1. BMA534 International Business Management
Group Report
Dr. Fan University of Tasmania

2. The Task
Form groups (2-3 members)
Choose the topic through discussion in your group
Start your work from Week 2

3. The Task The issue under the cross-cultural context The company
Internationalisation process, international expansion, export, localisation, foreign production, management of foreign employees, international disputes, entry strategies, etc.
The company
Not too big to be well known
No too small to find information
A large local company is appropriate, eg., Flight Centre, Commonwealth, Woolworth, etc.
Encourage to write on a company you are associated with
Write a report to
Identify and define the issue facing the company
Critically analyse and evaluate the issue
Make recommendations for the company

4. The first version of the group report
4, ,000 words
In a finished form rather than a draft
Expectation see the marking rubrics for the final group report
Submission through MyLO by Monday, 27 August at 14:00 pm
No marks for the peer review report and the final version of the group report if the first version is not submitted on time

5. Peer review report 20 marks Individual work
To reflect on the first version of your group report and inform the refinement of the final group report
In report form
Well structured and formatted
4 components
Contribution of each group member
Identification of major problems in the first version
Critical analyses of these problems
Constructive suggestions for further improvement
1,000 – 1,500 words
Submit by Monday, 17 September at 14:00 pm through MyLO

6. Writing the peer review report
Contribution of each group member
Better in bullet points
Identification of major problems in the first version
Five most significant problems in the first version
In the order from the most to the least significant
Critical analyses of these problems
Carefully read the first version, check it against the marking criteria and rubrics for the final version, and make comments
Constructive suggestions for further improvement
How should a problem be fixed up?

7. Structure of the peer review report
Title: Peer review report, group report title
Structure 1 (recommended)
Contribution of each member
Problem 1
Analyses
Suggestions
Problem 2
Summary
Structure 2
Problems 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5
Analyses of problems 1-5
Suggestions for problems 1-5

8. Peer review report Marking criteria
Your own contribution to the group work (20%)
Based on comments of all your group members
Identification of at least five major problems in the first version of your own group report (in the order from the most to the least important) (20%)
Critical analyses on the identified problems (20%)
Feasible and implementable suggestions for further improvement (20%)
Logical, cohesive and formatted writing and acknowledgement of sources if applicable (20%)
No need to force references in the writing

9. Final version of the group report
30 marks
Refine the group report by drawing on the insights of the peer review
4,500 words and no more than 10% variation
Marking criteria
Due on Monday, 1 October at 17:30 pm.
Submission through MyLO

10. Business report A strong sense of purpose
Focus on the key theme and avoid irrelevant materials
Focus on facts rather than abstract concepts and theories
Provide information and make analyses
What is the issue, what are the cause and consequence, how to resolve it
Different from other kinds of writing
Case studies = describe a full objective picture (a story) about a case
Case study analyses = discuss, analyse, and evaluate information related to a case
Lecture notes = explain and elaborate general points and theories for students
Academic research papers = assess theories or phenomena to make general arguments
Formal style and presentation
Appropriate title, headings, page numbers, margins, fonts, paragraphing, spaces between lines, paragraphs and sections, in-text citations, and end references
Refer to the style guide of Journal of International Business Studies for elements not specified

11. Structure of the group report
The following structure is a suggestion only
Alternative arrangement, if appropriate, is acceptable

12. Executive summary Compulsory for this assignment
A summary rather than an introduction or conclusion
Written for busy readers to quickly get to know the key points even without reading the full report
Therefore, the topical title and author information are needed
Focus more on recommendations (different from abstract)
Independent of the report
The title and author information is needed
The contents must be self-explaining
About 1 or 2 pages

13. Table of contents Optional On a separate page
1 or 2 levels of headings, but no more than 3 levels

14. Topical title A brief and simple description
Summarise the key theme of the report
Interesting

15. Introduction
Repeat the title and author information on the first page of the report contents
State the objective of the report
Background information about the core theme
key features of the company, such as industry, business, history, international experience, position in the market, etc.
Background information of the cross-cultural context (the foreign market/customer/country) (can be in a separate section or in the environment analysis section)
Describe the arrangement and structure of the report

16. Middle sections
Never ever use “body”, “body section(s)”, “main section(s)” or “middle section(s)” as a heading!!!
Normally include several sections in the middle part
Background information about the company (can be arranged in the Introduction section)
Define and describe the issue facing the company
Analyse and evaluate the issue
Cause, consequence, effects, implications for the company
Describe, discuss, analyse, categorise, evaluate, relate to theories, compare, reasoning, etc.
Use appropriate ways to present information
Texts, figures, tables, charts, etc.

