Analysing and reflecting on the entrepreneurial skills of an Entrepreneur

ASSESSMENT: Analysing and reflecting on the entrepreneurial skills of an Entrepreneur

 

Module Title: Creating and Leading Enterprise
Assessment Type Individual written assignment (2500 Words)

(worth 50% of overall marks)

 

Assessment Task 
Choose an entrepreneur to undertake research about. This entrepreneur may be a family member, a friend, a contact, or a well-known entrepreneur. You will be expected to undertake in-depth research about this entrepreneur making use of primary and / or secondary research. Primary research may include conducting an interview with the entrepreneur if possible. Secondary research could include drawing information from their company website, press coverage, company reports, financial data, academic studies of the entrepreneur etc.

Use this research to answer the following:

1.    Critically evaluate the entrepreneurial skills and activities demonstrated by the entrepreneur.

2.    How does your evaluation of the entrepreneurial skills of the entrepreneur make you reflect on your own entrepreneurial skills?

3.      What effects have the entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial skills and activities had on business, the economy, society and the environment? How does this influence your views about enterprise and entrepreneurship in general?

Task specific guidance:

When researching and writing this assignment you may find it helpful to consider the following in order to guide your reflections: –

Entrepreneurial Activities and Skills of the Entrepreneur

·        Take a close look at their current and previous actions and experiences.

·        What are the main characteristics that distinguish this entrepreneur? Use their life stories and experiences to identify these characteristics.

·        Would you consider this person to be an entrepreneurial person? If so, why? If not, why not? What makes them entrepreneurial in your perspective?

 

Self-Reflection on Entrepreneurial Skills

·        How do the entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial skills (or their lack of entrepreneurial skills) compare to your own entrepreneurial skills (for example, risk taking skills, leadership skills, decision making skills, problem solving skills)? How does this make you feel about your entrepreneurial skills? (When thinking about your own enterprise skills you may find it helpful to reflect on your experiences on this module so far, or other modules that involve(d) enterprising content/ activities)

·        Would you have done anything differently if you were this person? If so, what would you have done differently and why? If not, why not?

·        Based on your research about this entrepreneur and your experiences of undertaking this module, would you want to be an entrepreneur in the future? If so, why? If not, why not?

Effects of Enterprise

·        What have been the implications of their entrepreneurial skills and activities (for example, on their business, on the economy, on society, on the environment)? How does this affect your views about the value and impact of entrepreneurship?

·        Do you think it would be better if the entrepreneur you researched was more entrepreneurial in terms of achieving better impact? If so, who would it be better for? If not, why not?

All claims you make should be supported by strong argumentation and your discussions should draw on academic literature and theory covered in the module. You may also engage in wider reading by drawing on news articles and relevant journal papers.

Format of the assignment:

The previous section on ‘Assessment task’ provided some general guidance regarding the topics and areas to be covered in this assignment. In order to build up your written assignment, the following format using the sub-headings below is suggested, though, you might be creative in developing a more interesting format:

·        Introduction to the entrepreneur

·        Research undertaken

·        Entrepreneurial activities and skills of the entrepreneur

·        Self-reflection on enterprise skills

·        Effects of enterprise

You are encouraged to be creative with the presentation of the assignment. The more creative, the better!

Further guidance

For this assessment it is essential that you:

 

1.    Demonstrate a good knowledge of topics covered in the module as well as knowledge from relevant journal articles in the reading list. Avoid citing content from Wikipedia, Investopedia etc.

2.    Avoid being descriptive, rather critically evaluate the skills and activities of the entrepreneur. Draw a comparison between the entrepreneur’s skills and activities and the literature. By doing this, you will make the connection between theory and practice. Any findings of the skills and activities of the entrepreneur that contradict the literature should also be discussed critically using the sources mentioned in point 1.

