financial Performance Management

nstructions for assessment Summative assessment There will be one summative assessment which involves a comprehensive analysis of the financial and non-financial performance of an international organization (of your choice) and its closest competitor. You are required to select an international organization (company A), identify its closest competitor (company B), and analyze their financial performance using ratio analysis. You are then required to summarize and critique the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) literature and develop a balanced scorecard performance evaluation of the organization (company A) and its critical success factors. Finally, you need to provide a critical analysis of the benefits and challenges of adopting Integrated Reporting for your selected organization (company A). This is an individual report and should be 3,500 words (10% tolerance) excluding references, tables, figures, and appendix. See the sections below “Structure and presentation” and “Rubric” for more details. Components of summative assessment Individual or group submission Word count Weighting Must Attempt Y/N Must Pass Y/N Subcomponents Report (Case study analysis) Individual max. 3,500 words 100% Yes Yes n/a Note that above table does not include the formative assessments and that formative assessments are not marked. Formative assessment During the module, you are asked to submit a “Report overview” by the set deadline. It represents an opportunity to start working towards the assessment and receive feedback early in the module. Detailed instructions on the Formative Assessment will be available on Moodle. There will also be regular opportunities for Q&A on your summative work while it is under construction. Note that we will not provide any written or marks indicative feedback on drafts for summative assessment at any time. Should you perceive any formative feedback such way, then please note that it is not binding for your marking. Also, markers can change and you have no entitlement to be marked by the module convener or tutors. You should note that in our experience students who submit a formative assignment generally outperform those that do not. If you are off target at the initial stage we can help you put it right which will benefit your final summative submission. FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 2/7 Structure and presentation (Summative Assessment) The assignment should address the following questions: Question 1 (30%). Select an international organisation (of your choice – company A) and identify its closest competitor (company B). Present the two organisations and the criteria used for the identification of the competitor. Use ratio analysis technique to evaluate the financial performance of the two organizations; draw a comparative evaluation and critically discuss the findings. You need to access the annual financial statements of the last two years and provide details of the ratio calculations. It is recommended to use graphs and tables to present your analysis, and cite academic literature. Question 2 (30%). With reference to relevant literature, critically evaluate Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. Develop a proposed Balanced Scorecard to include critical success factors (CSF’s) for your selected organisation (company A). Question 3 (30%). Provide a critical analysis of the benefits and challenges of adopting Integrated Reporting (IR) for your selected organization (company A). Use academic literature and refer to the International Integrated Reporting framework to support your discussion. Presentation (10%). Mark awarded for presentation refers to overall structure and presentation, academic style of writing, use of Harvard style for references and in text citations. You need to use a comprehensive range of relevant (academic and professional) sources; use of online sources should be limited and the reliability of the source should be verified. All sources need to be acknowledged and referenced properly to ensure the originality of the work. The report needs to follow the below structure and address the three questions. The word limit for this assignment is 3,500 words (10% tolerance) excluding references, tables, figures, and appendix. Important note: Please refrain from selecting companies that have been shown for demonstration purposes during the sessions (this includes, for example, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Axa, Philip Morris, Monnalisa, Impahla Clothing, Viasat, Dellas). Any written work must be spell-checked and a contents page must be included. Do not use various font sizes and colours; Black ink, Arial, size 11, 1.5 lines spaced is recommended. Use DIN A4 format and page margins of 2.5 cm or 1 inch. Proposed structure of the Report: 1. Introduction Introduce the scope and focus of the report (approx. 250 words) 2. Financial Performance using Ratio Analysis Question 1 (approx. 1,000 words) 3. Balanced Scorecard Question 2 (approx. 1,000 words) 4. Integrated Reporting Question 3 (approx. 1,000 words) 5. Conclusions Provide an overall conclusion based on the reflection from the report (approx. 250 words) References Appendix – Provide details on the calculations presented in Question 1. The proposed structure above intends to provide a recommendation on the structure of the coursework. This can be enriched with more sections/subsections as you consider appropriate (example abstract, executive summary, table of contents, appendices, etc.). FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 3/7 Full reading list There will be weekly guided readings and you will be expected to undertake your own review of relevant literature, both academic and professional. Refer to Moodle for guidance on weekly readings. Essential Readings Atrill, P., McLaney, E.J. (2018). Management Accounting for Decision Makers. Pearson. Berk, J., DeMarzo, P. (2017). Corporate Finance (3rd ed.), Chapter 2. Pearson. Busco, C., Malafronte, I., Pereira, J., Starita, M. (2019). The Determinants of Companies’ Levels of Integration: Does One Size Fit All? The British Accounting Review, 51(3), 277-298. IIRC (2013). International Integrated Reporting Council. (2013). International framework. Available at http://integratedreporting.org Malafronte, I., Pereira, J., Busco, C. (2020). The role of corporate culture in the choice of integrated reporting. CIMA Research Executive Summary, 16(2). Available at https://www.cimaglobal.com Kaplan, R.S. (2010). Conceptual foundations of the balanced scorecard. Working Paper 10-074. Further Readings (more readings will be provided on Moodle) Barth, M. E., Cahan, S. F., Chen, L., Venter, E. R. (2017). The economic consequences associated with integrated report quality: Capital market and real effects. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 62, 43-64. Busco, C., Quattrone, P. (2015). Exploring how the balanced scorecard engages and unfolds: Articulating the visual power of accounting inscriptions. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(3), 1236-1262. Busco, C., Frigo, M.L., Quattrone, P., Riccaboni, A. (2013). Integrated Reporting: Concepts and Cases that Redefine Corporate Accountability. Springer. Busco, C., Frigo, M. L., Quattrone, P., Riccaboni, A. (2013). Redefining corporate accountability through integrated reporting. Strategic Finance, 8, 33-41. Busco, C., Granà, F., Quattrone, P. (2017). Integrated thinking. CIMA Research Executive Summary, 13(3), 1-26. Cardinaels, E., van Veen-Dirks, P. (2010). Financial versus non-financial information: the impact of information organization and presentation in a balanced scorecard. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(6), 568–578. De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated Reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042-1067. Dumay, J., Bernardi, C., Guthrie, J., Demartini, P. (2016). Integrated reporting: A structured literature review. Accounting Forum, 40(3), 166-185. Garcia-Sanchez, I.M., Raimo, N. Vitolla, F. (2020). CEO power and integrated reporting. Meditari Accountancy Research. Greatbanks, R. Tapp, D. (2007). The impact of BSC in a public sector environment: Empirical evidence from Dunedin City Council New Zealand. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 27(8), 846–873. Hoque, Z. (2014). 20 years of studies on the balanced scorecard: Trends, accomplishments, gaps and opportunities for future research. British Accounting Review, 46(1) pp. 33–59. Malafronte, I., Pereira, J. (2020). Integrated thinking: measuring the unobservable. Meditari Accountancy Research. FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 4/7 Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P. (2007). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management System. Harvard Business Review. July/August. Nørreklit, H., Mitchell, F. (2014). Contemporary issues on the balance scorecard. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 10(4). Salterio, S.E. (2012). Balancing the scorecard through academic accounting research: opportunity lost? Journal of Accounting and Organizational Change, 8(4), 458–476. How will your work be assessed? Your work will be assessed by a subject expert who will use the marking criteria provided in the section “Instructions for assessment” and the Marking rubric enclosed in the Appendix for this module. When you access your marked work it is important that you reflect on the feedback so that you can use it to improve future assignments. Referencing and submission You must use the Harvard System. The Business School requires a digital version of all assignment submissions. These must be submitted via Turnitin on the module’s Moodle site. They must be submitted as a Word file (not as a pdf) and must not include scanned in text or text boxes. They must be submitted by 2pm on the given date. For further general details on coursework preparation refer to the online information at Student Portal and Moodle. Mitigating circumstances/what to do if you cannot submit a piece of work or attend your presentation The University Mitigating Circumstances Policy can be found on the University website: Mitigating Circumstances Policy Marking and feedback process Between you handing in your work and then receiving your feedback and marks within 20 days, there are a number of quality assurance processes that we go through to ensure that students receive marks which reflects their work. A brief summary is provided below.  Step One – The module and marking team meet to agree standards, expectations and how feedback will be provided.  Step Two – A subject expert will mark your work using the criteria provided in the assessment brief.  Step Three – A moderation meeting takes place where all members of the teaching and marking team will review the marking of others to confirm whether they agree with the mark and feedback.  Step Four – Work then goes to an external examiner who will review a sample of work to confirm that the marking between different staff is consistent and fair.  Stop Five – Your mark and feedback is processed by the Office and made available to you. FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 5/7 Additional instructions for Re-sit The same assignment task as for the main assignment period applies to the re-sit. Re-sit deadlines will be published via Moodle. Visit the module’s Moodle site and check your Roehampton email account on a regular basis. The school is not obliged to check whether you have noticed re-sit deadlines. You are required to improve and resubmit your original work as well as adding a further reflective commentary in the form of a 400-700 words Essay. You must resubmit your work using the specific resit Turnitin link on Moodle. This additional word count can be added on top of the original word count of the assignment, if you used the full word count. The original marking criteria will still apply (see marking grid in Appendix) except that the 10% weighting for presentation will be awarded instead to your additional Reflective Essay section. That is a statement demonstrating how you learnt from the feedback and what you did differently the second time. Also reflect how the module contents could be beneficial as knowledge of best practices for a future management, public administration or advisory career. If you did not submit work at the first opportunity, you cannot reflect on your feedback. However, in such case, your Reflection Essay section should reflect upon a) how the module’s concepts are informing the professions and open up areas of future empirical research and b) how the module contents could be beneficial as knowledge of best practices for your future management, public administration or advisory career. If you were deferred at the first assessment opportunity you do not need to include the reflective piece as this is a first submission at a later date, not a re-sit. The Reflective Essay is marked based on the criteria of Criticality and Evidence-based Logic of arguments. It is an independent writing task and no supervision will be provided for conducting the essay. FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 6/7 Appendix: Marking rubric for Summative assessment Rubric category (range) Assigned mark >> ________________ Marking criteria Outstanding 100 Excellent (80-89) 85 Very Good (70-79) 75 Good (60-69) 65 Adequate (50-59) 55 Marginal Fail (40-49) 45 Fail (30-39) 35 Fail (20-29) 25 Not done 0 Question 1 30% Outstanding and flawless. Ratio analysis is presented, articulated and discussed in an excellent way. Excellent presentation of the two companies. Excellent comparative evaluation. The arguments are systematic and supported by a wide range of relevant tables, graphics, and literature. The calculations are correct. Very good effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. Very good presentation of the two companies. Very good comparative evaluation. The arguments are supported by a range of relevant tables, graphics, and literature. The calculations are generally correct. Good effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. Good presentation of the two companies. Good comparative evaluation. The arguments