E-commerce report

 

ASSESSMENT: <Individual Report>

 

Module Code: BHO0171
Module Title:  E-commerce
Assessment Type Individual Report
Academic Year 2020/21 Term 1

 

Assessment Task  
 

For this assignment you need to develop a brief proposal for an E-commerce startup business. Accordingly, the aim of your proposal is to attract the attention of potential angel investors. 

 

Task specific guidance: 

 

In this work you must use the following sections:

 

1.             Executive summary 

This is a brief summary of your business plan. The executive summary can help your potential angel investors to learn about your idea without having to read the full proposal. This section should be developed once you have completed sections 2 to 7 of your proposal. The words in this section will not be counted into the total word limit and should be between 150 – 250 words.

 

2.             Table of contents

You should create a table of contents via MS Word’s Automatic Table of Contents function, which can be found at the top left corner after you clicked References button at the top centre of MS Word. To use this function, you need to set the styles of your section titles and contents when writing. You can find available styles: Normal, Heading 1, Heading 2, etc. at the top right of MS Word window.

 

3.             Description of the business (approximately 200 words)

In this section you are expected to provide motivation and rationale for selecting a particular business domain. The aim of your proposal is to attract the attention of potential angel investors, who will be interested in the specific domain of business and your rationale for selecting it. You need to select one of the following business domains:

•       book publishing and retailing,

•       music publishing and retailing,

•       tourism and travel,

•       clothing retailing,

•       or any other idea for business you may have.

 

 

4.             Describe your E-commerce business model (B2C or B2B), as well as the payment system and security measures you are planning to develop (approximately 800 words)

 

In this section you need to provide details and justification for your specific B2C or specific B2B model. You will also need to provide details regarding the payment system and security measures you are planning to develop.

 

This section is covered in teaching weeks 7 and 11.

Teaching week 7: E-commerce business strategy (business models); Chapter 5. Teaching week 11: Payment systems and E-commerce security (Chapter 4).

 

5.             Marketing strategy (approximately 300 words) in this section you need to consider and motivate the type of marketing strategy for your business.

 

This section is covered in teaching week 8.

Teaching week 8: E-commerce, marketing, advertising (Chapter 6; Section 6.2).

 

6.             Conclusion (approximately 200 words)

Summarise the attractive points in your proposal (innovation).

 

7.             Develop your website (WordPress) and provide the Link to the website Construct a functioning e-commerce website for your business, using a development tool such as WordPress. Copy the URL address of your website and paste it in this section.

 

This section is covered in teaching week 10.

Teaching week 10: E-commerce Infrastructure and Developing your website – WordPress (Chapter 2, Section 2.4; Chapter 3, Sections 3.5 and 3.6).

 

8.             References (there is no word limit for this section).

 

Required Reading:

 

Laudon, K. C., & Traver, C. G. (2021). E-commerce 2020-2021: Business, Technology, Society (Global Edition). Pearson Education Limited.

 

 

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.

Learning Outcomes  
 

This section is for information only. 

 

The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these are the things you need to show in this piece of work.

 

On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate:

 

Learning Outcomes: 

 

 

5. Understand, analyse and implement current business modelling techniques within an online context.

 

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

 

 

6.             Demonstrate efficient implementation and effective improvement mechanisms that allow online business growth through the use of ecommerce and associated technologies.

7.             Explore current technological innovation and advise on its implementation within an e-commerce environment

8.             Practice implementing e-commerce solutions through the use of web-based software technology.

 

Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions.

 

Submission information
Word Limit: 1500
Submission Date:  18/12/2020
Feedback Date: 27/01/2020
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
  Knowledge and understanding (F, I and H)

Knowledge requirements are different at F, I and H level.  Please use the relevant level knowledge assessment criteria

 
Knowledge of the key concepts and principles required in the

assessmen

t task  (F)

Work demonstrates

originality/creati vity or an inspired individual perspective on information, theories and concepts, and a considered individual voice.

Effective and extensive use of relevant wider information, theories and concepts and sophisticated integration of ideas Extended breadth of information, theories and concepts evident and integration of ideas.

 

No misunderstan dings / gaps.

 

Appropriate information,

theories, concepts and in appropriate depth using module. Some

integration ideas.

 

No major errors

or

Most relevant information,

theories, concepts and appropriately.

 

Lacks depth of integrating ideas.

 

Few inaccuracies.

 

Adequate account of basic information, theories and concepts relevant to the assessment.  Some significant gaps.

 

Limitations in understanding

Mentions some terminology relating to theories, concepts.

 

Some poor or mistaken of knowledge of concepts and principles relevant to the

Very poor of knowledge of concepts and principles

relevant to the

assessment brief. Major misunderstandi ngs or omissions.

Negligible of knowledge of concepts and principles

relevant to the

assessment

brief

None demonstrated in the submission.

 

  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
        misunderstandi ngs.   and/or inaccuracies assessment brief.

 

Extensive gaps.

     
Detailed knowledge and critical understand ing of

relevant

knowledge

in the subject (I)

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.

 

 

Comprehensi vely draws on an extended knowledge to show welldeveloped critical insights and good knowledge integration.

 

No major errors or misunderstan dings or gaps.

 

 

 

 

Accurately demonstrates extended knowledge

showing good

critical insights and some knowledge integration.

 

No major errors or

misunderstandi ngs 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 wellestablished area(s) of knowledge with a many of

errors, misunderstandi ngs, and omissions

Very poor knowledge or

critical

understanding of relevant wellestablished theories / principles.  Major misunderstandi ngs or omissions.

