[ MODERN BUSINESS IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE MODULE ] – Degree Level
Writer is allowed to choose 1 topic out of the 5 topics below.
Writer will have to compare 3 countries for the chosen topic (either US, Japan, Germany or China) and explore 2 different industries in the paper.
Please let me know which question no. is chosen so that i can upload additional reading materials and notes for the question.
MANDATORY LENGTH OF ASSIGNMENT: 2000 WORDS (+/- 10%)
Please provide AT LEAST 12 academic references. Wikipedia, website and newspapers are not academic references. Books and Journals are. Also ensure that plagiarism check is below 25%.
Please also ensure that there is an introduction and a conclusion in the essay. The conclusion is a summary of the essay, it is a short response to the question posted.
Answer only ONE of the following:
1. Why do major economies generate different approaches to production and operations management, and have these differences significantly influenced competitive advantages between nations? (Productions and Operations Topic)
2. Does Chandler’s model of integrated managerial enterprise explain the organization of large companies in major economies and the long-term competitiveness of nations? (Chandler and Managerial Enterprise Topic)
3. Do contrasts in the long-term financing and ownership of business explain national differences in the governance and management of firms, and fundamentally account for the success of major economies? (Finance and Corporate Governance Topic)
4. To what extent are differences in the institutional and organizational characteristics and in the long-term performance of national business systems the result of ‘early’ or ‘late’ industrialization? (Late Development Thesis)
5. Does Porter’s ‘Diamond’ concept convincingly explain the achievements of major national business systems, or are their weaknesses, theoretically and empirically, in his arguments? (Porter and National Competitive Advantage Topic)
The writer can use the following marking criteria as a guideline for the paper requirements:
• Answering the question.
To interpret the set question; to consider key words or phrases; to decide how all parts of the question are connected; to devise an analysis and/or essay structure that allows you to answer the question fully; and, through analysis and thought, to determine the key issues, debates and subject matter as opposed to the peripheral or irrelevant.
• Knowledge of Cases and Evidence.
It is impossible to gain high marks unless you demonstrate knowledge of countries, institutions, industries, firms, and organizational functions. Evidence enables you to avoid annoying generalizations and sweeping statements. Use your cases and evidence within an analytical structure designed to answer the question rather than just mentioning cases and authors in turn and without clear purpose.
• Knowledge of Theory and Literature.
To demonstrate an understanding of major authors and theories whenever relevant. You should employ theories and concepts as a means of shaping your use of evidence, and theory and evidence should be synergic and not separate.
• Analysis and Structure.
This is the main characteristic that defines a good assignment. You are expected to know the major literature and offer evidential support as a basic part of studying for the course. The point is whether you have thought about the material, and whether you can use it to argue coherently and analytically in response to a set problem. The insights implicit in your analysis should be reflected in the design of your assignment structure, which, in turn, should be apparent to the marker.
It should be no surprise on this course that you have to offer comparisons. It is better to avoid the sequential outline of cases, by which is meant a discussion of (say) the US, Germany, the UK, Japan and China in turn and separately. The approach causes problems in the design of an analytical structure, and it is not directly comparative because you treat each example separately. Place evidence from each nation within the issues set by an analytical structure: that is, if you were to discuss comparative human resources, place choices of evidence from Germany, UK, US, Japan and China into most of the assignment sections dealing with key issues such as training, management education, employment systems, trade unions, etc.