Data and Decision Making (BS776) — Business Report: Two-Source Data Analysis in Python for Evidence-Based Decision-Making
This Level 7 report applies data management theory to a self-selected industry problem and carries it through to a working Python analysis and a defensible business recommendation. The brief is deliberately open on sector — finance, healthcare, transport, cyber security, business intelligence and others are all permitted — but firm on one point: the chosen topic must carry a genuine business implication rather than being a purely technical or clinical analysis. The work therefore begins by framing a specific data-driven decision the organisation needs to make, and returns to that decision at every stage. Two distinct data sources are then identified from approved open repositories and critically evaluated side by side. The evaluation covers the data types each holds, how the data was collected and what bias that introduces, how each is stored and managed, and where the weaknesses lie — proposing concrete data management solutions for the problems identified rather than simply cataloguing them. The analytical core examines, transforms and explores both datasets using univariate and multivariate techniques. All work is carried out in Python within Google Colab, with full screenshots of the code and outputs placed in the appendices and the live Colab link shared for verification. Charts and tables sit in the main body where they support interpretation, each labelled and referenced back to its data source, and each appendix is cited from the narrative so the reader can move between argument and evidence. Data cleaning and transformation steps are shown and justified, not glossed. Findings are reported at length and converted into a clear recommendation covering both the immediate decision and the current and future direction of data management for the business. The limitations section is written honestly — sample coverage, data recency, the assumptions the transformation forced, and what the proposed solution cannot address. Running alongside this, the module's weekly consolidation discussions are evidenced. Five or more critical responses across units two to nine are screenshotted, dated, individually labelled as appendices, and each supported by academic and practice references. Crucially, these are not left sitting in the appendix: they are cited and used within the main body to support the critical discussion, which is where the marks for that component sit. The report follows the prescribed structure — title page, executive summary, contents, introduction, main section with subsections per task, findings, recommendations, limitations, conclusion, Harvard reference list and full appendices — submitted as a single file.
Read Model Answer →