Negligible coverage of knowledge or

critical

understanding of wellestablished / major theories

/ principles

Wholly irrelevant.
Conceptual and critical understand ing of

contempor ary

knowledge in the

subject and its

limitations

(H)

Skilfully integrates conceptual knowledge from  other modules or disciplinary areas to provide original/ creative critical insights into the subject and its ambiguities in a considered individual voice Excellent conceptual knowledge and critical appreciation of the key tensions, controversies disagreement s and disputes drawing on ideas from beyond the module bounds. Offers original, Draws on an extended conceptual knowledge

 

Shows very

strong ability to apply/ critique ideas and a welldeveloped consideration of the limitations of knowledge.

 

Performance

at this level

Demonstrates competent conceptual knowledge drawing on a broader knowledge base. A good attempt at integrating and critiquing. Some solid insights into the limitations of knowledge.

 

No major errors

or

Demonstrates secure conceptual knowledge,

conventional critical

understanding of relevant knowledge.  Some awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

 

Lacks depth of integrating ideas.

 

Demonstrates adequate basic conceptual knowledge,

some formulaic critical

understanding

and awareness

of limitations of knowledge.

 

No integration of ideas.

 

Some errors and/or gaps in coverage and relevance

Mentions some terminology relating to theories,

concepts

 

Demonstrates insufficient grasp of a basic knowledge.  Very limited critical

understanding

and awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

 

Demonstrates

little core

knowledge.  No critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

 

Major misunderstandi ngs and

significant omissions.

Demonstrates

virtually no core knowledge or critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

 

 

Many errors in understanding and extensive omissions.

Wholly irrelevant.

 

  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
    compelling, insightful or interesting additional perspectives. and above shows

intellectual comfort with doubt, ambiguity, controversy, uncertainly and complexity rather than seeking certainty and a single right answer.

misunderstandi ng.  

Few

inaccuracies.

 

 

  Many errors in understanding and omissions.      
 

 

Cognitive / Intellectual skills

A range of means of framing cognitive and intellectual skills are provided to reflect the variety of assessment tasks across the School.  Module leaders should consider the following criteria and select the one(s) that best reflect the assessment tasks. Assessment task briefs should be designed with sufficient information to provide students with a clear understanding of the core intellectual skills expected within the bounds of the module– corresponding with the appropriate level of study

 

Module leaders should be clear about the nature of information / data to be analysed, as well as the ‘tools’ of analysis expected.  Analytical tools can be based on logic (comparison, connection, categorisation, evaluation, justification) and/or numerical (e.g. statistics, financial) or other.

 

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/conclu sions 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

misunderstandi ng.

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/conclusio ns 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 misunderstandi

ngs or omissions

Negligible analysis of information /

data Many errors in understanding and omissions.

 No relevant analysis of information / data

 

  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
       

 

             
Application of

knowledge /

skills to practice / a solution(s) / proposal / conclusion

Creative & original

application of

knowledge

/skills to

produce new insights and offers a novel and comprehensive

solution / proposal / conclusion which extends beyond the boundary of the brief.

Applies knowledge /

skills to

develop a

comprehensi

ve solution / proposal / conclusion which extends beyond the original boundary of the brief.

 

Extended insights.

Applies knowledge /

skill in a sophisticated manner to develop a well conceptualise d and solution / proposal / conclusion.

 

Alternative approaches might be considered.

 

Thoughtful and

developed insights/ creativity.

Applies knowledge/skill

in a logical and developed manner to provide a considered solution / proposal / conclusion.

 

Some good insights /creativity

 

No logical errors.

Applies knowledge/ski

ll in a logical manner to provide a more developed solution / proposal / conclusion.

 

Some but limited insights/creati vity.

 

Few logical errors

Applies knowledge/skills in a basic manner to develop a simple but limited

solution/ proposal/conclus ion.

No insights / creativity Logical errors evident.

Use of some knowledge to provide a solution / proposal / conclusion, but limited solution/ proposal / conclusion Some use of knowledge, but mostly insufficient. Weak use of knowledge / skills evident.  Very limited solution / proposal / conclusion. No evidence of attempt to analyse or interpret information or provide a

solution/propo sal/ conclusion.

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 Comprehensi ve use of high-quality evidence and sources beyond the normal bounds of the module and shows Task is very well supported by very extensive use of evidence / sources.

 

All points fully substantiated.

Task is well supported by more developed use

of

sources/eviden

ce

 

Most points are substantiated

Task is supported by several sources /evidence.

 

Some points are unsubstantiat ed.

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

 

Significant number of points

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

 

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

 

  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
  of independent reading and research.

 

Referencing fully competent and accurate

evidence of independent reading and research.

 

Referencing

fully

competent and accurate

 

No unsubstantiat ed points.

 

Referencing

fully

competent and accurate

and no major unsubstantiate

d points

 

Referencing largely competent and accurate. 

Some minor

errors in citations or references.

 

Referenced

appropriately

 

Referencing largely competent and accurate but may include errors

are unsubstantiated.  Some effort to reference, but frequent errors and omissions Very few points are substantiated using evidence / sources.

 

Significant errors and omissions in referencing

     
Structure and, style in supporting the

developmen

t 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 demonstratin Clearly articulated insight and creativity Some good

insights and evidence of

Demonstrates some basic insights.  Limited Largely descriptive with some basic Descriptive with very limited

inadequate insight

Inadequate insight or understanding No persuasive evidence of reflection None
  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
    g meaningful creativity   individual creativity creativity and originality. insight.  Limited creativity.        
Reflexivity and

developmen

tal 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 selfawareness

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 selfawareness and fair reflection on inner world.  Limited awareness of potential for development. Basic, but restricted selfawareness. Little reflection on inner world and limited awareness of potential for

development

Lack of selfawareness or reflection on inner world and scant awareness of potential for development. Minimal selfawareness or ability to express inner world and potential for development. No selfawareness or ability to articulate in a world None