Trusted by 2+ million users, 1000+ happy students everyday
Harvard references at least 35-40 with in text-citation 1st December Table content 2500words does not include references All figures, charts and tables must be in the appendices at the back of the report. The body of the report must not exceed 2500 words and the appendices must not exceed 10 A4 sides. Any work that exceeds the word or appendices limit will not be marked. You must consider the sustainability of HSBC and analyse the process of developing andimplementing a strategy for sustainability. Your report must include the following 3 sections: 1. Using a range of appropriate strategic models undertake an external and internal analysis of HSBC bank in terms of its strategy and sustainability identifying any performance gaps 2. Identify how HSBC bank should develop a strategy for sustainability and analyse the challenges in doing so 3. Identify how HSBC bank should implement a strategy for sustainability and analyse the challenges in doing so Report Marking Criteria These notes provide you with a guide to what constitutes a First, and Upper Second, etc. First (70% +) This is an outstanding piece of work. A full critical analysis is provided, and evidence of extensive research is displayed. Full command of the subject area is demonstrated, and the answer may well contain fresh insights into the area. It correctly applies relevant theoretical concepts, and evaluates the topic thoroughly. It is well structured and written in a fluent and concise manner. Upper Second (60-69%) This is an excellent answer, which grasps all the relevant material and shows wide reading. It is fully referenced, and demonstrates an understanding of the wider implications by providing critical analysis, application and evaluation. It merely lacks the poise and innovation of a first class answer. Lower Second (50-59%) This is a solid answer, which grasps the material and tackles the issue in a competent way. All major aspects of the area are covered, but some of the more subtle issues may not have been addressed fully. There is evidence of wider research, but its treatment lacks some depth and sophistication. It is presented in a competent way. Third (40-49%) This is a basic answer, which grasps most of the major issues raised in the topic area, but lacksdepth and understanding of the wider implications. Fail (less than 40%)
Found this document preview useful?
You are reading a preview Upload your documents to download or Become a Desklib member to get accesss