- This topic has 218 replies, 68 voices, and was last updated 5 years ago by
.
- Posts
here is the marker’s common on Overall Technical and Professional Skills:
_______________________________________________________________________You are advised to start your findings with the application of the models as these are intended to guide the subsequent financial analysis and not be an exercise done in isolation to everything else. Read through the CEO and directors’ reports for the period and use these to identify the strategic management decisions they will have taken on the basis of the factors present in their business environments (i.e. observe how these decisions have been influenced by the factors present in the application of the SWOT and PESTLE / Porters 5 Forces). You should then track through and see how such decisions have impacted on financial performance
_______________________________________________________________________all my friends did this separately models after financial analysis , but they did pass this part, and here he just request me to blend them together i am confused …
@Edwin – the overall impression I get is that you may have tried to be too ambitious in places and by trying to cover too many things your analysis was not deep enough in Part 3. Essentially it seems they want you to use the word count more effectively
In answer to your specific points:
1. You should edit Parts 1 and 2 where appropriate e.g. removing any theory on the Balanced Scorecard etc. (I suggest you stick with the tried and trusted SWOT and PESTLE – they are enough)
2. Although the marker told you to remove the actual SWOT on the comparator, you should use the factors and knowledge you have gained from this when discussing the differences in the two companies’ performances as that will bring in some depth to your analysis.
3. It is impossible for me to give a knowledgeable opinion as I haven’t read your RAP, however it seems as well as lack of depth in the evaluation, the referencing was not up to standard. This can be remedied by reading both Appendix 3 of the Information Pack and also ‘the Open Tuition Ultimate Guide to Referencing your RAP’ (a much more readable and practical guide as I have tried to set out clear rules to follow in Part 2) – this is on our homepage http://www.opentuition.com/obu
I would also suggest that you read the posts on ‘Using an AIRLINE for Topic 8’ as I give a lot of tips on that Forum topic thread in relation to conducting an appropriate analysis and evaluation (go to the second page of our topic title list where it is currently or use the Search facility to find it)
@qq419850428 – forget about what your friends did that is irrelevant because this comment (a) was about your work and (b) if it was in ‘Overall Technical and Professional Skills’ (as opposed to any actual assessment criteria number) so has been put in there more as guidance on how to improve your work.
I concur completely with this advice particularly the comments on the business analysis and application of the models: ” these are intended to guide the subsequent financial analysis and not be an exercise done in isolation to everything else”‘ You need to appreciate that in the Real World companies make decisions based on their strengths and opportunities and these are influenced by economic, political, technological factors etc – in other words the SWOT and PESTLE have a massive impact on their strategies, performance and financial results.
It defies logic to just stick a SWOT and PESTLE in at the end as it ignores its importance (it also demonstrates a ‘tick-box’ mentality to your work – obviously if all your friends also did this I suspect you have a dud mentor who doesn’t really appreciate the intricacies of the RAP and report writing!)
The whole purpose of making students do an application of the models is to get them to think about the company in a realistic business environment – which is what your marker is trying to tell you by saying you need to blend the business and financial together. When explaining percentages in the financial analysis relate the explanations more closely to the actual strategies and business environment
@Waqas – if you consult the latest Information Pack you will see the new industry sectors only apply to new and first submissions. For a failed P34 RAP (or from before P34) you are permitted to resubmit on your original company (however if you change company it must be to one of the new industry sectors if doing Topic 8).
OBU has removed the need to use the latest financial statements to update your work provided your original attempt was on the same company and was submitted in one the last 3 periods.
Thanks for your reply! Further, Should I rewrite the whole RAP or just the parts marked fail?