3.     Use examples, where appropriate, to illustrate your points.

General study guidance:

 

·        Cite all information used in your work which is clearly from a source. Try to ensure that all sources in your reference list are seen as citations in your work, and all names cited in the work appear in your reference list.

 

·        Reference and cite your work in accordance with the APA 7th system – the University’s chosen referencing style.  For specific advice, you can talk to your Business librarians or go to the library help desk, or you can access library guidance via the following link:

o   APA 7th referencing: https://library.hud.ac.uk/pages/apareferencing/

 

  • The University has regulations relating to academic misconduct, including plagiarism. The Learning Innovation and Development Centre can advise and help you with how to avoid ‘poor scholarship’ and potential academic misconduct. You can contact them at busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk.

 

·        If you have any concerns about your writing, referencing, research or presentation skills, you are welcome to consult the Learning Innovation Development Centre team busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk. It is possible to arrange 1:1 consultation with a LIDC tutor once you have planned or written a section of your work, so that they can advise you on areas to develop.

·        Do not exceed the word limit / time / other limit.

 

 

Assessment criteria
 

  • The Assessment Criteria are shown the end of this document.  Your tutor will discuss how your work will be assessed/marked and will explain how the assessment criteria apply to this piece of work.  These criteria have been designed for your level of study.

 

  • These criteria will be used to mark your work and will be used to support the electronic feedback you receive on your marked assignment. Before submission, check that you have tried to meet the requirements of the higher-grade bands to the best of your ability. Please note that the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.
  • The Learning Innovation Development Centre can help you to understand and use the assessment criteria.  To book an appointment, either visit them on The Street in the Charles Sikes Building or email them on busstudenthub@hud.ac.uk

 

 

Learning Outcomes
 

Learning Outcomes: Assignment Two tests LO’s 2,3,4, and 5.

 

Knowledge and Understanding Outcomes  

 

On completion of this module students will have an understanding of:

 

1.     The role of enterprise and entrepreneurship within business and specifically in                                SMEs.

2.     The stages required to create and implement an enterprising idea from concept through to final product.

3.     The range of resources required to create and lead enterprise.

 

 

Ability Outcomes

 

On completion of this module students will be able to:

 

4.     Work with others to manage an enterprise project to agreed objectives.

5.     Identify entrepreneurial skills in self and others

6.     Critically analyse entrepreneurial decisions made for new products and services including

enterprise case study situations.

 

Submission information
Word/Time Limit: 2500 Words
Submission Date: 06/11/2020
Feedback Date: 27/11/2020
Submission Time: 15:00
Submission Method: Electronically via module site in Brightspace.  Paper/hard copy submissions are not required.  For technical support, please contact:  busvle@hud.ac.uk

 

 

 

 

Appendix 1 Assessment criteria

 

These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed.  They describe different levels of performance of a given criteria.

 

Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.

 

 

The grades between Pass and Very Good should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module.  The Exceptional and Outstanding categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the Excellent requirements, perform at a superior level beyond the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.

 

  90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10 – 19 0 – 9
 Level Exceptional

(Outstanding+)

Outstanding

(Excellent +)

Excellent Very good Good Pass Unsatisfactory Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Fulfilment of relevant learning outcomes Met Met Met Met Met Met Not met or partially met Not met or partially met Not met or minimal Not met or minimal
Response to the question /task Full command of assessment task; imaginative approach demonstrating flair and creativity Clear command of assessment task; sophisticated approach Very good response to task; elements of sophistication in response Well-developed response to assessment task with evident development of ideas Secure response to assessment task but not developed sufficiently developed to achieved higher grade Adequate response that meets minimum threshold, but with limitations of development Nearly a sufficient response but lacks key aspects. Insufficient response Little response No response
Detailed knowledge and critical understanding of relevant knowledge in the subject Skilfully integrate ideas from beyond the module or disciplinary areas to provide original/ creative insights into the subject, tensions, and ambiguities in a considered individual voice. Shows an ease with contingency and ambiguity. Skilfully integrates extended knowledge/ ideas from

beyond the module, and disciplinary areas to provide excellent critical insights.  Shows a level of comfort with contingency and ambiguity.

