BRH606: Business Research for Hoteliers

Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page 1 of 6

ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Name	BRH606: Business Research for Hoteliers
Assessment	Assessment 2: Research Proposal
Individual/Group	Individual
Length	3,000 words
Learning Outcomes	This assessment addresses the following subject learning outcomes: a. Analyse the various approaches to business and social research and the difference between primary and secondary research b. Critically review extant knowledge in a disciplinary area for the identification of researchable problems c. Understand and justify the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis d. Investigate a range of data collection methods and tools e. Conceptually map the research process, developing a defensible framework for proposed research f. Evaluate the ways management research may be written and disseminated
Submission	By 11:59 pm Friday of Week 10 (29th November 2019)
Weighting	80%
Total Marks	100 marks

Context:
This assessment aims to equip students with the ability to understand, formulate and execute
a relevant research project in response to a business-related problem. This research project
has already been established, planned and defended in Assessment 1, with subsequent
feedback provided.
For this assessment, students are to produce a 3,000-word research proposal that
discusses the research context, investigates the research problem, and recommends a
suitable research methodology to undertake the research.
A Research Proposal can be defined as:
“A plan that offers recommendations for conducting research …details the who, the what,
the where, the when and the how of research and the information associated with it”.
Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page 2 of 6
Instructions:
SECTION 1: RESEARCH CONTEXT
The research context outlines the background of the study and the research problem
established in Assessment 1 (Note: best to approach this section is as though the reader
is unaware of the preceding presentation).
SECTION 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Using theresearch problem established in Assessment 1, students areto conduct a thorough
secondaryresearch and produce a literature review. The purpose of this literature review is
to place the research problem in the context of what is already known and aid in better
understanding the issue at hand. This will also help identify any gap in knowledge (that is,
“What Information we still need to get?”) which will inform the research objectives and
proposed primary research.
It is expected that at least 12 credible sources will be investigated, covering both academic
(minimum 8 academic references) and industry-based references. This will reflect depth,
breadth and credibility of the literature review. Correct and complete citations should be
provided according to the APA 6th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Sharepoint.
Students should avoid copying large amounts of secondary data and information. Rather,
students are encouraged to paraphrase and model the concepts to address the specified
research objectives.
In this section, students must demonstrate familiarity with the existing body of knowledge
and methods used in the relevant area of research. Additionally, students are required to
synthesise and critique the literature which have been reviewed.
SECTION 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR A PRIMARY RESEARCH PROJECT
In this section, students are required to address the following key points:

	The (revised) research objectives linked to the ‘knowledge gap’ identified in the previous section

 The research approach to be applied – Determining whether the proposed study will be
designed as an exploratory, descriptive or causal research. This section should also
provide reasons as to why the recommended approach suits the problem/information
requirements and how using the recommended approach will yield superior
information/results
 Details of the research design and methodology to be applied
Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page 3 of 6
 The proposed data collection method – For example: focus groups, interviews, surveys,
experiments or observation. Include a justification as to why this technique would be the
most appropriate.
 The population of the study is to be defined, including a discussion on the overall
population size.
 The proposed sampling method including where (the sampling frame) and how the
sample will be obtained (sampling technique), estimates of sample size, etc. Include a
justification as to why this technique would be appropriate and aligned with the overall
research approach.
 Implementation plan – Details on how the research design will be administered.
 Suggested questions/topic areas to be investigated – For example, if the proposed data
collection method is a structured interview, then sample questions to be asked should be
provided. These questions should relate directly to the objectives of your research.
Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page 4 of 6
Submission Instructions:
1. Typed and formatted according to the Assessment Structure Style Guide published
on Sharepoint
2. To be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word format to Turnitin
(www.turnitin.com) by Monday, 29th November 2019, no later than 11.59pm
3. Minimum of 12 credible sources including academic journal articles, text books and
supporting industry/professional references are required. Lecture notes are
unacceptable as a form of research.
4. All referencing (in-text referencing and reference list) must be in accordance with
the APA 6th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Sharepoint.
5. A Torrens University Australia Individual Assignment Cover Sheet is to be attached
to your submission.
6. See marking rubric attached at the end of this document. You do not need to attach
this rubric to your submissions.
Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page5of6

Assessment Criteria	Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49%	Pass (Functional) 50-64%	Credit (Proficient) 65-74%	Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84%	High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%
Concepts	Lack of or Inaccurate	Selection of	Clearly articulates	Insightful critical analysis	Assignment
Uses and explains	or inappropriate	concepts/theory is	key concepts and	and appropriate selection	demonstrates integration
concepts and theories	choice of	appropriate, but some	theories and the	of concepts/theories in	and innovation in the
that are relevant to the	concepts/theory.	aspects have been	relationship to the	key areas.	selection and handling of
research topic. (25%)	missed or	investigation. The	concepts/theory.
misconstrued.	theories work in an
appropriate
straightforward
manner.
Analysis	Fails to	Can analyse a limited	Can analyse with	Can analyse a range of	Can analyse new and/or
Methodology.	analyse	range of information	guidance using	information with	abstract data and
Demonstration of	information.	(i.e., using	given classification	minimum guidance, can	situations without
critical analysis. (20%)	classification	principles.	apply major theories and	guidance using a wide
principles).	compare alternative	range of techniques
methods/techniques	appropriate to the topic.
for obtaining data.
Conclusions Demonstrate ability to	Unsubstantiated/invali d conclusions based on anecdote and generalisation only, or no conclusions at all.	Limited evidence of findings and	Comprehensive evidence of findings	Good development shown in summary of	Analytical and clear conclusions well
develop informed opinions	conclusions supported	and conclusions	arguments based in	grounded in theory
based on literature and	by theory/literature.	with clear	theory/literature.	and literature showing
apply these to the	relationship to	development of new
development of a	theory/literature.	concepts.
research project.
(20%)

Subject Code BRH606 Assessment Brief 1_Defence of Research Project Page6of6

Assessment Criteria	Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49%	Pass (Functional) 50-64%	Credit (Proficient) 65-74%	Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84%	High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%
Style Quality of written expression (clear, logical, comprehensive) and referencing. (15%)	Errors in grammar, word choice, spelling or written expression AND/OR errors in referencing style.	Consistent errors in grammar, word choice, spelling or written expression OR errors in referencing style.	Very few errors in grammar, word choice, spelling or written expression AND no errors in referencing style.	Clear, concise academic written presentation with no grammatical errors, appropriate word choice and correct	No errors in grammar, word choice, spelling or written expression AND no errors in referencing style.
spelling. Few minor
errors in referencing
Evidence Use of literature/evidence of reading. (20%)	Little evidence of literature being consulted or irrelevant to the assignment. Less than required 12 industry/academic references used.	Literature is presented uncritically, in a purely descriptive way and indicates limitations of understanding. Between 12-13 industry/academic references used.	Clear evidence and application of readings relevant to the subject; uses indicative texts identified. Between 14-15 industry/academic references used.	Able to critically appraise the literature and theory gained from a variety of sources, developing own ideas in the process. Between 16-17 industry/academic references used.	Has developed and justified using own ideas based on a wide range of sources which have been thoroughly analysed, applied and discussed. More than 18 industry/academic references used.