In this assessment task, you can choose to write a research plan relevant to the organization that you are familiar with (e.g., where you currently work, with a focus on either one of the four primary or one of the four secondary
Graduate School of Business and Law
BUSM4586: Business Research Design
Assessment 3: Individual Research Plan
Overview
The purpose of this assessment is for you to submit a research plan that is clear, concise, consistent and convincing. This assessment task tests your ability to apply the business research design concepts introduced during the second half of the course by writing a research plan. Your task is to write a business research plan that would demonstrate your level of skills relevant to gaining agreement from others, for example, by convincing an organisation’s Board (or other industry relevant decision-maker) to approve the cost of employees being given time away from their normal duties to conduct the research that you are proposing. This assessment will assist in gaining credibility within an organization by designing contemporary business research projects to address organisational challenges.
Assessment criteria and weighting
- Demonstrated understanding of the set task: research problem; the research question (or set of questions) is clearly stated along with an explanation of why that question (or set of questions) is important to this business : 10 Pts
- Literature Review :10 Pts
- Research methodology : 10 Pts
- Ability to convince the board to approve the cost of employees being given time away from their normal duties to conduct research : 5 Pts
- Demonstrated clear, logical academic writing and referencing skills: 5 Pts
Learning Outcomes
This assessment is relevant to the following Learning Outcomes:
CLO3. Communicate research designs to professional target audiences and make reasoned judgments to inform transformative and sustainable business practices.
CLO4. Critically analyse current workplace issues, theories and practice, including future of work and technology.
CLO5. Evaluate different perspectives in business research design. In the Australian offerings, this includes opportunities and challenges that facilitate Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander People knowledge.
Assessment details (continued)
In this assessment task, you can choose to write a research plan relevant to the organization that you are familiar with (e.g., where you currently work, with a focus on either one of the four primary or one of the four secondary practices).
Remember, your task is to write a research plan that would convince a board to approve the cost of the proposed research into this topic. Your aim is to prepare a research plan that is so clearly important and likely to lead to success that top management in the business will be prepared to spend money implementing the plan (i.e. carrying out the research). Much of being convincing and credible will depend on the details you present in the methodology section: How you will collect and analyse data. You are welcome to adopt the structure used by examples that have been studied during the second half of the course; however, your problem has to be clearly different from the problems researched in those examples.
In the learning materials, we have used three examples as exemplars: Example A, which focused on training needs (culture) and used qualitative interviews to gather data; Example B, which focused on how best to provide excellent services to Chinese guests (execution and strategy) and used a quantitative survey to gather data; and Example C, which focused on the future role of the Chief Information Officer (structure and culture) and used case study method.
The topic for example A was: Recruitment, Training and Retention of Talent in China – Challenges and Opportunities for Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group
For example, B the topic was: The Evolving Role of the CIO in Hospitality
For example, C the topic was: Service Quality Issues of Luxury Hotels in China.
Note that the research topic in these examples is not the same as the research question (or questions); this means you must identify a business challenge or an area of opportunity for this assessment task (individual research plan) and formulate associated research question (or questions).
Please note: there is no opportunity to resubmit failed assessments.
Helpful hints on structuring your research plan
Please note that the company ‘Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group’ (MOHG) is ONLY used as an illustrative example here. ***Cover Page
***Table of Contents
***Introduction
This document presents to Board members of the MOHG a fully detailed plan for conducting research that has been designed to improve leadership within the company in ways that will not only lift employee performance and morale but will also contribute to our capacity to expand our market share and increase our profitability.
***Research Objective
***Literature Review
Please note below is ONLY an example – you are to use relevant literature that will help you in your research. The references used below (except Nohria et al., 2003) are NOT compulsory/mandatory to be used in your literature review)
Nohria, Joyce and Roberson (2003) argue that high performing organisations do a better job than their competitors with regard to four primary and four secondary practices. The four primary factors are ………….. Effective leadership has a positive impact on the strategy and the culture of a business organisation, and in particular a luxury hotel chain such as ours, because
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………..
This literature review presents a concise summary of what best leadership practice involves because having that summary will provide MOHG with a ‘best practice baseline’. Once we have clearly identified best leadership practice, we can then conduct targeted research into ways in which the reality of current leadership practices within MOHG are similar to – or different from – the baseline ideal; and if there are major differences, we can also conduct research into why those differences exist. The literature on best practice leadership can be sorted into three types:
- Leadership styles which get the best from others
- The most important leadership understandings of organisational functioning
- How the best leaders use their time to achieve extraordinary results
Goleman (2000) has investigated the effectiveness of six leadership styles
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
***Methodology
( …covering proposed data collection and analysis methods… (and why they were chosen)
To discover the current nature of MOGH leadership and where there are gaps between what should be happening and what is happening, a two-step research approach will be taken; the first step would involve surveying 160 employees and 40 managers across four different Mandarin Hotels operating in four different cultures: American, Thai, Chinese, and English. By collecting responses from different cultures we will be able to discover if leadership behaviours that are seen as effective in one culture are perhaps seen as ineffective in a different culture – or if what works and what does not work is the same regardless of culture.
