Written Coursework #3: Literature Review

Anonymous
timer Asked: Feb 8th, 2019
account_balance_wallet $120

Question Description

Written Coursework #3: Literature Review

 The objective is to produce a literature review report. It involves developing skills like critical paper reading and writing up the literature review.

 The report must not exceed 6 sides of A4 including references.

Suggested report structure:

1. Title. Short, informative title.

2. Introduction. A short section providing motivation, the overall aim and any specific objectives for the literature review undertaken.

3. Background. You may want to provide here any background information relevant/required for the review in the next section.

4. Main part of the report. This should contain the review itself including analyses/discussion on pros and cons of collected references or approaches, together with the identification of any potential limitations and/or gaps. Links between the major references analyzed should also be established here, together with relevant classification(s). If possible, you may also want to illustrate some of the main discussion points on one or more example(s).

5. Summary and Conclusion. Summarize briefly the work presented in the report, draw the main conclusions and provide future work recommendations based on your findings/opinion.

6. References. Provide the list of references cited in the report. Remember that each reference listed here must be cited at least once somewhere in the report text. (Also, if a reference is cited somewhere in the text, it must appear in this list too.

The assessment will be based on the following:

1. Content: this will be based on the critical review itself, i.e. on the discussion(s)/comments made, including identified pros/cons of analysed pieces of work, potential knowledge gaps identified, links identified, classifications and future work recommendations made.

2. Presentation: This will be based on general presentation and the use of references, figures, tables, equations, etc.

Written Coursework Marking Structure

Since as a marker you cannot be expected to be knowledgeable about all the topics chosen by students submitting paper/literature reviews, you are not expected to assess the review from the standpoint of an expert in those topics; rather it should be assessed against general criteria, as follows:

Written Coursework #3: Literature Review

1. Has the topic been clearly defined and introduced? [10 marks]

2. Have a reasonable number of sources been reviewed (neither too many nor too few), and do they all seem to be appropriate to the topic? (At least eight sources should be reviewed, and probably not more than a dozen — depending on the topic.) [15 marks]

3. Have the sources been critically analysed (as opposed to merely reported), and compared? [25 marks]

4. Is there a good overall summary of the conclusions from the review? [20 marks]

5. Is the document well-structured and well presented, with sectioning, figures, tables, equations as appropriate to the subject matter, and is the standard of writing adequate? (N.B.: Non-native speakers of English should not be penalized heavily for language errors unless these are so numerous as to seriously interfere with the intelligibility of the review.) [20 marks]

6. Is the referencing complete and in a consistent style, with everything cited in the text included in the bibliography, and everything listed in the bibliography cited in the text? [10 marks]

7. Is the review within the stipulated length limit — neither too long nor too short? (It is required to be no more than 6 pages of A4; anything less than 4 pages is too short.) [Drop 5 marks for each page that it exceeds 6 pages, or for each page that it falls short of 4 pages.]

