Assignment 2 Specifications Purpose:This unit aims to give you an opportunity to combine many facets...

Question

Assignment 2 Specifications	Purpose:This unit aims to give you an opportunity to combine many facets of your acquired MBA skills into the production of a high-quality research project.Assignment 2 - the Literature Review - is designed to ensure that each team member masters the skills of searching, locating, reading, summarising, and using relevant academic literature and secondary data to create a compelling discussion and/or argument, thereby creating the context for their further research in pursuit of the answer to their research question(s).Your tutor will LEAD and FACILITATE you through the process, week by week. The learning will be progressive, so for best results you will need to be listening to the weekly recorded lectures as well as participating in the interactive tutorials and discussion board.	Assignment Structure should be the following:		1.	An opening statement of the Research Problem and research Question(s) – these should now be more detailed than what you had in your Topic Approval.	2.	Discussion of major theories, models or streams of influence around this topic. This provides your lecturer with evidence that you have gone deeper than your initial search now to find literature that leads you toward answering your research question	3.	Draw the reader’s attention to any contrasting views expressed in prior research in this area and give your view of how differing opinions can be brought together to help answer the research question and ultimately resolve the research problem. [the more comprehensive your literature review, the better. Whatever you do NOT find out in this literature review will leave you with more work to do when you move to the next part of the project, i.e. methodology]	4.	Report how it has brought you closer to an answer to your research question(s).	5.	Ensure all in text citations are correctly referenced.	6.	Add a comprehensive List of References, in Harvard referencing style.	[Students please be warned that errors in referencing attract suspicion of plagiarism/academic misconduct and may require detailed investigation, prompting a request for further information from you regarding your sources. It is always essential that academic integrity is upheld and any breach thereof may lead to a mark of ZERO		and		a report of academic misconduct. Don’t take a chance!]	7.	Append a statement indicating ‘who wrote which sections of this report’						HI6008 Assignment 2 – Literature Review - Marking Rubric																																						Excellent													4-5 marks																			Very   Good													3-4   marks															Good													2-3   marks															Satisfactory													1-2   marks															Unsatisfactory													0-1   mark														Identification of appropriate Body of   Knowledge				[Max 5 marks]										Cited   sources are all current and relevant										Cited   sources are mostly current and relevant										Cited   sources are somewhat current and relevant										Cited   sources are marginally current and relevant										Irrelevant   or poorly-selected sources														Depth of literature search								[Max 5 marks]																		The   sources provide an excellent depth of contextual understanding										The   sources provide a very good depth of contextual understanding										The   sources provide a good depth of   contextual understanding										The   sources provide a satisfactory depth of contextual understanding										Insufficient   depth														Quality of Literature Sourced								[Max 5 marks]																		At   least 12 additional sources of excellent quality										At   least 12 additional sources of very high quality										At   least 10 additional sources of high quality										At   least 8 additional sources of satisfactory quality										Low   quality literature, lack of academic sources, or less than 8 relevant sources														Structure of the Literature Review								[max 5 marks]																		The   literature review is extremely well-structured, with sub-sections and logical   paragraphing										The   literature review is very well-structured, with sub-sections and logical   paragraphing										The   literature review is well-structured, with sub-sections and logical   paragraphing										The   literature review is sufficiently structured, with sub-sections and logical   paragraphing										No   or little logical structure														Design, content and flow of discussions or   arguments								[Max 4 marks]																		The   literature review is exceptionally well-designed, with interesting and   well-formulated discussion or argument that makes for compelling reading										The   literature review is very well-designed, with interesting and well-formulated   discussion or argument that makes for very good reading										The   literature review is well-designed, with interesting discussion or argument   that makes for good reading										The   literature review is sufficiently well-designed, with discussion or argument   at least worthy of reading										Difficult   to make sense of what is written; significant grammatical or spelling   mistakes. Not of a sufficiently high standard for an MBA Capstone Project.														Referencing (in-text and reference list)								[Max 4 marks]										Excellent   in all respects, both in-text and the reference list										Very   good in all respects, both in-text and the reference list										Good   in-text and the reference list										Satisfactory   in both in-text and the reference list															Unsatisfactory referencing																		Appendix (who wrote what)				[Max 2 marks]														Appended																												Not appended																		Total (30)																								/30