The marker suggests that I use more resources as I have over relied on the annual report. Even though most of the information I provided in the RR was clearly stated in the annual report, like strategic changes. Anyway, could you provide me with your feedback on this:
3. Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
You have analysed appropriate areas of Delta, but the coverage is mainly of a descriptive nature. This fact is underlined by the lack of overall referencing throughout your analysis section with very few references other than a couple relating to Delta annual reports. You need therefore, to gather further research relating to the underlying reasons for the good/bad performance of Delta in comparison to your chosen comparator so that you are analytical and show where you sourced the ideas and insights from. Having clearer project objectives at the outset will also allow you to reach more exact and effective conclusions at the end of your RAP as well.Your number 4 and 6 aren’t really objectives.Shall I change all the objectives here or just the objective numbers 4 and 6?
Overall Technical and Professional Skills Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
To strengthen your analysis you need to link your business and financial analyses so please read through the CEO and directors’ reports for the period. Use these to identify the strategic management decisions they will have taken on the basis of the factors present in their business environments (i.e. observe how these decisions have been influenced by the factors present in the application of the SWOT and PESTLE/ Porter’s 5 Forces). You should then track through and see how such decisions have impacted on financial performance and this will help you explain the reasons that lie behind the changes rather than just offering numerical explanations. As you have chosen an airline you should attempt to introduce some KPIs that are used in the airline sector alongside the conventional ratio analysis e.g. load factors, costs/revenues per available seat per kilometre [Mile] known as ASK or ASM; yield per passenger; aircraft utilisation, as again this would help with a better analysis / evaluation (these KPIs are often in the annual report).I used the above mentioned KPIs for reasoning of the ratio analysis. What else does the marker want me to do with the KPIs?
6. Information gathering and Referencing Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
As I pointed out in 3 above there was a general lack of referencing in your submission. There needs to be evidence of you having done sufficient research around Delta to be able to talk with authority about their performance over the 3-year period you are looking at. This research then needs to be referenced effectively within your work so that it adds weight to your argument and you win the confidence of the reader that you know what you are talking about in an analytical and not descriptive sense. Application of the models is not intended to be an exercise done in isolation from the rest of the analysis.as the point of the business analysis is to inform and guide the evaluation of financial performance. As mentioned previously blending the business and financial analyses together should provide greater insights into what lies behind the financial analysis.I know that I made a huge blunder here by relying on the annual report and this point seems very fair to me. I need to understand how do I blend the business models with the ratio analysis?
Final Question: Should I rewrite the whole RR or just reflect the markers comments in the report? For example, do I need to rewrite the objectives? but that would lead to make changes for the rest of the report.
Thanks for reply , does that mean I should write models and financial analysis together ? Like each paragraph got both bit of these two parts , or I just bring ahead the business models part in front of the financial part ?
Hi qq419850428, covering a little for Trephena as she is away.
You can place the business models ahead of the financial parts. Mixing them together with the financial analysis leads to a loss of structure and also the possibility that you do miss out key business points.Hi Waqas
Allow me to answer in point form
1) yes, over reliance on annual reports is a common reason for failure. The annual reports can give an idea of areas to explore but seek validation of those ideas from a diversified base of sources from analysts, trade associations, newspapers etc
2) Yes. Remove objective 4 and 6 as per the examiner’s comments (unless u strongly disageee with them)
You are also encouraged to examine your remaining objectives and see if you really were aiming to achieve them.3) link your business and financial analysis. Show how the business factors affects the financial results.
4) for the KPIs, it seems that you may not have used it meaningfully (or the examiner may have missed spotting it). Use the KPIs to meaningfully explain and support the key ratios. If need be, create a small subheading to bring emphasis to your usage of them.
5) yes, it looks like there needs to be quite a lot of rewriting of the report. Especially the linking of financial analysis with business.
Eg the fall in oil prices meant that competitors started lowering ticket prices due to lower operating costs. This price competition affected the revenue of Delta as it also had to lower its ticket prices in response.Going by the examiner’s comments, it does look like you should adopt the mindset that all is up for change. Even adding new references from sources would mean extra changes to the parts that may have received a pass.
@LearningLuminarium @trephena thanks you, found that lot of information in these forum are vital and indeedly important, but bad thing is i totally ignored and run out of the road on my first submission, once agian aprreciated your comments
Hi Trephena and Mentors,
Topic No:20- Failed First Attempt
Please find the examiners comments bellow, any advice, whether it be minute would be much appreciated. Also kindly address my queries below too. Many Thanks.
______________________________________________________________________
Examiner Comments:1. Understanding or accountancy/business models: Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
You need to include the limitations of Mendelow’s framework. Also make it clear that you are using the UN Global Compact model; the discussion of the GRI could be removed.2. Application of accountancy/business models:Pass
3.Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusion :Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
Your analysis is very good – you have produced an in-depth and interesting application of CSR at VW to the selected models. There are just two issues that you need to deal with, which are fairly straightforward. Firstly, bench-marking to Toyota. You do not benchmark any CSR beyond 3 ratios and so it is important that you state this on page 2, otherwise the reader is expecting a full comparator analysis across all CSR aspects. Secondly your conclusions should conclude on the research questions set. The research questions need to be revised to achieve this – these should explicitly reflect what you have done in the project: assess CSR practices at VW using Mendelow’s framework and Carroll’s Pyramid, and bench-marked CSR practice at VW against the GRI.
4. Presentation of project findings: Pass
Overall Technical and Professional Skills: Faill
5. Communication: Pass
6. Information gathering and Referencing: Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
You have attempted to reference your work but you need to take more care when doing so. The Harvard system should be used in a systematic basis throughout your report and the citations should be present in the list of references. Likewise the list of references should only contain citations from the report. The Harvard system uses Author family name or Organisation name (date) – this is frequently incorrect in your project. In the list of references you should just include the family name and initials, for example Norton and Hughes (2009) in the report, and then Norton, A. and Hughes, J. (2009). CIMA Official Learning System Enterprise Management. Massachusetts: CIMA Publishing, in the list of references. At times you fail to include the date with the reference in the text. Please also present the list of references alphabetically. It is also important to differentiate sources with the same author and same date – include a,b,c etc. after the date. You also have a tendency to place the reference at the end of the paragraph but this is not always appropriate – think more about the positioning of references to ensure that the statements of fact or opinion of others is acknowledged directly when discussed.
7. Information Technology: Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
You have included a spreadsheet but this has been used as a word document to present the financial statements as well as including a couple of pasted graphs. It is important that you demonstrate your effectiveness in generating data using formula (such as the result of ratios or the sums present in the financial statements) and creating graphs from data that you have inputted.
Skills & Learning Statement
8. Self Reflection: Pass
9. Communication Skills (inc Presentation): FAIL
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
You have made a good start on the presentation slides but these are not very engaging and would benefit from some graphs, charts and/or graphics to break up the pages of text. The first 6 slides should be reduced to 3 as the focus of the presentation should be the findings. There are also some other slide which are not needed, for example 8,9,11. Some of the other slides need to be summarized into more succinct bullet points. For example slide 17 would be more effective if it just contained the heading ‘ethical responsibilities’ plus the bullet points. There is no comparator analysis/benchmarking against the Global Compact evident within the slides but you have included GRI which is not applied in the project.
_______________________________________________________________________
Questions:
1. Since I have passed the ‘Self Reflection’, do i need to do the SLS report again? or leave it as it is , and fix the presentation as the marker suggested?
2. The re-submission statement template that has been provided in the pack, can I simply use that format in a Word file and write my statement, and attach as a separate file while submitting?
3.Any specific suggestions for the Re-submission statement, based on the markers comments on my project?
4. In part 2 of my project, I produced a summary on GRI framework and did the analysis of this framework in pat 3.
Now, the marker suggested ‘Remove the discussion on GRI’, so should i completely delete the GRI part both from Part 2 and 3?5.Further, on this GRI framework point, the marker said in point number 3, last line, “Benchmark CSR Practices of VW against the GRI”
So does the marker want me to keep GRI or remove? I am a bit confused about the suggestion regarding this framework. Please suggest
Many Many Thanks for your help
Warmest RegardsHi,
My first research report unfortunately ‘failed to achieve a pass’ (I love how they word that), and in my feedback it refers to my use of PEST and SWOT analysis. It says ‘these were only briefly alluded to in the main body of your RAP but were shown in more detail in the appendix. The appendix was over your word count hence these could not be used to assess whether you have undertaken a pass standard evaluation and analysis’.
But in the information pack it says that the appendices shouldn’t be included in your word count, so I’m slightly confused as to whether I have misunderstood the use of an appendix or whether the markers comment is contradictory to the information pack?
I’m assuming it’s the former, as the report appears to have been checked by a moderator and I have full faith in the marker, however I was wondering if someone would be able to either clarify this for me or point me in the right direction of where I can get clarification?
I have spoken to my mentor however he is also unsure, although he’s going to find out if he can get more information (he’s a colleague and I’m his first mentee).
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.
@arrembee
The appendices should only contain ancillary material – the full SWOT and PEST should always be in the body of the report for the main company (although if you do one for the competitor it would be permissible for this to be in the appendices). I think there is some ambiguity here – my interpretation is that your report was already up to the word count as you are correct there are no limitations placed on the appendices. So what I think the marker is saying is that they might have made an allowance for your SWOT etc being inadvertently in the appendices and marked it as if in the report however they could not do this as you had more or less already exceeded the 7,500 limit.Markers are instructed to be strict about the word count otherwise it is unfair for students who have complied with it so ways deemed to be made to circumvent. the word count is dealt with as if it formed part of the actual word count (Usually this is over use of tables that could have been in MS Word but posted as images to avoid being picked up by the word count: they will be considered as part of the word count by estimating the number of words they contain and added back).
You are correct – all failed work is moderated and the moderator should have reached the same conclusion as the marker (otherwise things are changed e.g. a fail could become a pass).
I doubt you will be able to get further clarification the system does not seem to be geared up to giving any extra feedback (I suspect otherwise they would be inundated).
Hope that helps
(please note though we have a proper thread dealing with marker feedback ‘OBU marker-speak – what the feedback really meant’ so that is where feedback queries are supposed to be posted and the reason I have closed this thread)
1. You can just leave the SLS statement and focus on improving the Presentation slides however you may need to upload the SLS file when resubmitting
2. The actual format of the resubmission statement is not critical however the content is so as long as you produce some form of resubmission statement that will be find
3. Personally I think you sound as if you had a bit of a nit-picker as a marker 🙁 For actual advice on writing the Resubmission statement please see my article on the homepage
Just go along with what they say for [1]. I am confused myself about the comments regarding GRI – so just be honest and say you are confused about the feedback and state why (you are UNlikely – unless you are really unlucky – to get the same marker next time around – and I know of one marker who actually tells students to use GRI !!!!).
In relation to [3] can you do some benchmarking and ratios about charitable initiatives as that falls within Carroll’s? (there is one marker who is passionate about objective analysis of charitable donations !!!!) e.g. charitable donations as a percentage of net profits for 3 years for both companies and comparisons with the trend (whether they are increasing/decreasing) and going in the same direction as dividends. The aim here would be to show whether the company’s altruism is in line with its distributions to shareholders.
The conclusions should summarise the key findings and relate these back to the initial research objectives
4. As I say, I am confused about this so unless you have word count problems you could just leave it in unless what they meant is that your discussion of GRI was a bit tangential and not really to the point (so maybe edit it?).
5. Can you do a bit of this??? If you can, do it – otherwise say that you have benchmarked against Toyota for consistency (something your marker clearly isn’t!!! haha)
I really feel that “Your analysis is very good” tends to indicate that your report only marginally failed. Ensure that you include a few more ratios and some new material (as they can see from the Turnitin score how much is from your last submission).
By the way I have included a few comments specifically about VW on the T20 forum topic thread so read last the few pages and that might also help give you a few ideas. Good luck! 😀
As evidence of this you must submit a copy of your presentation in your Skills and Learning Statement.
Dear Trephena
One more query, my mentor is saying that i need to change Q1 and 2 from the SLS as well as.
But i thought the reflection on meetings with mentor due to project failure will be highlighted on the resubmission statement itself.
Also I am further consdering, that since my SLS is a pass, any changes i make will have it be evaluated again.So please suggest in this case
Thanks alot
Just remove the final word ‘statement’ from the above feedback and it makes better sense:
“As evidence of this you must submit a copy of your presentation in your Skills and Learning” [section]
You need to submit an appropriate presentation -usually PowerPoint slides – that set out your key findings and conclusions. The written statement and the slides collectively are known as the SLS
Deleted my earlier enquiries, i have found the answer when i read tru the Forum comments
What does the marker mean? Also, do I have to edit my analysis completely?
In your financial analysis and evaluation you consider each ratio for each year relating to Jetblue separately, and then provide a fairly brief
comparison with Delta over the 3 year period. Try more to identify trends in the Jetblue ratios over the period and use your business
analysis to explain the movements. What policies and strategies explain the trend? What political, economic and business environmental
factors have impacted on the performance of Jetblue over the 3 year period? You have 7 pages of references. Make better use of the
material you have gathered to provide a more robust critique of Jetblue performance over the 3 year period. You must provide your
readers with suitable conclusions drawn from and substantiated by your analysis and evaluation.Companies do not make decisions on the first day of the financial year and implement them on the second day! Neither does the impact of any decisions end on the last day of the financial year!
What the marker was trying to tell you was to get real about about how companies operate in the real world and look at the continuous trend in the data rather that breaking it up on a year by year basis.
I always advise students to read the CEO and Directors’ reports starting with the ones that actually precede the first year of study for both companies to get an idea of strategic direction and what the major policies for the future are. These will be closely linked to the PESTLE and SWOT factors so start your analysis with a good application of the models.
Markers look for evidence that students have identified the factors from the business environment (i.e the models) that have influenced performance via the strategic decisions and how successful or otherwise the major decisions and policy changes have been.
So yes I think you do need to edit your analysis thoroughly unless you want to waste the GBP 300 submission fee on something that might fail again unless you do!
Hello @trephena
There are comments from the marker.3. Evaluation of information, analysis and conclusions
You have made a very good start on your RAP submission however there is an over dependence on the financial reports throughout your Financial analysis. This is a very important source however wider reading is required either to confirm your findings or to establish alternate views on the company and the benchmark company. This will enable you to lift your submission to a new level which will allow you to add more critical reflection rather than description. You write clearly, it is more facts which are required.Overall Technical and Professional Skills
MODERATOR: Although you started your analysis with the application of PESTLE analysis you are advised to bring in the application of both models at the beginning of the findings as these models are intended to guide the subsequent financial analysis and not be an exercise done in isolation to everything else. It is therefore worth devoting a lot of effort to producing a good application of the models. To help with this and your financial analysis you really need to find more sources relating to your company from articles in the business and trade press / online business pages to add more depth to your analysis. Try to identify the strategic management decisions the company management may will have taken on the basis of the factors present in the business environment (i.e. observe how decisions have may been influenced by the factors present in the application of the SWOT and PESTLE). Consider for example how the company may have built on its strengths and how this may have led to increased growth (you have touched upon this at the end however it needs to be better integrated into the evaluation of financial performance) You should then track through and see how management decisions have impacted on financial performance as this will strengthen your financial analysis.6. Information gathering and Referencing
You need to 1. carry out deeper research to support the changes required in your Financial analysis . the second improvement is 2. to increase your referencing and sources within your financial analysis. You seem to be referencing appropriately but do not overlook this with your submission and consult Appendix 3 of the Information Pack if you need any help with this. Remember that every time you use a source, make a statement of fact or state the opinion of others you must provide a reference (including stating sources for your graphs, table and charts)
______________
I have some questions:
1. Is it true that the market want me to focus to revise the financial analysis? I perform the RR in the following order: PESTLE – Financial analysis – SWOT. Do I need to revise into the new order: PESTLE – SWOT – Financial analysis?2. I passed the SLS element, however, should I do nothing with the SLS but still submit together with the RR on the next submission?