17. Conclusion
Start with a very short summary and synthesis of the discussion in previous sections
Logically drive the conclusion from previous discussion
After the analyses in the middle section, now answer the question of ‘so what’
Possible ways of writing a conclusion
Drawing out general arguments
Relating to the objective of the report
Predicting the future
Discussing the implications

18. Recommendations Can also be included in the conclusion section
Suggestions for the company for what to do in relation to the issue
Expectation
Insightful – based on your own critical and innovative thinking
Logical – derived from discussion in previous sections
Feasible – implementable

19. End-referencing list Start with a new page
15+ references (both websites and academic publications)
Academically unsound sources are NOT allowed
Wikipedia, textbooks, lecture notes, blog, and articles without sponsors

20. Harvard Referencing Style
Strictly follow Harvard Referencing Style for both in-text citations and end-referencing list
In-text citation
Correct: This has been emphasised repeatedly (Liang, 2016).
Wrong: According to Liang, (2016) this is simply wrong.
Wrong: This is also wrong. (Liang, 2016).
Wrong: It is just wrong to cite internet materials in this way ( 2010).
End references
Websites and access dates are needed for materials available only on internet, but no wetsites are needed for publications which have hard copies but you sourced from internet
Correct: University of Tasmania, 2015, Guidelines for Harvard citation style, accessed 22 September, 2015, [
Correct: F. Liang, 2014, The correct style for end references, Pearson: Hobart.
Wrong: F. Liang, 2014, The correct style for end references, Pearson: Hobart, accessed 22 September, 2015, [

21. Appendix Optional Start with a new page
For important materials that is not be able to include in the main report
Try to incorporate important information into the report if it is important, or simply drop them if not important
Words not counted

22. Marking criteria and rubrics
HD (100%-80%)
DN (70%-79%)
CR (60%-69%)
PP (50%-59%)
NN (0%-49%)
Ability to write in a professional context; present information in an appropriate way (20%)
No or few errors in language; Focused and purposeful discussion; Complete structure; Appropriate format; Appropriate ways to present information.
Few errors in language; mostly Focused discussion; Complete structure; Mostly appropriate format; Mostly appropriate ways to present information.
Some errors in language; reasonably Focused discussion; Complete structure; Reasonably appropriate format; Mostly appropriate ways to present information.
Mostly understandable but with errors in language; Clear discussion; Complete structure; Partly appropriate format; More than one way to present information.
Partly understandable; Some clear discussion; Most components included; Partly structured; Some formatting; Limited ways to present information.
Ability to identify, analyse and evaluate information to make arguments (20%)
Addressed a complete set of key issues; Insightful, plausible and evidenced arguments.
Addressed most key issues; Mostly insightful, plausible and evidenced arguments.
Addressed many key issues; Mostly insightful and evidenced arguments.
Addressed some key issues; Mostly evidenced arguments.
Addressed limited key issues; Some evidenced arguments.
Ability to relate conceptual knowledge to the issues (20%)
Critically related relevant conceptual knowledge to the issues.
Related mostly relevant conceptual knowledge to the issues.
Related some relevant conceptual knowledge to the issues.
Conceptual knowledge is partly relevant to the issues.
Some conceptual knowledge was discussed.
Ability to draw conclusion and make recommendations based on research (20%)
Conclusion and recommendations were insightful and feasible, and logically drawn from prior discussion.
Conclusion and recommendations were feasible and logically drawn from prior discussion.
Conclusion and recommendations were logically drawn from prior discussion.
Conclusion and recommendations were mostly relevant to prior discussion.
Conclusion and recommendations partly relevant to prior discussion.
Ability to acknowledge sources and comply with Harvard citation style (20%)
Acknowledged all sources; appropriate and sound sources were referred to; complied with HCS.
Acknowledged most sources; mostly appropriate and sound sources were referred to; complied with HCS.
Reasonably acknowledged sources; partly appropriate and sound sources were referred to; mostly complied with HCS.
Acknowledged more than half of sources; some appropriate and sound sources were referred to; mostly complied with HCS.
Acknowledged limited sources; some unsound sources were used (e.g., Wikipedia, textbook, and lecture notes); partly complied with HCS.