are supported by relevant tables and literature. The calculations are overall correct and may include minor mistakes or omissions. Generally adequate effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. Adequate presentation of the two companies. Adequate comparative evaluation. The arguments are supported by a few tables (or no tables) and some literature. The calculations include minor mistakes. Some effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. Inadequate presentation of the two companies. Insufficient comparative evaluation. The arguments are not supported by tables or literature. The calculations have mistakes. Weak effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. No presentation of the two companies. Very limited or no comparative evaluation. The arguments are not supported by tables or literature. The calculations have mistakes. Insufficient effort at presenting, articulating and discussing financial ratio analysis. No presentation of the two companies. No comparative evaluation. Very few relevant points. The arguments are not supported by tables or literature. The calculations have mistakes. Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted. Question 2 30% Outstanding and flawless. Material selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Comprehensive, systematic, and critical analysis of relevant literature. Demonstrates a sophisticated approach to the application of theory to practice. Excellent discussion and analysis. Appropriate conclusions accurately drawn from materials and data selected. Material mostly selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Very good critical review and synthesis of ideas. Considerable evidence of solid research into the subject. Extensive use of theory. Very good discussion and analysis with logical conclusions, accurately drawn from materials and data selected Material mainly selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Good analysis of the literature, quite critical and welldeveloped. Good use of theory. Good discussion and analysis. Good conclusions mostly accurately drawn from materials and data selected, however can be expanded. Some analysis shows promise Material selected from a mix of sources, many that are not appropriate and/or authoritative. Ideas organised into a coherent argument with limited critical discussion. Reasonable use and application of theory to support analysis. Generally adequate discussion and analysis. Statements can be better supported with materials and data. Some analysis shows promise and depth of thought. Very few sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Relatively poor organisation and analysis of ideas. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with almost no critical discussion. Subject not properly investigated using appropriate sources. Analysis is not very well explained and Poor quality of sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Very poor organisation and analysis of ideas. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with no critical discussion. Little or no explanation of the appropriate concepts and discussion of literature. Analysis is not well explained or not appropriate; Very poor quality of sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Ideas organised randomly or not organised at all. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with no critical discussion. Very limited sources selected. Analysis is not at all explained or not appropriate; very limited discussion. Very limited analysis. Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted. FPM Assessment Brief 2021-2022 University of Roehampton Business School 7/7 and very well incorporated. and depth of thought. discussion is insufficient. Materials and data selected are poorly related to the discussion. limited discussion following from the data and the analysis. Question 3 30% Outstanding and flawless. Material selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Comprehensive, systematic, and critical analysis of relevant literature. Excellent critical analysis of the benefits and challenges. Material mostly selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Very good critical review and synthesis of ideas. Considerable evidence of solid research into the subject. Very good critical analysis of the benefits and challenges. Material mainly selected from appropriate, authoritative sources. Good analysis of the literature, quite critical and welldeveloped. Good analysis of the benefits and challenges. Material selected from a mix of sources, many that are not appropriate and/or authoritative. Ideas organised into a coherent argument with limited critical discussion. Adequate analysis of the benefits and challenges. Very few sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Relatively poor organisation and analysis of ideas. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with almost no critical discussion. Inadequate analysis of the benefits and challenges. Poor quality of sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Very poor organisation and analysis of ideas. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with no critical discussion. Poor critical analysis of the benefits and challenges. Very poor quality of sources regarded as appropriate and authoritative. Ideas organised randomly or not organised at all. Absence of cogency and structure to review, with no critical discussion. Very poor critical analysis of the benefits and challenges. Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted. Presentation 10% (Criteria does not apply to Resit). Outstanding and flawless. Clear, concise, and effectively argued within the length allowed; skilled use of academic conventions; accurate proofreading. All works cited and referenced appropriately according to Harvard format. Very good control of length; skilled use of academic conventions; nearly all errors eliminated in proof-reading. Almost all works cited and referenced appropriately according to Harvard format. Competent control of length; good use of academic conventions; accurate spelling, grammar, etc.; careful proofreading. Almost all works cited and referenced appropriately according to Harvard format. Length requirements observed; appropriate use of academic conventions; minor errors in spelling, grammar etc.; quite careful proof-reading. Some errors in citations and references. Presentation is either too long or too short in relation to content; some errors in application of academic conventions; some errors in spelling, grammar etc.; some indication of proofreading. Significant errors in citations and references. Poorly presented work; presentation is either too short or too long (waffling); missing several elements or parts; major errors in spelling, grammar etc.; little indication of proofreading. Major errors in citations and references. Very poorly presented work; presentation is inadequate, unfocused, and not at all clear; missing several and key elements or parts; spelling, grammar etc. are very scarce; no indication of proofreading. Citations and references are not appropriate.