Using a survey questionnaire has been chosen for this first step of the research because
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………
Test items used in the questionnaire will fall into three types: items that will measure the extent of employee satisfaction with the style of leadership used by their manager (for instance “To what extent would you describe your manager’s leadership style as democratic?’) ; items that will measure
.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………….
The second stage of the planned research will involve interviewing twenty employees (five from each hotel) and four managers (one from each hotel). Employees will be asked questions such as “can you tell me about a time when you felt most inspired by your manager – what was happening, what was he or she doing and why did that matter to you?” Managers will be asked questions such as “In your experience, what do you think has been the most effective leadership decision or action you have made and why do you think that was good for the company and for your employees?” Interviews have been chosen as a research method for this part of the project because
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………
Please note, full details of the questionnaire items and the interview questions can be found in Appendices One and Two.
It is expected that this research would find differences between the current MOHG leadership practices and what has been previously identified as ideal practice. Most importantly, the research would pinpoint exactly which practices are less than ideal, making it possible to then make targeted recommendations for improvement ………………………………..
In addition, the understanding that will be gained from the interview transcripts will enable us to uncover factors within the organisation that are helping and those which are …………
***Estimated Cost
***Conclusion
***References
***Appendices
Referencing guidelines
You must acknowledge all the courses of information you have used in your assessments. Use RMIT Harvard referencing style for this assessment.
Refer to the RMIT Easy Cite referencing tool to see examples and tips on how to reference in the appropriated style. You can also refer to the library referencing page for more tools such as EndNote, referencing tutorials and referencing guides for printing.
Use RMIT Harvard referencing style for this assessment.
Submission format
Upload as one single file (word document or PDF) via the Assignments submission portal on Canvas.
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Academic integrity is about honest presentation of your academic work. It means acknowledging the work of others while developing your own insights, knowledge and ideas. You should take extreme care that you have:
- Acknowledged words, data, diagrams, models, frameworks and/or ideas of others you have quoted (i.e. directly copied), summarised, paraphrased, discussed or mentioned in your assessment through the appropriate referencing methods,
- Provided a reference list of the publication details so your reader can locate the source if necessary. This includes material taken from Internet sites.
- If you do not acknowledge the sources of your material, you may be accused of plagiarism because you have passed off the work and ideas of another person without appropriate referencing, as if they were your own.
RMIT University treats plagiarism as a very serious offence constituting misconduct.
Plagiarism covers a variety of inappropriate behaviours, including: - Failure to properly document a source
- Copyright material from the internet or databases – Collusion between students.
- For further information on our policies and procedures, please refer to the University website.
Assessment declaration
When you submit work electronically, you agree to the Assessment declaration.
Criteria Ratings Pts
HD D C P N
Criterion 1
Demonstrated understanding of the set assessment task:
research problem; the research question (or set of questions) is clearly stated along with an explanation of why that question (or set of questions) is important to this business Outstanding understanding of the task; the research problem and research question(s) are, relevant, important and interesting and can genuinely be addressed by research.
Excellent information about the company or industry is provided while explaining the
research problem or in the development of research question(s).
Submission meets the suggested word limit requirements. Comprehensive understanding of the task; the research problem and research question(s) are interesting, relevant and important
Very good
information about the company or industry is provided while explaining the research problem or developing research questions.
Submission meets the suggested word limit requirements. Good
understanding of the task; the research problem and question(s) are relevant and
important for the selected company or industry context. Submission meets the suggested word limit requirements. Good basic understanding of the task; the research problem and question(s) are relevant, but these are associated with limited background information about the company or industry.
Assessment exceeds the suggested word count. The research problem/research question are difficult to understand and/or the importance of addressing the research problem/ question(s) is not clear. Assessment exceeds/does not meet the suggested word count.
10 to > 7.99 pts 7.99 to > 6.99 pts 6.99 to > 5.99 pts 5.99 to > 4.99 pts 4.99 to > 0 pts 10 pts
7
Criterion 2
Review of relevant literature The literature
review is comprehensive and describes relevant material; this section includes topics that are most relevant to the research question and
concludes with a
list of
factors/themes which are most important to obtain a deeper understanding of the research problem.
