THIS PAPER HAS BEEN DONE AT ESSAYLINK.NET; CONTACT US FOR A SOLUTION

ASSIGNMENT BRIEF

Submission Deadline

Marks and Feedback

Before 10am on:

———–

20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7)
15 working days after deadline (L6)
10 working days after deadline (block delivery)

Click or tap to enter a date.

 

 

Unit title & code

Intercultural Competence in Business  MAR013-1

Assignment number and title

Assignment 1: Case Study

Assignmenttype

Case Study

Weighting of assignment

40%

Size or length of assessment

The word-limit for the assignment is 2,000 words (+/- 10%). This does not include the title page, executive summary, table of contents, reference list and appendices.

Unit learning outcomes

1           Demonstrate the following knowledge and understanding

Identify and define the different value and belief systems present across cultures through cultural profiling and self-construal.

2           Demonstrate the following skills and abilities

Demonstrate your understanding of different cultural frameworks and strategies used in intercultural communication by applying theories to practice in variety of intercultural business interactions.

 

 

 

 

What am I required to do in this assignment?

This is a ‘seen paper’ in-class test.  Students have access to the exam questions two days before the test.

There will be two examples of intercultural incidents (small case studies); these are examples of different behavioural and communication problems. You are asked to apply your understanding of relevant theories, frameworks and ideas and propose solutions to demonstrate the extent of your intercultural awareness in different business interactions. All theories and frameworks should be referenced correctly using the Harvard system.

CHOOSE ONLY ONE (OUT OF 1, 2,) TO DISCUSS. Apply your understanding of relevant theories, frameworks and ideas and propose solutions to demonstrate the extent of your intercultural awareness in different business interactions.

Case studies for S2:

Case 1:

Fred Gardner, a thirty-one-year-old sales manager for a small boat-building firm in Connecticut, decided to stop off in Lisbon to call on several potential clients after a skiing trip to Switzerland. Having set up three appointments in two days, he arrived for the first two scheduled meetings at the appointed times but was kept waiting for over a half-hour in each instance. Based on these two experiences, Fred assumed that the Portuguese, like other “Latin types, must be manana oriented and not particularly concerned with the precise reckoning of time. With this in mind, he was not particularly concerned about being on time for his third appointment. Instead, he extended his visit to the local museum and arrived at his third appointment more than forty minutes late. However, Fred sensed that the Portuguese businesspeople were quite displeased with his tardiness.

Where did Fred go wrong?
How could you help Fred better understand this cross-cultural problem?
Use intercultural theories to explain it and support your discussion.
What would be your advice to Fred?

Case 2:

Sam Lucas, a construction supervisor from an international engineering firm, had the reputation of being tough but fair minded. He was a very forceful, confrontive individual who always spoke his mind. He never hesitated to call on the carpet any worker whom he felt was performing poorly. Even though during his six years with the company Sam had never worked outside of the United States, he was chosen to supervise construction on a new hotel project, in Jidda, Saudi Arabia, primarily because of his outstanding work record. On this project, Sam supervised the work of about a dozen Americans and nearly twice as many Saudis as well as over 100 labourers from Indian sub-continent. It was not long before Sam realised that the Saudi workers, to his way of thinking, were nowhere as reliable as the workers he had supervised in the United States. He was becoming increasingly annoyed at the seeming lack of competence of the local workforce. Following the leadership style that held him in such good stead at home, he would reprimand any worker who was not doing his job properly, and he would make certain that he did it publicly so that it would serve as an object lesson to all the other workers. He was convinced that he was doing the right thing and was being fair, for after all, he reprimanded both Americans and Saudis alike. He was troubled, however, by the fact that the problems were seemed to be growing worse and more numerous.

Where did Sam go wrong?
How could you help Sam better understand this cross-cultural problem?
Use intercultural theories to explain it and support your discussion.
What would be your advice to Sam?

What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)

In order to pass Assessment 1 you will need to:

Compare and contrast different cultural frameworks
Demonstrate how these frameworks can be applied to understand different interpersonal interactions in business situations
Apply intercultural communication theories to practice in various business situations

How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?

We will be filling this section in together in class onClick or tap to enter a date.make sure you have downloaded/printed out the Assignment Brief and bring it to the session with you.

How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?

This assessment provides a grounding in the intercultural frameworks relevant to international business environment.  Mainly it will involve frameworks related to communication, homogeneity versus diversity, tradition and change, dimensions of culture and so on. The frameworks are discussed in scheduled classes.

 

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.

You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.

 

Pass – 40-49%

Pass – 50-59%

Commendation – 60-69%

Distinction– 70%+

1

Knowledge

(35%)

Piecemeal knowledge of relevant theories and concepts. Some noticeable misunderstandings and/or inaccuracies.

Rather confused focus that quite often strays from the topic. Limited discussion of concepts and issues.

Fairly broad knowledge of relevant theories and concepts. Mostly accurate understanding.

Quite clear focus, but sometimes strays from the topic. Logical and coherent discussion of concepts and issues, but limited originality.

 

Broad knowledge of relevant theories and concepts.  Thoughtful  and accurate understanding

Clear and appropriate focus. Thoughtful discussion that shows independent thinking.

Broad and critically evaluative knowledge of relevant theories and concepts. In-depth and accurate understanding

Very clear and appropriate focus. Very insightful discussion and original, inspirational thinking.

2

Analysis (35%)

Limited analysis. Lacks enough evidence based argument. Limited reference to theory and/or practice or used inappropriately. Statements of ‘fact’ and personal belief insufficiently reinforced by citations from appropriate third-party sources, research and relevant literature.
Satisfactory analysis of some appropriate concepts. Some evidence based argument demonstrated which draws on theory and/or practice. Statements of ‘fact’ and personal belief reinforced by citations from an appropriate, but limited, range of third-party sources, research and relevant literature.
Good analysis of related concepts and ideas. Appropriate evidence based argument demonstrating good understanding of theory and/or practice. Statements of ‘fact’ and personal belief reinforced by citations from an appropriate and broad range of third-party sources, research and relevant literature.
Comprehensive analysis of a range of related concepts and ideas. Evidence based argument demonstrating an excellent understanding of theory and/or practice. Statements of ‘fact’ and personal belief supported by citations from an extensive range of appropriate up to date third party sources, research and relevant literature.

3

Presentation

(10%)

Though the discussion presented is reasonably systematic, there are improvements that the student should have implemented, for example, over-long and discursive sections/paragraphs or too short and fragmented sections/paragraphs which render some pages un-reader-friendly. There is scope for the work to be better organised.
Though the discussion presented is generally systematic, there are improvements that the student should have implemented, for example, over-long and discursive paragraphs or too short and fragmented paragraphs which render some pages un-reader-friendly.
The overall presentation of the discussion is articulate, lucid, structurally sensible and mature in expression. The references are organised conscientiously and comprehensively.
The discussion presented is produced in strict conformity with the guidelines contained in the assignment brief. The text is wide-ranging, the style mature, the approach measured, the presentation reader-friendly.

4

Persuasion (20%)

Reasonable and academically sound language and formatting.
Precise and persuasive arguments based on a firm foundation from the question through to the conclusions constructed.

 

Advanced and persuasive arguments based on a firm foundation from the question through to the conclusions constructed.
Very advanced and persuasive arguments based on a firm foundation from the question through to the conclusions constructed.

GET ALL YOUR ACADEMIC HELP AT ESSAYLINK.NET