ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Assessment Practical assessment
Assessment code: 011
Academic Year: 2023/2024
Trimester: 2
Module Title: Critical Perspectives on Cross-Border Business
Module Code: MOD009194
Level: 6
Module Leader: John Threlfall
Weighting: 40%
Time Limit: 7-9 minutes per individual
Assessed Learning
Outcomes 3. Critically assess and analyse multinational enterprises’ potential responses to external influences
4. Critically assess the activities of MNEs in terms of both interests and wider socio-environmental impacts
Assessment date: Please refer to the deadline on the VLE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
? This is an individual assessment within a group activity, ? No extensions are available for this assessment.
? Mitigation: The deadline for submission of mitigation in relation to this assignment is no later than five working days after the submission date of this work. Please contact the Director of Studies Team - DoS@london.aru.ac.uk.
See rules 6.112 – 6.141:
http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/academic/public/academic_regs.pdf
ASSIGNMENT TASK
You will be allocated membership of a group of between four and six stakeholder representatives involved in the United Kingdom’s manufacturing operations of the Japanese multinational enterprise, Panoshiba.
Employability skills: The role-play simulation allows each student to practice a range of employment skills: such as research, planning, communication, negotiation, problem-solving, listening, compromising, and decision-making.
Stakeholder Representatives:
1. Japanese Manager
2. Board Member
3. Trade Union Representative
4. Domestic Supplier Representative
5. Sustainability Activist
6. Local Government Representative
Agenda
In response to a period of decreasing profitability, Ria Watanabe Chief Operating Officer (COO) at the corporation’s European HQ is seriously considering plans to reduce costs by closing down the major UK plant, in order to offshore manufacturing in another country. The Regional Division Manager for Akio Sato’s UK operations has convened a meeting between representatives of several key stakeholder groups who are deeply concerned about the potential impact of such a decision on their interests. An independent professional mediator has been hired to chair the proceedings.
The goal is to reach a negotiated resolution that is acceptable to ALL the parties.
Practical: role-play negotiation [100 marks]
Task Schedule
- Students are strongly advised to prepare notes in bullet point form and to prepare a reference list of sources they intend to cite.
- These materials should be emailed to the assessor ahead of the assessment.
- Assessors may consider these notes and reference lists when assessing the standard of research that each participant has demonstrated.
- Each representative will be given 2 minutes to make opening remarks outlining their perspective, goal(s), and rationale.
- These opening remarks are important as they are the best opportunity to demonstrate:
(1) command of the task brief and stakeholder perspective.
(2) knowledge and understanding of Cross Border Business and/or Stakeholder Theory
- Other representatives should listen carefully and take notes during each representative’s opening statement.
- After opening remarks, participants will be individually allocated a further 5 minutes to work towards a compromise resolution that is deemed acceptable to all representatives.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Your negotiation meeting should focus on:
a) A critical assessment and analysis of external influences on multinational enterprises (MNEs) potential responses to Foreign Direct Investment:
Knowledge and understanding of relevant module content should include:
Direct Foreign Investment, international culture, and cross-culture management. Academic theories e.g. M E Porter’s Diamond Model to support specific negotiating positions
50 marks
b) A critical assessment of the activities of MNEs in terms of both interests and wider socio-environmental impacts
Knowledge and understanding of relevant module content with an emphasis on environmental issues, sustainability, and national and local socio-environmental issues
40 marks
Presentation Quality
Standard of representation: planning, communication, persuasion, problem- solving, listening, compromising, and decision-making skills plus critical engagement with the other participants are assessed in both
10 marks
You will decide roles in your group and assign aspects of the two tasks to each role.
REQUIRED AND RECOMMENDED READING
To prepare for the task, students are required to read several specific texts:
I. The ‘Detailed Negotiation Scenario Overview’, (available on the VLE)
II. An individual ‘Role Sheet’ describing the particular position of each participant’s role in the negotiation. Lecturers will allocate these roles no less than two weeks before the assessment week.
