Entrepreneurship & Innovation in Emerging Economies

Module Code: BSM980
Module Name: Entrepreneurship & Innovation in Emerging Economies
Coursework Title:
2,000-word essay on an allocated case
Task Details/Description:
Each student is required to submit an academic-style essay (no longer than 2,000 words,
excluding a list of references) analysing the following case as:
IDEO: Human-Centered Service Design
In reaction to a rapidly growing middle class in Peru, Cineplanet, the leading movie cinema
chain in the country, hired a team of IDEO designers to reinvent the movie going experience
for Peruvians. Your task is to critically assess IDEO’s design process and its application to
Cineplanet.
Your answer should cover the following points:
1. Outline IDEO’s design process and critically assess its applicability to emerging
economy markets in general.
2. Evaluate the way in which IDEO’s design process is applied to Cineplanet. Discuss
potential difficulties and challenges the particular application may face, and provide
recommendations for overcoming them.
Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:
1. Assess implications of operating in emerging market environment for new business
creation and innovation
2. Evaluate management concepts and tools available to new businesses in emerging
markets
3. Design strategies for new business creation and innovation in emerging markets
COURSEWORK ASSIGNMENT
Assessment Criteria:
1. Analysis and development of argument
Does the essay construct a coherent and convincing argument for holding a
particular view?
2. Use of research
Does the essay draw on models and theories relevant to an issue in question? Does
it show a good understanding of the models and theories?
3. Critical understanding and originality
Does the essay examine the issue in a critical light and provide insights based on
independent thought or creative thinking?
4. Structure and quality of presentation
Does the essay make a clear, logical presentation of train of thought without
grammatical and spelling errors? Does it use an appropriate style of referencing?
Presentation Requirements:
Word Count: no longer than 2,000 words (excluding a list of references)
Font Size: 11 or 12 points
Line Spacing: Single or 1.15
Alignment: Justified
Submission Date & Time:
Thursday 24 March 2022 @ 12:00 pm (noon) (UK time)
Assessment Weighting for the Module:
100% of total mark.
Ethical Requirements
Not applicable
Essential Reading for Coursework Task
(if in addition to reading provided in the module outline):
The following case document is provided:
Buell, R. W. and Otazo, A. (2016) ‘IDEO: human-centered service design’, Harvard
Business School, The Case Centre, Ref. 9-615-022.
Marking Scheme:
Overall assessment aims: <50% Fail 50-59% 60-69% 70%+
1. Analysis and development of
argument
Does the essay construct a
coherent and convincing
argument for holding a
particular view?
Reports views but does not
clearly relate them to the task.
Insufficient or misinterpreted
evidence and views. Discussion
is too factual and descriptive.
Draws on limited sources, if
any, to support arguments.
Issues understood. Provides the
evidence and reports views on
them. In doing so, provides a
fairly coherent response to the
task. Draws on a variety
sources to support arguments,
though they are not always
explored in sufficient detail.
A clear understanding of issues.
Evidence of coherent
arguments. Draws on a wide
variety of evidence in support of
arguments.
An excellent understanding of
issues. Analysed in depth to
support arguments. Coherent
arguments throughout.
2. Use of research
Does the essay draw on models
and theories relevant to an
issue in question?
Does it show a good
understanding of the models
and theories?
Makes only superficial use of
models and theories, or models
and theories used are not
clearly aligned or appropriate to
the objective of the
presentation. Materials
presented are largely irrelevant.
Uses relevant models and
theories, and they are aligned to
the objective of the
presentation. Good grasp of
models and theories involved.
Evidence of reading and
research.
Makes very good use of models
and theories. Very good grasp
of models and theories
involved, with evidence of wide
reading and research.
Models and theories used are
clearly aligned to the
presentation’s objectives.
Excellent grasp of models and
theories involved, with evidence
of wide reading and research.
3. Critical understanding and
originality
Does the essay examine the
issue in a critical light and
provide insights based on
independent thought or creative
thinking?
Arguments are superficial,
narrow, lack depth and are
poorly evidenced. Little
evidence of a personal
interpretation, synthesis, and
evaluation.
Some evidence of a personal
interpretation, synthesis, and
evaluation but lacks depth
overall.
Shows some insight and scope
and stem from critical analysis.
Evidence of a personal
interpretation, synthesis, and
evaluation.
Shows an excellent ability for
critical analysis and evaluation.
Arguments are insightful,
creative, and innovative.
Substantial evidence of
personal interpretation,
synthesis, and evaluation.
Discusses issues rarely
identified by postgraduates and
may, for example, exhibit a
novelty of approach.
4. Structure and quality of
presentation
Does the essay make a clear,
logical presentation of train of
thought without grammatical
and spelling errors?
Does it use an appropriate style
of referencing?
The essay lacks coherence,
focus, and is structurally weak.
The transitions and flow are
confusing and lack logical
progression leading to
confusion.
Repeated errors in referencing.
More than the occasional error
in spelling and/or grammar.
The essay is focused and
coherent and the structure is
sound, though there are some
minor inaccuracies and flaws
evident. The transitions and
flow are clear, logical and hold
the attention of readers.
Referencing generally correct.
Occasional spelling and/or
grammatical errors.
The essay’s structure is of a
high standard, with the content
clearly defined, focused and
organised. Transitions and flow
of the presentation are
designed to hold the attention of
readers.
Referencing largely correct.
Occasional spelling and/or
grammatical errors.
The essay is exemplary with
excellent focus, structure, and
organisation. No irrelevant
material. The transitions and
flow are flawless and do an
excellent job to engage readers
throughout.
Referencing correct. No (or only
minor) errors in spelling and/or
grammar.