6SUEV002W.2 Social and Green Innovation

ASSESSMENT TWO

INNOVATION ANALYSIS REPORT

SECOND SEMESTER – 2021 / 2022

 

ASSESSMENT WEIGHTING:  50%

WORD COUNT / LENGTH OF PRESENTATION:  20 slides

 

LEARNING OUTCOMES ADDRESSED:

3. Identify, select and use investigative strategies and techniques to critically analyse and evaluate the potential drivers, conditions, barriers and climate that influence social and green innovation
4. Analyse information and data from academic and non-academic sources to assess the impact of social and green innovation and their diffusion in the success of business, society and the environment.

 

 

1.    ASSESSMENT SUMMARY:

Assessment 2 Innovation Analysis Report (equivalent to 2000 words) consists of an individual PowerPoint report with maximum 20 slides applying innovation theories studied in the module to assess the social and green innovative solution developed in the group project. In the PowerPoint report the student should analyse the potential impact and diffusion of the innovation in society, the business model to implement the innovation, and the organisational / regional / global conditions that may influence the innovation. The PowerPoint report assesses the learning outcomes 3 and 4.

2.    DETAILED ASSESSMENT GUIDE AND STRUCTURE:

The PowerPoint report will assess your analysis of the potential implementation of the innovative solution. This will allow you to develop three crucial employability skills: Critical and creative thinker, entrepreneurial, and socially, ethically and environmentally aware.

 

You will be assessed considering the expected learning outcomes, your efforts to collect, analyse and present relevant information, and your capacity to apply the theoretical and practical knowledge discussed in lectures and seminars in the assessment. A special reward is given to students who can exceed expectations, bring more sophisticated arguments to the discussion, show a remarkable capacity to innovate and collect and analyse relevant information.

 

The proposed structure of the PowerPoint report is:

• Introduction and description of the problem and the innovative solution
• Analysis of the potential impact and diffusion of the innovation (considering how to measure it)
• Analysis of the business model of the innovation, considering the financial and operational decisions
• Analysis of the organisational/regional/global conditions that may influence the innovation
• Conclusions

 

Sources:

 

Students are expected to use academic and industry sources, including legitimate online sources. Be careful of checking whether a source is legitimate and whether a piece of information is correct (check twice in at least two sources). Use the academic literature provided in the course to frame your perspective and analysis of the innovation (you can also use other literature; there is no need to restrict yourself to particular literature). Doubts about the use of sources will be clarified during lectures. Avoid wasting time searching obscure sources.

 

Students may also use news material from legitimate sources (such as Financial Times, The Economist, BBC, The Guardian, New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Le Monde, and Spiegel, to cite a few). Avoid sources that you are not sure about. These newspapers have more than enough material.

 

Students can also use material published by companies on their websites, and serious research from top management consultancies (McKinsey, Bain, The Boston Consulting Group, Monitor, Arthur D. Little, Booz Allen & Hamilton, Deloitte, to cite some).

 

As with any case-based work, you may need to make assumptions, which you should state clearly.

 

Formative activities: Students will show a draft of their PowerPoint report describing the main structure and potential references in week 12 and receive feedback from the seminar tutor.

 

 

 

 

 

3.    MARKING CRITERIA:

Criterion	Weighting
Quality of description of the problem and the innovation	15%
Quality of analysis of the potential impact and diffusion of the innovation (considering how to measure it)	25%
Quality of analysis of the business model of the innovation, considering the financial and operational decisions	25%
Quality of analysis of the organisational/regional/global conditions that may influence the innovation	25%
Quality of published document (including format, references)	10%

 

4.    TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES WITH SUBMISSION:

If you have a financial hold situation a hardcopy plus electronic version will be accepted via the WBS Registry Coursework Lobby before the deadline. Please contact the Marylebone Registry to clarify how you should submit assessment in this situation: [email protected]

Please do not email your module leaders or your seminar leaders your coursework unless you have been asked to do so. The Registry does not accept such a submission in most cases.

If you are having technical difficulties on the date of submission and cannot submit the coursework on time you need to log a call via the IT Service Desk that can be found on this webpage: https://www.westminster.ac.uk/current-students  Please make sure that your message is very specific. The Service Desk will then email you confirmation that you will be able to use as supporting written evidence for your MC claim.

Yo

5.    PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION:

Any assessment submitted late online will be penalised unless you submit a claim for Mitigating Circumstances (MC) and the claim is accepted by the Registry. Check this page for more information: https://www.westminster.ac.uk/current-students/guides-and-policies/assessment-guidelines/mitigating-circumstances-claims

If you do not submit an MC claim or if your MC claim is rejected then the penalty for assessments submitted individually online within the 24 hours late period is a reduction of 10% of the overall marks available for the assessment, except for work which is marked in the range 40 – 49%, in which case the mark will be capped at the pass mark (40%). Assessments submitted individually online more than 24 hours late will be given the mark 0%, unless the Mitigating Circumstances claim has been accepted officially by the Registry.

6.    AVOIDING PLAGIARISM:

Your assignment must demonstrate your own work and ideas. You may use graphs and clipart as appropriate.  All written work must be the work of the individual student. Similarities between the work of students will be reported as collusion.

Any quotations and references that you include in your assignment will be identified by the Plagiarism detection programme as being similar to other sources. Therefore it is vital that you reference correctly.