Parul · Accepted Answer

Impact of Facebook on performance of business
Impact of Facebook on performance of business
Research Assignment
Contents
Abstract	2
Introduction	2
Literature Review	5
Research Dimension and Examination Question:	9
Research Methodology:	9
Collection of Data:	9
Conclusion	11
References	13
Abstract
The motivation behind this exploration and research is to look at the effect of Facebook and YouTube utilization on scholastic execution of business understudies learning at ACBSP licensed personal business colleges of Bangladesh. Organized poll containing fifteen inquiries has been utilized to gather reaction from the respondents. The respondents are undergrad level understudies and their age extend is between nineteen to 24 years. The overview was led at ACBSP certify personal business colleges in Bangladesh and number of respondents was 460. Relapse model was utilized for information investigation. There are two ACBSP certify personal business college in Bangladesh. Our investigation zeroed in on understudies from both business schools. We found that Facebook and YouTube have practically comparable effect on scholarly execution of the understudies from both school which is 14.7% for the understudies from North South University and 17.2% for the understudies from Independent University, Bangladesh. Respondents from the two colleges accept that YouTube is more useful than Facebook for study reason. This paper assists with understanding view of understudies contemplating business disciplines at ACBSP certify personal business colleges in Bangladesh about effect of Facebook and YouTube use on their scholarly presentation.
Introduction 
Admittance to web and media transmission is turning out to be simple step by step. As indicated by the examination led by Internet World Stats, position of Bangladesh is positioned ten among the best twenty nations with the most noteworthy number of web clients. This report shows that as of June 2017, web infiltration rate is 44.5% in Bangladesh. Client of web-based media is expanding step by step in Bangladesh. Facebook is the most mainstream online media in Bangladesh and second most well-known web-based media is YouTube. As indicated by Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC), half of portable web data transmission and 17% of ISP web transfer speed are utilized for Facebook. Another exploration directed by Global Digital Stat shot shows that the capital city of Bangladesh, Dhaka has second most elevated dynamic Facebook clients on the planet which is 22 million. Late report of Stat counter shows that as of January 2018, Bangladesh have 93.07 million Facebook clients though number of YouTube clients is 4.93 million.
Facebook is the most greatest and renowned informal organization on the planet. Along these lines, it is a decent spot that give the opportunity to the organization to comprehend and examine the cross-culture of buyer purchasing conduct through the cross-public impact from Facebook. For instance, the organization can investigate elective clarifications in the online buy expectations model of the clients through the Facebook. Then again, it additionally enables the advertiser to think about the buyer's comparability or diverse between the nation on their purchasing conduct. Along these lines, the advertiser can change or utilize the more reasonable promoting systems to draw in the diverse country of client. 
There are some examination utilizing global examples propose that there are customer contrasts in shopping mentalities toward web stores between moderately collectivist and nonconformist societies. For instance, the advertiser or organization can investigate the distinctive social components of Korea and UK through informal community like Facebook. Korean online shoppers use, look for, and rely upon, administration data quality more than their Western partners in the UK. Anyway Westerns had less coordinated hunt and relied more upon their inward information and individual involvement in items or sevices. It show that the diverse of repurchasing among Korean and UK purchasers
A large portion of the understudies in private colleges approach the web. Understudies access web for both training just as diversion reason. As indicated by BTRC, a large portion of the Facebook clients in Bangladesh are matured between 13-25 years. The level of youth Facebook clients in Bangladesh is 73%, while another 27% clients are inside 26+ years matured. This measurement shows that the guardians don't have away from about the use of Facebook just as other use of web. Because of absence of information about the utilization of web-based media, the guardians get terrified and have negative thought regarding effect of online media in training. Question hole of open assessment as of late in Bangladesh has exacerbate the picture of web-based media. Presently, individuals in Bangladesh think web-based media is harming the training arrangement of Bangladesh. There is positive use of online media on training moreover. There has been some exploration in Bangladesh on use example of web-based media of understudies in state funded college. Be that as it may, there are just not many examinations done via online media utilization design by understudies of private colleges in Bangladesh. There are just two ACBSP certify personal business college in Bangladesh and their example of showing a genuine so extraordinary. The ACBSP accreditation guarantees standard and nature of instruction of business colleges.

Assignment 2 Specifications Purpose: This unit aims to give you an opportunity to combine many facets of your acquired MBA skills into the production of a high-quality research project. Assignment 2 -...

Answer To: Assignment 2 Specifications Purpose: This unit aims to give you an opportunity to combine many...

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment

	Excellent 4-5 marks	Very Good 3-4 marks	Good 2-3 marks	Satisfactory 1-2 marks	Unsatisfactory 0-1 mark
Identification of appropriate Body of Knowledge [Max 5 marks]	Cited sources are all current and relevant	Cited sources are mostly current and relevant	Cited sources are somewhat current and relevant	Cited sources are marginally current and relevant	Irrelevant or poorly-selected sources
Depth of literature search [Max 5 marks]	The sources provide an excellent depth of contextual understanding	The sources provide a very good depth of contextual understanding	The sources provide a good depth of contextual understanding	The sources provide a satisfactory depth of contextual understanding	Insufficient depth
Quality of Literature Sourced [Max 5 marks]	At least 12 additional sources of excellent quality	At least 12 additional sources of very high quality	At least 10 additional sources of high quality	At least 8 additional sources of satisfactory quality	Low quality literature, lack of academic sources, or less than 8 relevant sources
Structure of the Literature Review [max 5 marks]	The literature review is extremely well-structured, with sub-sections and logical paragraphing	The literature review is very well-structured, with sub-sections and logical paragraphing	The literature review is well-structured, with sub-sections and logical paragraphing	The literature review is sufficiently structured, with sub-sections and logical paragraphing	No or little logical structure
Design, content and flow of discussions or arguments [Max 4 marks]	The literature review is exceptionally well-designed, with interesting and well-formulated discussion or argument that makes for compelling reading	The literature review is very well-designed, with interesting and well-formulated discussion or argument that makes for very good reading	The literature review is well-designed, with interesting discussion or argument that makes for good reading	The literature review is sufficiently well-designed, with discussion or argument at least worthy of reading	Difficult to make sense of what is written; significant grammatical or spelling mistakes. Not of a sufficiently high standard for an MBA Capstone Project.
Referencing (in-text and reference list) [Max 4 marks]	Excellent in all respects, both in-text and the reference list	Very good in all respects, both in-text and the reference list	Good in-text and the reference list	Satisfactory in both in-text and the reference list	Unsatisfactory referencing
Appendix (who wrote what) [Max 2 marks]	Appended				Not appended
Total (30)					/30