 

 

Comprehensively draws on an extended knowledge to show well-developed critical insights and good knowledge integration.

 

No major errors or misunderstandings or gaps.

 

 

 

 

Accurately demonstrates extended knowledge showing good critical insights and some knowledge integration.

 

No major errors or misunderstandings or gaps.

 

Accurately demonstrates most basic knowledge offers a basic critical understanding.

 

Lacks depth of integrating ideas.

 

Few errors and/or gaps in coverage and relevance.

Adequately demonstrates relevant basic knowledge and some, but limited, critical understanding

 

No integration of ideas.

 

Some errors and/or gaps in coverage and relevance

Mentions some terminology relating to theories, concepts

 

Little critical understanding of relevant well-established area(s) of knowledge with a many of errors, misunderstandings, and omissions

Very poor knowledge or critical understanding of relevant well-established theories / principles.  Major misunderstandings or omissions. Negligible coverage of knowledge or critical understanding of well-established / major theories / principles Wholly irrelevant.
Analysis of information / data using qualitative or quantitative analytical methods Shows inspired / creative insights of both analytical method and results/ findings/ conclusions. Adapts, combines, and possibly reconfigures recognized analytical methods in a way that leads to enhanced insight into a problem area. Extended and accurate analysis of information / data.

 

Expected analytical methods used are wholly appropriately within normal boundaries.

 

Fully appropriate results/conclusions of analysis    within the scope of the tool.

 

 

Competent analysis with evident use of analytical methods.

 

Fully appropriate results / conclusions / findings.

 

No major errors or misunderstanding.

Secure basic analysis with generally sound use of analytical methods.

 

Largely appropriate results with few significant errors

Adequate basic analysis with largely appropriate use of analytical methods.

 

Partially appropriate results/ finding/conclusions with some errors

Inadequate analysis with largely appropriate use of analytical methods.  Partially appropriate results with some errors Barely any relevant analytical methods of information / data.  Major misunderstandings or omissions Negligible analysis of information / data Many errors in understanding and omissions.  No relevant analysis of information / data
Argument, reasoning Intellectually coherent and comprehensive argument that articulates authentic, considered stance in own voice Compelling argument that shows intellectual agility and captures ambiguity.  Wholly relevant. Sharply focused and complex argument.

 

All points wholly relevant

 

Convincing and coherent reasoning.

Clearly articulated argument with consideration of different perspectives.

 

Mostly relevant points.

 

 

Logically coherent reasoning.

Satisfactory argument but limited in complexity.

 

Broadly relevant points.

 

Some limitations in terms of reasoning

Adequate basic level of argument provided.

Some relevant points but also a number of irrelevant points

Errors in reasoning.

Weak argument with substantial errors in reasoning. Descriptive or largely incoherent Largely incoherent No argument is offered
Use of referenced* evidence and sources to support task

 

*Normally APA 7th or OSCOLA

Systematic and rigorous use of evidence/ sources beyond the normal bounds of the module to robustly support purpose of the work. Evidence of independent reading and research.

 

Referencing fully competent and accurate

Comprehensive use of high-quality evidence and sources beyond the normal bounds of the module and shows evidence of independent reading and research.

 

Referencing fully competent and accurate

Task is very well supported by very extensive use of evidence / sources.

 

All points fully substantiated.

 

No unsubstantiated points.

 

Referencing fully competent and accurate

Task is well supported by more developed use of sources/evidence

 

Most points are substantiated and no major unsubstantiated points

 

Referencing largely competent and accurate.  Some minor errors in citations or references.

Task is supported by several sources /evidence.

 

Some points are unsubstantiated.

 

Referenced appropriately

 

Referencing largely competent and accurate but may include errors

Task supported by basic evidence and sources but is over-reliant on very few sources.