III. Relevant academic texts posted on the module VLE page: Weeks 8-10
IV. Core Text: Hill, C. and Hult, T., 2022. International Business: Competing in the
Global Marketplace (14th ed.), NY: McGraw Hill
V. Inkman K., 2022, Cross-Cultural Management: An Introduction Sage
VI. Thomas D.C. and Pearson M. F., 2022, Cross-Cultural Management: Essential Concepts, McGraw Hill
In addition, it is expected that all students conduct independent research for this task. Using the ARU Digital Library. Strong performances in this task will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of both relevant Cross-Border Business Management theory and evidence/data about the given scenario, which focuses on a Japanese MNE based in Sunderland and its contemporary stakeholder relations with UK institutions.
Panoshiba Negotiation Scenario Overview
This will be available on the VLE in the Assessment Tile
Level 6 is characterised by an expectation of students’ increasing autonomy in relation to their study and developing skill sets. Students are expected to demonstrate problem-solving skills, both theoretical and practical. This is supported by an understanding of appropriate theory; creativity of expression and thought based on individual judgement; and the ability to seek out, invoke, analyse and evaluate competing theories or methods of working in a critically constructive and open manner. Output is articulate, coherent and skilled in the appropriate medium, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism.
Mark Bands Outcome Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band for ARU’s Generic
Learning Outcomes (Academic Regulations, Section 2)
Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and
Transferable Skills
90-
100%
Achieves module
outcome(s)
Exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with extraordinary originality and autonomy. Work may be considered for publication within ARU Exceptional management of learning resources, with a higher degree of autonomy/exploration that exceeds the assessment brief. Exceptional structure/ accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination.
Exceptional team/practical/professional skills. Work may be considered for publication within ARU
80- Outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, it's theory and ethical Outstanding management of learning resources, with a degree
89% of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the assessment brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate expression.
issues with clear originality and autonomy Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination.
Outstanding team/practical/professional skills
70-
79%
Excellent knowledge base that supports analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/ practice/ethics of discipline with considerable originality
Excellent management of learning resources, with degree of autonomy/research that may exceed the assessment brief. Structured and creative expression. Excellent academic/ intellectual skills and practical/team/ professional/ problemsolving skills
60-
69% Good knowledge base that supports
analysis, evaluation and problemsolving in theory/
practice/ethics of discipline with some originality Good management of learning resources, with consistent selfdirected research. Structured and accurate expression. Good
academic/intellectual skills and team/practical/ professional/problem solving skills

50-
59%
Sound knowledge base that supports some analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in
theory/practice/ethics of discipline Sound management of learning resources. Some autonomy in research but inconsistent. Structured and mainly accurate expression. Sound level of academic/ intellectual skills going beyond description at times. Sound
team/practical/professional/problem-solving skills
40-
49% A marginal pass in module outcome(s) Adequate knowledge base with some omissions at the level of ethical/ theoretical issues. Restricted ability to discuss theory and/or or solve problems in the discipline Adequate use of learning resources with little autonomy. Some difficulties with academic/ intellectual skills. Some difficulty with structure/ accuracy in expression, but evidence of developing team/practical/professional/ problem-solving skills
30-
39% A marginal fail in module
outcome(s).
Satisfies default
qualifying mark Limited knowledge base. Limited understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline Limited use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Limited academic/ intellectual skills. Still mainly descriptive. General difficulty with
structure/ accuracy in expression. Practical/
professional/problem-solving skills that are not yet secure
20-
29%
Fails to achieve module
outcome(s)
Qualifying mark not satisfied
Little evidence of knowledge base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline/ ethical issues. Significant difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline
Little evidence of use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Little evidence of academic/ intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive. Significant difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression. Little evidence of practical/professional/ problem-solving skills
10-
19% Deficient knowledge base. Deficient understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Major difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline Deficient use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Deficient input to teams. Deficient
academic/intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive. Major difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression. Deficient practical/professional/problem-solving skills
1-
9% No evidence of knowledge base; no evidence of understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Total inability with theory and problem No evidence of use of learning resources. Completely unable to work autonomously. No evidence of input to teams. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. Work wholly descriptive. Incoherent structure/accuracy and expression. No evidence of practical/professional/ problem-solving skills
solving in discipline
0% Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes