Integrating business perspectives
In your lectures and tutorials you have seen numerous examples of businesses operating in the urban environment of Sydney. Using one real world business as a case study discuss how the business model canvas approach can provide researcher’s with a framework for assessing the feasibility of a business’s design.
References: It is expected that students will cite a minimum of 10 references in each essay. Chosen references will demonstrate your engagement with key academic concepts whilst also showing he ability to source reputable industry based information relating to your chosen case study.
Currently 3 writers are viewing this order
Assessment One – Essay 2BRIEF
Essay 2 (10%)
1. The question and requirements
This assessment task is to be undertaken individually.
It is designed to assess your problem-solving skills, your capacity to source and analyse relevant information and your written communication skills.
While there will be no writing workshops provided for this assessment, there will be discussion boards on UTS Online.
In your lectures and tutorials you have seen numerous examples of examples businesses operating in the urban environment of Sydney. Using one real world business as a case study discuss how the business model canvas approach can provide researchers with a framework for assessing the viability of a businesses’ design.
Note: You are free to choose any business you wish for this assignment. It is suggested, however, that where possible you choose a business in the urban entrepreneurialism space as this will provide important links to your group assignment.
In preparing your response, you should:
a. justify the statements you are making by referring to sources of information you have independently researched;
b. provide examples to support your points;
c. refer to at least ten sources from valid and reputable published literature (n.b. this does not just have to be academic literature);
d. present your references using the Harvard system of referencing;
e. limit your response to 1000 words – not including references(give or take 10%). The ability to present your point of view within a prescribed number of words is an important skill which will be assessed in this task; and,
f. edit your work prior to submitting it to ensure it is written with accurate grammatical structure, spelling and punctuation.
You must submit your final work through Turnitin on UTS Online by August 31. Work will be assessed according to the criteria summarised in Table 1 (pto).
Some Suggested Readings
Business model canvas:
Krueger, N. F. (1993). The impact of prior entrepreneurial exposure on perceptions of new venture feasibility and desirability.Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 18(1), 5-21.
Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Oliveira, M. A. Y., & Ferreira, J. J. P. (2011). Business Model Generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers and challengers. African Journal of Business Management, 5(7).
Thompson, A. (2005). Business Feasibility Study Outline.Enterpreneurship and business innovation: The art of successful business start-ups and business planning.
Trimi, S., &Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2012).Business model innovation in entrepreneurship.International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(4), 449-465.
2. Assessment Criteria
Table 1 provides a detailed description of each assessment criteria.
MARKING CRITERIA Weighting BELOW EXPECTATIONS MEETS EXPECTATIONS EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS
/100 Z P -> C D -> HD
1. Discusses the central characteristics of the Business Model Canvas
20 No Provides details of some or all of the characteristics with reference to supporting evidence Characteristics are comprehensive and illustrated with supporting examples
2. Explanation of how the Business Model Canvas can be used to assess business feasibility.
30 No Limited application to business issues and practice Extensive analysis of the concepts in relation to business issues and practice
3. Uses a critical analytical approach
20 No / little evidence of a critical or analytical approach
e.g. The writing is often subjective; lacks logic; overlooks bias* inconsistencies, omissions of sources
Includes no/little interpretation Yes, to some extent
Writing is mainly objective; logical
Minimal bias, inconsistencies and omissions reflected from sources
Attempts interpretation Yes, to a great extent
Writing is objective; logical
Explicitly recognises bias, inconsistencies and omissions reflected in sources
Interpretation is comprehensive
4. Coherent format and structure; communicative effectiveness
Incoherent; paragraphs non-existent
Sentences and/or paragraphs not sequenced logically
Irrelevant material detracts from the main argument Yes, the writing is mostly logically sequenced
Mainly clear links between sentences and paragraphs
Material is relevant to the argument and supported with examples; paragraphs and topic sentences introduce, develop, and exemplify main ideas/points
The essay is very well structured, coherent, and easy to understand.
No irrelevant material
Paragraph and sentences are cohesive and coherent throughout
5. Usage (literacy)
Writing difficult to follow
Errors in spelling, grammar, sentence structure and/or punctuation make the Writing can be followed throughout.
Occasional errors in spelling, grammar, sentence structure and punctuation have minimal effect on meaning Minimal errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Uses a variety of clear and concise expression of ideas
6. Use of supporting material & Harvard UTS referencing
10 Little, inaccurate, or no citation
Material is identified and supported; citation is mostly accurate and appropriate; some omissions or uncited material Consistent and accurate citation used throughout as necessary