Writing an essay on global and international business can be a hard task for some students. This is because of fear of unfamiliar businesses not around the student’s own living environment. To write a good essay on international business, the student must demonstrate excellent knowledge and appreciation for the topic. Here is the marking criteria for global and international business essays:
First (80 – 100)
Excellent understanding and knowledge of the frameworks is shown through an excellent analysis of the international and global contexts of the business environment. Excellent application of the extended PND model with external variables. Arguments are well supported and the analysis fits together to produce a coherent justification for the key issues identified. Well articulated key issues drawn from each piece of analysis. Work is well written, well structured and appropriately referenced using the Harvard method. Evidence of excellent research skills and good use of the theories provided, demonstrating an astute understanding of how the theoretical concepts of international business management can be applied in practice.
First (70 – 79)
Very good understanding and knowledge of the frameworks is demonstrated through a very good analysis of the business organization, its environment and potential future strategies. Very good application of the extended PND model with external variables. Demonstrates ability to critically evaluate information and make reasonable judgments and arguments. Arguments are well supported with evidence of good research. Work is well structured and generally well written with good use of Harvard referencing method. The information provided demonstrates very good understanding of how the theoretical concepts of international business management can be applied in practice.
Upper Second (60 – 69)
Content is always relevant to questions set and assignment task. A good analysis using appropriate frameworks to answer the questions and addressing the task. Good application of the extended PND model with external variables. Good ability to critically evaluate is demonstrated. Decent number of issues identified and supported by a good discussion. Good evaluation of reasonable options for the organisation is provided. Good justification for alternative choice is suggested. Good reflection on how the theoretical concepts of international business management can be applied in practice. Good use of references.
Lower Second (50 – 59)
A reasonable analysis using appropriate frameworks to answer to the questions and address the assignment task. Some lack of understanding may be shown at times but this is counterbalanced by good analysis elsewhere. Adequate application of the extended PND model with external variables. Adequate analysis of the international business issues and contextual environments. Conclusions are reasonable. Some reflection and thinking has taken place about cross cultural management and cultural intelligence but may be brief or limited. The use of references is not always consistent with the Harvard method requirements.
Third (40 – 49)
Analysis will demonstrate an understanding of which frameworks to use and a basic competence in their use. Analysis may be unsophisticated using the basic PND model. The work may not fit together well and discussion may be superficial. There may be gaps in the analysis but it is adequate and demonstrates a basic understanding of the business environment. Analytical discussion relies on assertion with insufficient support of the prior research. Referencing is inconsistent.
Failed (30 – 39)
Poor understanding of the purpose of the analysis and the use of the frameworks shown. Many errors and inadequacies in the use of the theoretical frameworks. Poor analytical discussion which fails to adequately reflect on international business management and cross cultural intelligence. The work is poorly structured and badly referenced.
Failed (0 – 29)
Very poor use of frameworks. There is no evidence of any understanding which frameworks to use or may not have used any frameworks to analyse the environment and in drawing conclusions. No evidence of research. The work tends to be inarticulate and badly organised. The Harvard referencing method is not adhered to.