature and introduce your proposed methodology and plan of work.  

Your research question/aim and objectives should be well-focused and well-scoped.

The preliminary literature review is not a list of article summaries but should be structured under themes and headings. It serves several purposes, including:

  • To outline what is already known about the topic, demonstrating that you have positioned your work in a broad body of literature and are aware of the main outcomes and ideas of relevance to your research
  • To define the research problem that underpins your research question
  • To illustrate some of the different theoretical and methodological approaches to your topic
  • To help you develop a framework for your analysis
  • To help you interpret your findings

The methodology should be described and justified, including a discussion of whether to use primary, secondary, or mixed methods. A reflection on your understanding of research terminologies such as qualitative, quantitative, inductive and deductive, positivist and interpretivist, and others, as well as a rationale for the methodology used for your research project.

The work plan should be presented as a Gantt Chart or Spreadsheet with accompanying notes if necessary.

Ethical Approval 

For secondary research, the ethics form must be completed and submitted online; for primary research, it must be submitted to the allocated supervisor by 30th May 2025 (follow the links below). A One-Day Dissertation Workshop will be held on June 24, 2025 (SET01 and SET02), marking the formal start of the BU7001 Module (Management Research project) and its completion on October 7, 2025. Ethics Approval must be obtained before this date. The list of allocated supervisors will be available in April 2025. Students enrolled in a two-year master's program must consult with their supervisor, as they will not be undertaking BU7001; instead, they will be engaged in a project placement.

Obtaining ethical approval requires you to demonstrate that you have considered and assessed the ethical risks associated with your project and have a plan in place to negate these or reduce them to an acceptable level.

Once your ethics form is fully completed and signed by you and your allocated supervisor, your supervisor will submit it to the ethics committee for approval (Primary research only). For secondary research, you must complete the ethics form online and request that your allocated supervisor provide you with the Peer Reviewer Email Address, which you can then add to the online form. Follow the links below for both Ethics Forms. Please DO NOT collect any data until you have full ethical approval.   

BU7002 Learning Outcomes

  • To understand the nature of management knowledge and research through an appreciation of various research philosophical orientations
  • To identify and critically evaluate a range of research strategies and research designs
  • To understand and evaluate management research designs and methods for the chosen research project
  • To understand the ethical conduct of management research

Key Resources.

Core Text:

  • Bell, E., Bryman, A., & Harley, B. (2019). Business research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S., Giardina, M. D., & Cannella, G. S. (2023). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (Sixth). SAGE.
  • Gray, D. E. (2019). Doing research in the business world (2nd ed.). SAGE.
  • Saunders, M., Thornhill, A., & Lewis, P. (2019). Research methods for business students (8th ed.). Pearson. 

Additional Texts

  • Bell, J., & Waters, S. (2018). Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers (7th ed.). Open University Press.
  • Denscombe, M. (2021). The good research guide: research methods for small-scale social research projects (7th ed.). Open University Press.
  • Easterby-Smith, M., Jaspersen, L. J., Thorpe, R., & Valizade, D. (2021). Management and business research (7th ed.). SAGE.
  • Punch, K. (2014). Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  • Robson, C., & McCartan, K. (2016). Real world research: A resource for users of social research methods in applied settings (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Silverman, D. (2022). Doing qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE.

Assessment Rubric

Criteria

90-100%

80-90%

70-79%

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

 

0-9%

Introduction

(25%)

 

Appropriate and concise title

 

Main research question and aim

 

Importance feasibility of research, background and clear objectives

Crisp succinct title accurately summarises the essence of the research focus.

 

Excellent aim that provides a very clear and logical framework for delivery of the main project.

 

Topic feasible & original and objectives clearly stated

 

Crisp succinct title accurately summarises the essence of the research focus.

 

Convincing aim that provides a very clear and logical framework for delivery of the main project.

 

Entirely feasible topic

A well expressed title that incorporates all key dimensions.

 

Convincing aim.

 

Feasible topic.

Overall clarity

A good working title that could be more succinct

 

Thorough aims that effectively break the topic / question into its component parts.

 

Largely feasible topic with some minor clarifications required.

 

 

Title largely captures the focus of the project.

 

Appreciation shown of the use of aims to break the topic into component parts. However, there may be gaps or ambiguities.

 

Areas of plan need revision for feasibility.

 

Title may not adequately articulate the proposed research; language may be clumsy.

 

Limited use of aims to break the topic into component parts.

 

Plan needs substantial revision.

Title fails adequately to capture the essence of the proposed research; may contain ambiguities.

 

Little use of aims to break the topic into component parts.

 

Plan needs substantial revision.

Title reveals lack of clarity about the focus of the proposed research. 

 

Aims missing or poorly articulated with little or no relevance to title.

 

Little or no prospect of overall topic feasibility.

Title bears little relation to the research idea. 

 

Aims missing or have no relevance to the title. 

 

Topic is unfeasible with zero prospect of delivery.

Title bears no relation to the research idea. 

 

Aims missing. 

 

Topic is unfeasible with zero prospect of delivery.

Literature Review (30%)

 

Depth, breadth & relevance of reading and related analysis

 

Quality of the structure of the analysis in determining the research problem

 

Clarity of conceptual model or framework

 

 

 

 

 

Exceptional critical analysis of relevant literature showing substantial insight.

 

Authoritative argument with a clear logical progression leading to a highly original & valid research idea

 

An extremely complex conceptual model developed

Comprehensive critical analysis of relevant literature.

 

Authoritative argument with a clear logical progression leading to a highly original & valid research idea

 

A detailed conceptual model developed

Good critical analysis of relevant literature. Some material may be dated.

 

Excellent organisation of ideas; cogent development of argument. Research will contribute to filling an identifiable research gap.

 

A useful and clear  conceptual model developed

 

 

Good analysis of relevant literature overall; but may lack criticism or comprehensive-ness.

 

Logically structured; well-reasoned discussion. Research will contribute to filling an identifiable research gap.

 

A good  conceptual model developed

 

Some good analysis of relevant literature; but weaknesses and/or gaps.

 

Reasonable structure; logical flow. Research gap identified but may be too general or too inconsequential.

 

A reasonable conceptual model developed

 

 

 

 

Basic analysis of some relevant literature but without underlying logic and structure. 

 

Research gap identified but may be too general or too inconsequential.

 

Paraphrasing weak and inaccurate.

 

Lack of detail and clarity in conceptual model development

 

Inadequate analysis. Largely descriptive and provides little insight into the context for the research focus.

 

Poorly structured.

 

Little or no paraphrasing with excessive reliance on direct quotations. 

Research problem may not be identified

 

An incomplete conceptual model

 

 

Descriptive, not analytical. Elements missing and no proper structure to discussion.

 

Structure confused or incomplete. Research problem not identified.

 

Paraphrasing non-existent. No attempt to use or apply APA system.

No knowledge of conceptual model

 

Isolated, disconnected statements indicating lack of thought.

 

 

Lack of evidence of reasoning. Little discernible organisation of material relative to subject. Research problem not identified.

 

No conceptual model development

 

 

 

 

 

 

Isolated, disconnected statements indicating lack of thought.

 

Lack of evidence of reasoning. No discernible organisation of material relative to subject. Research problem not identified.

 

No conceptual model development

 

 

 

Criteria

90-100%

80-90%

70-79%

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

 

0-9%

Methodology (20%)

 

Rationale and research paradigm.

 

Research population and sampling method.

 

Research specific methods and justification.

 

Methods of data analysis.

 

Ethical issues and research standards

 

Exceptional understanding and clear expression of research philosophy.

 

An erudite and, succinct justification of chosen methods that are entirely apt. Rationale for rejected methods clearly explained.

 

Means of data analysis will maximise insight into research topic.

 

Clear, mature and deep insight into ethical considerations and research standards.

Advanced understanding of research paradigm. Rationale for selecting it & implications of it clearly conveyed.

 

A well-argued justification of chosen methods that are entirely apt. Rejected methods identified.

 

Excellent approach to data analysis that aligns with research topic.

 

Excellent consideration and discussion of ethical issues & research standards.

Confident understanding of research paradigm. Rationale for selecting it & implications of it clearly conveyed.

 

Appropriate methods explained. Justification includes rejected methods.

 

Competent approach to data analysis.

 

Competent analysis of ethical issues & research standards.

Understanding of research paradigm and rationale for selecting it.

 

Appropriate methods explained & justified.

 

Generally competent approach to data analysis but may not be fully aligned with research topic.

 

Generally good consideration of ethical issues & research standards but may lack depth in places.

Limited apparent understanding of research paradigm but reasonable justification.

 

Research methods explained but limited justification

 

Basically sound approach to data analysis but somewhat lacking in depth and crispness.

 

Basic analysis of ethical issues & research standards. Little depth of evaluation.

Explanation of research paradigm attempted but little evidence of understanding.

 

Expression and style reasonably clear but lack sophistication. 

 

Research methods described but not justified. Some additional methods would have been appropriate.

 

Data analysis superficial.

 

Superficial consideration of ethical issues & research standards.

Research paradigm barely addressed.

 

Expression of ideas insufficient to convey clear meaning. 

 

Research methods listed but hardly or ineptly described.

 

Data analysis unlikely to provide useful insight into the research topic

 

Ethics form not acceptably completed.

Research paradigm not addressed.

 

Inappropriate, terminology; inadequate and inappropriate vocabulary

 

No attempt to describe, let alone justify, selected method.

 

Data analysis inappropriate.

 

Ethics form only submitted – inadequately covered.

Research paradigm not addressed.

 

Inaccuracies of expression and vocabulary render meaning of written work extremely unclear.

 

Two of research method, means of data analysis, ethics form missing.

Research paradigm not addressed.

 

Inaccuracies of expression and vocabulary render meaning of written work completely unclear.

 

Research method missing

 

Means of data analysis missing.

 

Ethics form missing.

Plan of Work (10%)

 

Understanding of key deliverables and elements.

 

Quality of plan structure and organisation.

 

Practicality of plan.

 

 

Sharp focused understanding.

 

Outstanding, structure with effective use of written & graphic components.

 

Entirely deliverable. Provides a detailed ‘route map’ to final submission.

A very clear summary of all key elements that is well structured and fit for purpose.

 

Deliverable with a clear sequencing of the key stages of the project

A complete & appropriate structure that will facilitate implementation

 

A deliverable plan that covers all the key practicalities, though some detail could be amplified.

A competent summary of key elements, though one or two may be overlooked.

 

A good structure overall. There may be elements that are somewhat vague or undeveloped.

 

 

A basic identification of important key elements, though several may be overlooked.

 

A basic structure that would benefit from additional components. Not particularly logical in terms of layout and sequencing.

Some key elements identified. Many overlooked,

 

Basic structure lacking. Sequencing of components not logical. Key components may be missing.

 

 

Insufficient key elements identified to enable plan to be adequately implemented. Confused understanding of these.

 

No discernible structure. Just a list of ‘to do’ items that is probably not complete.

Confusion regarding what constitutes key elements

 

An inadequate ‘to do’ list that is far from being complete or comprehensive

 

Insufficient detail provided to enable implementation of the project.

 

 

 

 

 

Insufficient detail provided to assess deliverability.

 

No structure. May be a vague and unfocused sentence or paragraph.

 

 

Plan missing

 

.

 

Criteria

90-100%

80-90%

70-79%

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

30-39%

20-29%

10-19%

 

0-9%

Written Expression (10%)

 

Written expression, vocabulary and style

 

Grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax

Exceptional clarity and coherence; highly sophisticated expression.

 

Near perfect spelling, punctuation and elegant syntax.

Very well-written, with accuracy, flair and persuasive expression of ideas

 

Near perfect spelling, punctuation and flowing syntax

Well expressed, fluent, sophisticated and confident expression; highly effective vocabulary and clear style

 

Near perfect spelling, punctuation and syntax

Clear, fluent, confident expression; appropriate vocabulary and style

 

High standard of accuracy in spelling, punctuation and syntax

Clearly written, coherent expression;

reasonable range of vocabulary and adequate style

 

Overall competence in spelling, punctuation and syntax, although there may be some errors

 

Expression and style reasonably clear but lack sophistication. Limited vocabulary. Limited or no proof reading

 

Inaccuracies in spelling, punctuation and syntax are too frequent and indicative of a careless approach and poor proof-reading.