3. Does I need to modify another areas? As I understand that the marker want to focus on the financial analysis, but if I keep another parts, the Turnitin would state that the remaining areas are the same with my first submission and this is not acceptable? And I must also upload all the appendices again?
4. As I choose food industry and use a milk company to perform the RR, is it important that I must find a milk competitor to benchmark or just a company in food industry?
5. As I submit in Nov 2017, I used 2014, 2015 and 2016 financial statements. I’m not sure that should I update it by using 2017 financial statement or just revise based on those I have used?
5. I’ve read your advises above, could you please give me some more advice that I can improve for the next submission.
Thank you so much.
I passed 8 out of 9 on my first attempt in topic 8 and failed on referencing, which is so annoying!! Overall my referencing was good but not perfect I admit, but it did not deserve a fail. I feel its their way to justify making more money.The feedback I received was as follows:
6. Information gathering and Referencing Fail
Reasons for fail and advice for improvement:
Although you have provided some referencing your referencing skills show many weaknesses and therefore you are recommended to consult Appendix 3 of the Information Pack for guidance. One of the purposes of referencing is that the reader can find the item in the reference list and seek out the source easily. This is not possible with your list as it is firstly not arranged in alphabetical order and secondly because the text and list references do not match (you need to have basically the same format for both). For example you show NHS 2012 in your text but there is no entry NHS (2012) in your list – using an electronic search I did find https://www.nhs.uk/news/food-and-diet/sweet-breakfast-cereals-too-sugary-for-kids/,. This means that you need to go through your list and report and ensure that the references match and using the NHS example above this should be listed as NHS (2012) followed by the title of the article “Sweet Breakfast Cereals too Sugary for Kids’ accompanied by the URL and the date you last accessed the source. You also need to ensure that all references are included as even using an electronic search both your marker and I could not find several of these. Everything referenced in the text must be set out in the required detail in the list.From the feedback I’m assuming my reference list was the only problem? Does that mean I would only have to resubmit the reference list ? Any advise would be much appreciated. Thanks!
Page 79 of the infopack offers you two possible ways to list your references:
1) Alphabetically
2) By the order they appear in your report.I would read the infopack closely. What we advise our students to do is to use the “reference” function found in MS Word. This minimises the risk of poor referencing.
I hope this helps! I don’t think OBU fails students “just to make money”. In any case, referencing is a skill any undergraduate student should get right. I know how annoyed you must be at failing the project for what must appear to be a small mistake. If what is pointed out in the paragraph you have pasted is true, I don’t think you would be able to appeal the marker’s decision.
Hi LL, thank you for your reply. The thing is it was in alphabetical order since I used endnote! Could I challenge or dispute this in anyway if it turns out that it was in alphabetical order?
HI
I chose Topic 20 for my RAP for the period 35, however I just received my results and unfortunately I didn’t pass.
Basically I received F in my communication and IT Skills, the rest is all a pass. My question here is do I have to re write my entire RR or just make the changes in line with the examiners comments?
1. For my communication skills inc presentation, the examiners comments are that its a specific requirement to show conclusions in your presentation. What does he mean by this?
2. For my IT skills it says You need to demonstrate your understanding of spread sheets by using the calculating functions and you have not done so. This one I get it as I used the numbers from the AR and didn’t have any formulas which may have been the issue here.
I am looking to re submit my RAP in May and would like to know if I make the changes where I think examiner wants me to would it be good enough for a pass?
As I have passed all other assessment criteria apart from the 2 mentioned above.
So if i redo me presentation and fix my excel sheet along with the re submission statement would this be enough or do I need to make changes to my previous work as well ie the areas where I have received a pass grade…
Any help would be appreciated
Regards
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.