Please check information about Westminster Harvard Referencing style here: https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/referencing

Westminster Harvard Referencing Style booklet can be downloaded here:

https://www.westminster.ac.uk/sites/default/public-files/general-documents/referencing-your-work.pdf

Any evidence of plagiarism will be reported to the Academic Standards team. A similarity content of 0% will be investigated by the Academic Misconduct Panel as it is regarded as being an indicator of an attempt to circumvent the plagiarism software. Since your document should have several different references the plagiarism detection programme should identify them.

Please see more information about plagiarism here: https://www.westminster.ac.uk/current-students/guides-and-policies/academic-matters/academic-misconduct/plagiarism

 

7.    RUBRIC

 

Criteria	0-40%	40-50%	50-60%	60-70%	70% and above
Quality of description of the problem and the innovation (15%)	Inadequate and incomplete description and summary of the problem/challenge and the innovative solution.	Very basic description and summary of the problem/challenge and the innovative solution supported with facts, but with inconsistencies or omissions.	Adequate description and summary of the problem/challenge and the innovative solution supported with facts, but with minor inconsistencies or omissions.	Very good description and summary of the problem/challenge and the innovative solution supported in important facts.	Excellent description and summary of the problem/challenge and the innovative solution supported with the most critical and meaningful facts.
Quality of analysis of the potential impact and diffusion of the innovation (considering how to measure it) (25%)	Weak level of evidence of analysis and critical evaluation of the impact of the innovation, more development and commentary is needed. May need to do more than describe. Application of diffusion theory to the innovation was missing or rudimentary with omissions or errors in its depth, breadth and interpretation.	Basic level of evidence of analysis and critical evaluation of the impact of the innovation, but some ideas/points superficially made and will require further development. Application of diffusion theory to the innovation was basic with omissions or errors in its depth, breadth and interpretation.	Good level of analysis and critical evaluation of the impact of the innovation, but more ideas/points could be addressed and developed further. Application of diffusion theory to the innovation is good but with omissions or errors in its depth, breadth and interpretation.	Very good level of analysis and critical evaluation of the impact of the innovation, few ideas/points could benefit from further development and discussion. Application of diffusion theory to the innovation is good but with minor omissions or errors in its depth, breadth and interpretation.	Excellent level of analysis and critical evaluation of the impact of the innovation with clearly developing and thorough discussion. Application of diffusion theory to the innovation is outstanding in its depth, breadth and interpretation.
Quality of analysis of the business model of the innovation, considering the financial and operational decisions (25%)	Weak level of evidence of description and analysis of the potential business model of the innovation, with no discussion of the financial and operational decisions required. More development and commentary is needed. May need to do more than describe. The breadth, depth and integration of findings/literature into the work is very limited.	Basic level of description and analysis of the potential business model of the innovation, with limited discussion of the financial and operational decisions required. Some ideas/points are superficially made and will require further development. The breadth, depth and integration of findings/literature into the work is limited.	Good level of description and analysis of the potential business model of the innovation, with some discussion of the financial and operational decisions required. More ideas/points could be addressed and developed further. The breadth, depth and integration of findings/literature into the work are good.	Very good level of description and analysis of the potential business model of the innovation, discussing the financial and operational decisions required. Few ideas/points could benefit from further development and discussion. The breadth, depth and integration of findings/literature into the work are very good.	Excellent level of description and analysis of the potential business model of the innovation, critically discussing the financial and operational decisions required. The breadth, depth and integration of findings/literature into the work is outstanding.
Quality of analysis of the organisational/regional/global conditions that may influence the innovation (25%)	Poor integration and practical application of theory/literature related to potential conditions that may influence the innovation. Weak level of evidence of analysis and critical evaluation, more development and commentary are needed.	Very basic integration and practical application of theory/literature related to potential conditions that may influence the innovation. Basic level of evidence of analysis and critical evaluation, some ideas/points superficially made and will require further development.	Good integration and practical application of theory/literature related to potential conditions that may influence the innovation. Good level of analysis and critical evaluation, but more ideas/points could be addressed and developed further.	Very good integration and practical application of theory/literature related to potential conditions that may influence the innovation. Very good level of analysis and critical evaluation, few ideas/points could benefit from further development and discussion.	Excellent integration and practical application of theory/literature related to potential conditions that may influence the innovation. Excellent level of analysis and critical evaluation with clearly developing and thorough discussion.
Quality of published document (including format, references) (10%)	Poor report structure with limited or no use of images, figures and infographics. Writing style is muddled and not always clear. Standard of proof reading needs improving as report has many errors. Referencing mainly inaccurate or absent.	Basic report structure with limited use of images, figures and infographics. Writing style is not always clear. Standard of proof reading needs improving, as report has many errors. Referencing present having many inconsistencies and inaccuracies.	Good presentation and structure of the PowerPoint report with flowing sections and some good use of images, figures and infographics. Writing is mainly clear. Good standard of proof reading but with some errors. Minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing using the university Harvard system.	Very good presentation and structure of the PowerPoint report with flowing sections and good use of images, figures and infographics. Fluent academic writing style. Very good standard of proof reading with very few errors. Referencing relevant and mostly accurate using the university Harvard system.	Excellent presentation and structure of the PowerPoint report with flowing sections and excellent use of images, figures and infographics. Fluent and articulate academic writing style. Excellent standard of proof reading with no or minor errors. Referencing clear, relevant and consistently accurate using the university Harvard system.