Outstanding connection between the material reviewed and the purpose of the study.
. The literature review
is relatively
comprehensive and describes most relevant material. This section concludes with a list of the factors/ themes which are most important to the research problem Very good attempt to connect the material reviewed with the purpose of the study. The literature review section includes topics that are relevant to the research question and concludes with a list of the factors which are most important to the research problem. There is some attempt to connect the material reviewed with the purpose of the study. The literature review lacks adequate coverage of relevant material There is no connection between the material reviewed and the purpose of the study.
10 to > 7.99 pts 7.99 to > 6.99 pts 6.99 to > 5.99 pts 5.99 to > 4.99 pts 4.99 to > 0 pts 10 pts
Criterion 3
Research Methodology Superior discussion
and justification of the proposed
methods; superior identification, elaboration and
justification of the proposed data collection and analysis methods; Clear discussion and justification of the
proposed methods; Clear identification, elaboration and justification of the proposed data collection and analysis methods; Outlined how the Reasonable discussion Relevant concepts but may be lacking are provided, but justification of the there is little attempt proposed method; to explain why those Clear identification and concepts could be
justification of the used to address the proposed data business collection and analysis challenges. methods; Outlined how No clear justification of how the proposed methods are relevant to answer the research problem. Missing or unsatisfactory data collection instrument(s) i.e. interview questions, or
8
Outlined how the proposed methods are relevant to answer the research problem and how data will be analysed; Superior discussion on why alternative research methods would have been less appropriate; provided highly relevant, high quality data collection instrument(s) i.e.
interview questions, or survey questionnaire items, or observation protocol. proposed methods are relevant to answer the research
problem and how data will be analysed; provided relevant and good quality data collection instrument(s) i.e. interview questions, or survey
questionnaire items, or observation protocol, with very few areas for improvement. the proposed methods are relevant to answer the research problem; May be lacking in detail in one area, e.g. not enough details on how data will be analysed; provided relevant data collection instrument(s) i.e. interview questions, or survey questionnaire items, or observation protocol, with some minor improvements required. survey questionnaire items, or observation protocol or absence of a methods section. The proposed interview questions, or survey questionnaire items, or case study protocol are irrelevant to the research question or are confusing or vague.
10 to > 7.99 pts 7.99 to > 6.99 pts 6.99 to > 5.99 pts 5.99 to > 4.99 pts 4.99 to > 0 pts 10 pts
Criterion 4
Ability to convince the board to approve the cost of employees being given time away from their normal duties to conduct the research Superior and fully convincing explanation of why the likely findings would assist in convincing a board to approve the cost of employees being given time away from their normal duties to conduct the research. Clear and convincing Clear explanation of A partial explanation There is no attempt explanation of why why the likely findings of why the likely to explain the the likely findings would assist in findings would assist importance of would assist in convincing a board to in convincing a board research and how convincing a board approve the cost of to approve the cost of the proposed to approve the cost employees being given employees being research methods of employees being time away from their given time away from could be used to given time away from their normal duties to normal duties to their normal duties to address the conduct the conduct the research. conduct the research. business problem. research.
9
5 to > 3.99 pts 3.99 to > 3.49 pts 3.49 to > 2.99 pts 2.99 to > 2.49 pts 2.49 to > 0 pts 5 pts
Criterion 5
Demonstrated clear, logical academic writing and referencing skills Consistently clear style and use of language encouraging ease of comprehension and insightful conclusions; quality logic and flow of arguments.
Consistently meets
academic referencing requirements and the referencing fully follows the RMIT Harvard
referencing stye in the in-text citations and the referencing list. Submission meets the word limit requirements. Clear presentation, content flow and good use of language; easy to read and draws clear conclusions. Almost always meeting academic referencing requirements and your referencing following the RMIT Harvard referencing style.
Submission meets the word limit requirements. Presentation is mainly easy to follow; language succinct and well chosen; May have minor errors in academic referencing: or in the use of RMIT Harvard referencing style. Submission meets the word limit requirements. Layout is adequate Response is not with acceptable flow clear or logical.
and use of Layout is confusing; language; some misspellings and logic, flow and use of
grammatical errors. language difficult to
Academic read; limited no
referencing may academic references
require used; many spelling
improvement, e.g.: and grammatical referencing partially
follows Harvard errors; referencing referencing style in does not follow the in-text citations Harvard referencing or in the reference style.
list. Submission
does not meet the Submission does not word limit meet the word limit requirements. requirements.
5 to > 3.99 pts 3.99 to > 3.49 pts 3.49 to > 2.99 pts 2.99 to > 2.49 pts 2.49 to > 0 pts 5 pts
Total: 40 pts
10