 

Expression of ideas insufficient to convey clear meaning; inaccurate or unprofessional terminology. No evidence of proof reading

 

Many errors in spelling, punctuation and syntax – often repeated. No evidence of proof-reading.

Lack of clarity, very poor expression; style inappropriate, terminology; inadequate and inappropriate vocabulary

 

Many serious errors of spelling, punctuation and syntax that interfere with meaning and clarity of expression

Inaccuracies of expression and vocabulary render meaning of written work extremely unclear

 

Many serious errors of even basic spelling, punctuation and syntax that undermine or block clarity of meaning and discussion

Inaccuracies of expression and vocabulary render meaning of written work completely unclear

 

Many serious errors of even basic spelling, punctuation and syntax that undermine or block clarity of meaning and discussion

 

Referencing (5%)

 

Accurate and appropriate application of the APA 7 referencing system for listing and citing sources

All sources acknowledged. Consistently, appropriately, authoritatively and meticulously listed/cited. An outstanding list of references that is authoritative, current and original.

 

All sources acknowledged & meticulously listed/cited. A comprehensive list of references.

 

All sources acknowledged and correctly listed/cited.

 

Sources mainly acknowledged and mostly accurately listed/cited. 

 

 

Sources usually, but not always, acknowledged; referencing generally accurate, but with too many inaccuracies and errors

 

Reference list lacks source balance.

 

Inclined to rely too much on direct quotations. 

 

Tendency to over-use web sources

Sources not always acknowledged; references too often incorrectly cited/listed. Over-reliance on using direct quotations and website URLs. 

 

A shallow list of items (<10), which may lack source balance 

 

 

Referencing incomplete, inappropriate or inaccurate. 

<10 listed items, which may lack relevance.

Little attempt to apply APA system. Almost complete reliance on web sources.

.

Referencing highly inaccurate or absent.

<5 items listed most of which are not directly relevant. Likely to be all web sites

 

Incompetent in knowledge and application of APA system

 

No meaningful attempt at referencing. 

 

<5 items listed. None relevant or vaguely so.

 

Incompetent in knowledge and application of APA system

No references.

 

Not using APA referencing.

 

Struggle With assignments and feeling stressed?

 Order Non-Plagiarized Assignment

Stuck on your BU7002 Management Research Methods? Don't worry! Our Management Assignment Help service is the best for you. If you need help with assignments, our expert PhD writers will provide you with original content. And yes, you will also get free assignment samples, which will give you a perfect idea of ​​how to write a top-quality assignment. Don't worry about the deadline, as we guarantee on-time delivery. Contact us now for high-quality and plagiarism-free work and boost your grades!

Workingment Unique Features

Hire Assignment Helper Today!


Latest Free Samples for University Students

Customer Experience Strategy CW4 Formative Assessment Report Example | BPP

Category: Report Writing Example

Subject: Management

University: BPP Business School

Module Title: Customer Experience Strategy

View Free Samples

BUS7095 Business and Management Research Project Option 4 (Business Plan) Assignment Sample 2024-25, Sem3 | BCU

Category: Assignment

Subject: Business

University: Birmingham City University

Module Title: BUS7095 Business and Management Research Project Option 4 (Business Plan)

View Free Samples

RBP020L063H Leadership and Change Management Assignment Sample

Category: Assignment

Subject: Management

University: University of Roehampton

Module Title: RBP020L063H Leadership and Change Management

View Free Samples

HRMM080 Ethical and Responsible Leadership AS2 Reflective Portfolio Sample

Category: Assignment

Subject: Management

University: University of Northampton

Module Title: HRMM080 Ethical and Responsible Leadership

View Free Samples

ACAD1346 The child’s live Experience Developing Confidence Learners Assignment Sample

Category: Assignment

Subject: Education

University: University of Greenwich (UOG)

Module Title: ACAD1346 The child’s live Experience Developing Confidence Learners

View Free Samples
Online Assignment Help in UK