 

Significant number of points are unsubstantiated.

Some effort to reference, but frequent errors and omissions

One or two apparent references to concepts introduced in the assessment task

 

Very few points are substantiated using evidence / sources.

 

Significant errors and omissions in referencing

Little or no evidence

 

Significant errors and omissions in citation and application of referencing

Unsupported

 

Very little attempt to cite or reference

No evidence

No citations

Structure and, style in supporting the development of ideas

(criteria relevant for essay-style work)

Elegant flow and structure is integral to the argument. An exceptional demonstration of academic writing which effectively guides the reader. Elegance of flow that skilfully through the work and excellently supports key message.

 

 

Well-ordered logical flow of material in a fluid style which contributes well to the development of the key messages and guides the reader through the writer’s thinking.

 

Clear logical and structured flow of material that guides the reader and supports the development of key messages. Basic logical flow of material with elements of signposting for the reader which supports key messages to some extent, but which can lapse in places. Some logical flow of material with some observable elements of signposting for the reader but elements of disorganisation

May contain repetition or irrelevant material which obscures the key messages.

Some attempt at structure, but disorganized and ineffectual in reflecting argument or analysis. No evident intent of structure.  Disorganised, irrelevant or repetitive content. None Insufficient evidence
Language and style Lucid, fluent, elegant, and compelling, using a distinctive and individual voice Clear and fluent with a breadth of vocabulary. Discernible author voice. Clear functional writing with a discernible author voice. Clear and straightforward use language.

 

Largely error free

Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and syntax.

Limited flaws.

Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and syntax that conveys the meaning of the text.

 

Many vocabulary, grammar and syntax errors that obscure meaning Extensive flaws in vocabulary, grammar and syntax that prevent the text from being understandable. Unacceptable Insufficient evidence
Formatting of work (font, pagination, labelling) Impeccable formatting entirely consonant with assessment brief expectations Excellent formatting.  Polished and consonant with the assessment brief expectations. Formatting consonant with assessment brief expectations.  No formatting issues. Formatting very largely free from major presentational problems and consonant with assessment brief. Formatting broadly consonant with assessment brief but some breaches of guidance. Acceptable formatting, but some breaches of guidance.  Some unprofessional aspects Formatting not sufficiently consonant with assessment brief. Multiple formatting issues. Formatting not consonant with assessment brief. Very poor with multiple formatting issues No discernible attempt format work. No formatting
Reflection, creative thinking, and questioning Profoundly insightful and creatively original Excellent insight and demonstrating meaningful creativity Clearly articulated insight and creativity Some good insights and evidence of individual creativity Demonstrates some basic insights.  Limited creativity and originality. Largely descriptive with some basic insight.  Limited creativity. Descriptive with very limited inadequate insight Inadequate insight or understanding No persuasive evidence of reflection None
Reflexivity and developmental learning

 

 

 

Outstanding and profound self-awareness and critical reflection on inner world and its implications for development at multiple levels. Profound self-awareness arising from extensive critical reflection on inner world and its implications for development Demonstrates insightful self-awareness and critical reflection on inner world and insightful implications for development Demonstrates clear self-awareness and reflection on inner world and some awareness of implications for development Some self-awareness and fair reflection on inner world.  Limited awareness of potential for development. Basic, but restricted self-awareness. Little reflection on inner world and limited awareness of potential for development Lack of self-awareness or reflection on inner world and scant awareness of potential for development. Minimal self-awareness or ability to express inner world and potential for development. No self-awareness or ability to articulate in a world None
Demonstration of skill or competence (for example: oral presentation skills; team working; problem solving; client communication; application of model, ability to give feedback to peers)

 

Demonstrates exceptional level of competence Demonstrates outstanding level of competence Demonstrates excellent level of competence Demonstrates very good level of competence Demonstrates good level of competence Demonstrates satisfactory level of competence Attempted but largely inadequate Attempted but wholly inadequate Minimal attempt Not attempted