Filter by keyword, subject, or both. Updates live as new model answers are added to our portal.
Problem Solving and Research Methods for Managers
1,000 words
Problem Solving and Research Methods for Managers – Summative Assignment
This module assessment develops students’ ability to apply problem-solving tools, techniques and research methods to an original business problem. The assessment consists of two summative components. Summative 1 comprises two 25-question multiple-choice questionnaires covering the key learning areas taught throughout the module. Summative 2 consists of a video presentation and an individual reflective piece. For the video presentation, students must prepare a 10-to-15-minute presentation demonstrating competent application of the problem-solving tools, techniques and research methods taught during the module. The presentation should address an original problem identified within a business where the student has previously worked or currently works. Where the student does not have relevant work experience, a business that the student is interested in working for in the future may be selected. The presentation should include an appropriate analysis of the problem, application of relevant problem-solving and research methods, conclusions and recommendations. References should be included at the end of the presentation using the Harvard referencing system. The second component is an individual reflective piece of 1,000 words. The reflection should document the student’s learning experience, the outcomes of the experience and how the learning will inform future professional practice. The assessment brief emphasises that reflective writing should go beyond simply describing events. Students are expected to explore their thoughts and emotions and develop deeper self-awareness. The use of one or more reflective or learning frameworks is recommended to structure the reflection. The assessment is designed to assess both practical application and reflective learning. The video presentation should demonstrate the ability to connect theory with a real or relevant business problem and produce appropriate conclusions and recommendations. The reflective component should demonstrate what the student has learned from the experience, how that learning has influenced their understanding and how it can be transferred to future practice. Students must use Harvard referencing. The assessment is submitted through the relevant Moodle/Turnitin or Panopto submission links. The assessment brief states that presentation references are not included in the presentation word count. Students should also ensure that their final submission follows the required file-format and deadline instructions provided on Moodle. The marking rubric places substantial emphasis on the quality of presentation design and delivery, the depth of reflection and learning demonstrated, and clarity of writing, structure, grammar, Harvard referencing and use of visuals. Strong work should therefore demonstrate a clear connection between the business problem, the selected problem-solving and research methods, the resulting analysis, conclusions and recommendations, followed by a genuinely reflective discussion of the learning experience and its implications for future practice.
Read Model Answer →
Artificial Intelligence / International Business
3,000 words
AI Innovation Consultancy: Evaluating Artificial Intelligence Solutions for Business Problems
This individual consultancy assessment requires students to act as an AI Innovation Consultant and evaluate how artificial intelligence could address a significant real-world business problem. Students select one industry—such as healthcare, retail, FinTech, manufacturing or agriculture—and concentrate on a single clearly defined organisational challenge rather than comparing multiple sectors. Potential issues include long waiting times, high operating costs, fraud and risk, poor customer experience or inefficient supply chains. The report develops a practical AI solution by identifying suitable technologies such as machine learning, natural language processing or computer vision and explaining how they would operate within the chosen organisational context. Students are not required to build an AI system; instead, the emphasis is on demonstrating business-level technical understanding, critical thinking and the ability to assess whether the proposed technology can realistically integrate with existing organisational processes. The analysis considers the capabilities and limitations of AI, technical feasibility, integration requirements and the skills or organisational capabilities required for implementation. Students must also critically examine ethical, legal and social implications, including issues such as algorithmic bias, transparency, accountability, privacy and regulatory obligations such as UK GDPR. Appropriate risk-mitigation measures should be proposed. A substantial element of the report develops the business case for AI adoption. Students evaluate implementation costs and expected benefits, estimate return on investment, identify assumptions and commercial risks, and assess the overall strategic value of the solution to the organisation. The report concludes with clear recommendations, implementation priorities and a final judgement on whether the proposed AI initiative is feasible and worthwhile. The assessment places strong emphasis on critical analysis, technical understanding, business acumen and professional communication. Students are expected to support arguments with credible academic, industry and government evidence and include at least two professional visualisations such as frameworks, diagrams or tables. Harvard referencing is required throughout. Overview word count: approximately 330 words. The brief also allows authorised use of generative AI for idea generation, drafting/structuring and proofreading, provided the student verifies accuracy, references appropriately and submits the required GenAI declaration.
Read Model Answer →
Business Management / Strategy
2,467 words
Contemporary Issues in Business (BS729) — Reflective Portfolio: Case Trends, Stakeholder Perspectives and Management Frameworks
This Level 7 portfolio accumulates across a semester of case-based workshops and is submitted as a single document combining reflective writing with sustained critical discussion. The assessment rewards demonstrable personal development as much as analytical knowledge, so the writing is first-person where it needs to be and evidential throughout. The reflective component presents six workshop reflections, each no longer than 150 words and each structured through one of the established reflective models introduced in the module — Gibbs' Reflective Cycle, Kolb's Learning Cycle, Schön's framework or the ERA framework. These are not summaries of what the case was about. Each one identifies where the analysis could have been sharper, what was missed in the live discussion and why, what will be repeated and what will be done differently, with the emphasis falling on transferable learning about how business problems are diagnosed and decisions taken under uncertainty rather than on the particulars of any single case. The larger critical component works through three connected questions. The first examines how contemporary trends studied in the module affect businesses both positively and negatively, drawing on two specific cases but deliberately reaching beyond them to consider consequences across whole industries — the trend, not the company, is the unit of analysis. The second addresses why identifying stakeholders and understanding their perspectives is critical to sound decision-making, using one module case to demonstrate it. Competing interests are mapped explicitly, the power and legitimacy of each group considered, and stakeholder theory used to argue why a manager who weighs only shareholder interest arrives at a worse decision. The third question turns to the management tools and frameworks applied during the module, using two cases to show how a particular tool was selected, what it revealed that unstructured analysis would have missed, and equally where it fell short. This includes judgement about when each framework is and is not appropriate, since selecting the right tool for the problem is itself the skill being assessed. Harvard referencing is applied consistently across all sections, with academic sources supporting the theoretical claims and practitioner sources grounding the industry discussion. Portfolio items are collected through PebblePad across the semester and consolidated into one file for submission, the class participation element being tracked separately by the lecturer across the case discussion sessions.
Read Model Answer →