Intro + summary /30

Structure + critical comments /45

Referencing + style + length /25

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Written Coursework #3: Literature Review The objective is to produce a literature review report. It involves developing skills like critical paper reading and writing up the literature review. The report must not exceed 6 sides of A4 including references. Suggested report structure: 1. Title. Short, informative title. 2. Introduction. A short section providing motivation, the overall aim and any specific objectives for the literature review undertaken. 3. Background. You may want to provide here any background information relevant/required for the review in the next section. 4. Main part of the report. This should contain the review itself including analyses/discussion on pros and cons of collected references or approaches, together with the identification of any potential limitations and/or gaps. Links between the major references analyzed should also be established here, together with relevant classification(s). If possible, you may also want to illustrate some of the main discussion points on one or more example(s). 5. Summary and Conclusion. Summarize briefly the work presented in the report, draw the main conclusions and provide future work recommendations based on your findings/opinion. 6. References. Provide the list of references cited in the report. Remember that each reference listed here must be cited at least once somewhere in the report text. (Also, if a reference is cited somewhere in the text, it must appear in this list too. The assessment will be based on the following: 1. Content: this will be based on the critical review itself, i.e. on the discussion(s)/comments made, including identified pros/cons of analysed pieces of work, potential knowledge gaps identified, links identified, classifications and future work recommendations made. 2. Presentation: This will be based on general presentation and the use of references, figures, tables, equations, etc. Written Coursework Marking Structure Since as a marker you cannot be expected to be knowledgeable about all the topics chosen by students submitting paper/literature reviews, you are not expected to assess the review from the standpoint of an expert in those topics; rather it should be assessed against general criteria, as follows: Written Coursework #3: Literature Review 1. Has the topic been clearly defined and introduced? [10 marks] 2. Have a reasonable number of sources been reviewed (neither too many nor too few), and do they all seem to be appropriate to the topic? (At least eight sources should be reviewed, and probably not more than a dozen — depending on the topic.) [15 marks] 3. Have the sources been critically analysed (as opposed to merely reported), and compared? [25 marks] 4. Is there a good overall summary of the conclusions from the review? [20 marks] 5. Is the document well-structured and well presented, with sectioning, figures, tables, equations as appropriate to the subject matter, and is the standard of writing adequate? (N.B.: Non-native speakers of English should not be penalized heavily for language errors unless these are so numerous as to seriously interfere with the intelligibility of the review.) [20 marks] 6. Is the referencing complete and in a consistent style, with everything cited in the text included in the bibliography, and everything listed in the bibliography cited in the text? [10 marks] 7. Is the review within the stipulated length limit — neither too long nor too short? (It is required to be no more than 6 pages of A4; anything less than 4 pages is too short.) [Drop 5 marks for each page that it exceeds 6 pages, or for each page that it falls short of 4 pages.] Intro + summary /30 Structure + critical comments /45 Referencing + style + length /25 ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

Prof_Alfred
School: University of Virginia

See attached. I have addressed all areas you had highlighted

Running head: HOW TO MANAGE INNOVATION IN BUSINESS

Literature Review: How to Manage Innovation in Business?
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

1

HOW TO MANAGE INNOVATION IN BUSINESS

2

Literature Review: How to Manage Innovation in Business
Innovations in business organizations are important as they promote the growth of a
business. In businesses, innovation is linked to the ability to transform ideas, concepts, and
knowledge into new processes, services, or products as a way of benefiting the organization,
customers, and shareholders continuously. Effective management of innovations in businesses
enables organizations to recognize the steps taken in coming up with innovative ideas and
implementing them, promotes open discussions within the business, promote interdisciplinary
work, and helps organization to focus on the needs of the customer. The management of
innovation in organizations faces challenges such as the high costs associated with implementing
the innovation and difficulty in building an innovation culture. Managing innovations in
organizations can be implemented through assessing the current capabilities of employees,
creation beneficial innovative strategies, and coming up with a pragmatic approach for
implementation. Generally, the management of innovation in business can help a business
establish working processes that align with the vision of the company. This literature review will
discuss the management of innovation in businesses.
Background
Innovation management has been influenced by factors such as increased emphasis on
application of innovative strategies in businesses, increased competition in the global market,
organizations’ view of innovation as a contributor of success, and the changing market
characteristics. There has been a growing concern about the need to manage innovation in
organizations. The history of innovation management can be traced back to Joseph Schumpeter
(1930) who outlined the existence of various types of innovation such as innovation in products,
markets, ways of organizing any industry, and production methods. He also addressed the role of

HOW TO MANAGE INNOVATION IN BUSINESS

3

innovation as developing new sources of supply through utilization of raw materials and
implementation of other changes in an organization. Other early contributors to innovation
included Peter Drunker (1954) who viewed innovation as a basic function of an organization,
Mohr (1969) whose definition of innovation entailed an assessment of the degree to which
specific new changes were implemented in a business, and Rogers (1998). Rogers believed that
innovation was characterized by knowledge creation and diffusion of an organization’s current
knowledge (Alves, 2018). In 1994, a survey conducted by the Department of Trade and Industry
(DTI) reported that during the 1980s the productivity in the manufacturing in the industry in the
UK had increased more than in any other sector due to the application of innovation
management. This proved the importance of incorporating innovation management on
organizations (Eltis & Higham, 1995). Specifically, this liter...

flag Report DMCA
Review

Anonymous
Good stuff. Would use again.

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University





1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology




2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University




982 Tutors

Columbia University





1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University





2113 Tutors

Emory University





2279 Tutors

Harvard University





599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology



2319 Tutors

New York University





1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University





1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University





2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University





932 Tutors

Princeton University





1211 Tutors

Stanford University





983 Tutors

University of California





1282 Tutors

Oxford University





123 Tutors

Yale University





2325 Tutors