Recent Question/Assignment

Assessment Information
Subject Code: BUS 604
Subject Name: Business Research Methods
Assessment Title: Assessment 3 – Research Ethics Proposal
Weighting: 40 %
Total Marks: Length: 40
3000 (+- 10%)
Due Date: Submission due Week 12 – Sunday at 11.59 pm
COURSE: Master of Business (Research)
Unit: Business Research Methods
Unit Code: BUS 604
Type of
Assessment: Assessment 3 – Research Ethics Proposal
Unit Learning Outcomes addressed: (a) Demonstrate a critical appreciation of the major steps involved in conducting research.
(b) Demonstrate an extended understanding of various business research designs and methods, and be able to evaluate and explain their strengths and weaknesses in research designs for particular projects.
(c) Demonstrate a critical appreciation of ethical issues in research and an advanced understanding of appropriate procedures and protocols applicable to these issues.
(d) Critically review and evaluate research literature.
(e) Design research for a particular project, explaining the limitations, advantages, and technical and ethical implications of the techniques employed.
(f) Select, justify and design questions suitable for a survey instrument and be able to analyse survey data in relation to a particular research question.
(g) Prepare a formal research proposal investigating an innovative and/or unresolved research question.
Criteria for
Assessment: • Knowledge and Understanding
• Content and exploration of theories and ideas
• Analysis, synthesis and critical engagement
• Technical skills and referencing
Submission Date: Week 12 Sunday at 11:59pm
Total Mark &
Weighting: 40 marks | 40%
Students are advised that any submissions past the due date without an approved extension or approved extenuating circumstances incur a 5% penalty p er calendar day, calculated from the total mark e.g. a task marked out of 40 will incur a 2- mark penalty per calendar day.
Assessment Task Description
Organizational citizenship behaviour is defined as employees' behaviours that are discretionary and -not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes the effective functioning of the organization- (Organ, 1988). That is, an employee's favourable behaviour that is not specified in the person's contract and is not an enforceable requirement of the employee's role. Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB), leadership styles, and perceived justice are essential for organizational success. However, these constructs have not been adequately studied together within the small and medium enterprises’ (SMEs) context. Thus, a research is being conducted to assess the effects of leadership styles and perceived justice on organizational citizenship behaviour of employee of SMEs in Sydney, Australia. This study will use the cross-sectional survey as the research design. The convenience sampling technique will be used to select a sample size of 305. Questionnaire will be used to collect the data. Data will be analysed using multiple regression.
Based on the scenario, develop a research ethics proposal to be submitted to the Excelsia College Ethics committee for approval. You must use the Research Ethics Proposal templates attached, for to this assessment.
You must;
1. identify a relevant title for the project
2. Identify and define the research problem
3. State 2 aims for the research
4. Explain the need for and value of the research.
5. List your research questions or hypotheses.
6. Outline the research design and methodology
7. Indicate whether the research is the first stage of a larger project.
8. Who will be approached or recruited to be research participants? How many participants will be involved in your study?
9. List the selection and, if appropriate to your study, the exclusion criteria for participants.
10. How will you recruit respondents for your research?
11. How will you provide detailed information about the study to potential participants?
12. Describe how you will obtain consent to participate from those volunteering as participants for the research.
13. Detail how will you ensure that participants do not feel under any obligation to assist you with your research as participants.
14. Describe how you will preserve participants' confidentiality as you collect and analyse the data and when you report the results
15. If there are any potential risks (physical, emotional, social or legal) to individual participants' wellbeing (beyond those normally encountered in everyday life) as a result of their involvement in the research, detail the steps that will be taken to address these risks including any support facilities such as counselling, debriefings or referrals.
16. If there are any potential safety implications for yourself as the researcher (beyond those normally encountered in everyday life) please indicate how these will be addressed.
17. If research participants will receive any payment, reimbursement, or other benefits from participation in the research, please detail this and provide a justification for the level of compensation.
18. Describe briefly how the research data will be recorded, for example, audiotape, videotape, or written notes.
19. Describe what you will do with the recorded data once it has been analysed.
20. Specify who apart from yourself (and your supervisors if applicable) will have access to the research data and results, and any conditions to be placed on that access.
21. Detail who will own the data and the results of your research.
22. Create Timelines of the research study
NB: You must use relevant sources to support your arguments where necessary.
Marking rubrics
Criteria HD (High
85%-100% DN (Distinction)
75%-84% CR (Credit) 74%-65% P (Pass) 50%-64% F (Fail)
Knowledge and Command of Demonstrates Demonstrates Understanding Limited/poor
understanding the topic, command of a well- of understanding
5 marks unusual the topic by informed contemporary demonstrated. Any
creativity, showing understanding academic creative input is
perception and creativity, of the topic by debate, with somewhat off the
insight, all perception and showing some point.
suggesting that insight — a creativity and creative input
work should be serious insight — a and insight, with
published in an contribution to serious a tendency
academic the academic contribution to toward
the academic debate. description.
Content and exploration of
theories and ideas
10 marks Outstanding selection that makes a substantial contribution to academic debate. Outstanding selection from a wide relevant and innovative
range of
perspectives Selection from a wide and relevant
range of perspectives and sources Relevant selection from a
range of
perspectives and sources.
Sources are Narrow selection, minimal use of sources, to support the argument.
and sources. that draws mostly
upon integrated into
contemporary the overall
academic debate. argument.
Analysis, Outstanding Sources very Sources well- Mostly clear, Sources are not
synthesis and critical engagement
15 marks
use of source material. Excellent
argument that is of the
highest academic quality. Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question, to a high degree of excellence. well integrated into the overall argument. Clear
well structured argument that is well crafted and cogent. Critical
distance and outstanding analysis of the question. integrated
into the
overall argument. Clear, cogent
and well-
structured argument.
distance and
sound analysis of the question.
cogent and well- structured argument. Demonstrates criticality and generally good analysis. properly integrated into the argument. Absence of clear
and cogent argument.
Incomplete analysis with a tendency to accept the source material at face value.
Technical skills and referencing
Referencing impeccable using appropriate conventions.
No errors in grammar or spelling. Referencing
clear and accurate using appropriate conventions.
Virtually no errors in grammar or spelling. Referencing
clear and
accurate using appropriate
conventions. Good grammar spelling. and Referencing
sufficiently clear and using an appropriate convention. Adequate
grammar and spelling. References limited/inappropriate.
Many errors in
grammar and spelling, making it difficult or impossible to read.