What Will You Get?

We provide professional writing services to help you score straight A’s by submitting custom written assignments that mirror your guidelines.

Premium Quality

Get result-oriented writing and never worry about grades anymore. We follow the highest quality standards to make sure that you get perfect assignments.

Experienced Writers

Our writers have experience in dealing with papers of every educational level. You can surely rely on the expertise of our qualified professionals.

On-Time Delivery

Your deadline is our threshold for success and we take it very seriously. We make sure you receive your papers before your predefined time.

24/7 Customer Support

Someone from our customer support team is always here to respond to your questions. So, hit us up if you have got any ambiguity or concern.

Complete Confidentiality

Sit back and relax while we help you out with writing your papers. We have an ultimate policy for keeping your personal and order-related details a secret.

Authentic Sources

We assure you that your document will be thoroughly checked for plagiarism and grammatical errors as we use highly authentic and licit sources.

Moneyback Guarantee

Still reluctant about placing an order? Our 100% Moneyback Guarantee backs you up on rare occasions where you aren’t satisfied with the writing.

Order Tracking

You don’t have to wait for an update for hours; you can track the progress of your order any time you want. We share the status after each step.

image

Areas of Expertise

Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.

Areas of Expertise

Although you can leverage our expertise for any writing task, we have a knack for creating flawless papers for the following document types.

image

Trusted Partner of 9650+ Students for Writing

From brainstorming your paper's outline to perfecting its grammar, we perform every step carefully to make your paper worthy of A grade.

Preferred Writer

Hire your preferred writer anytime. Simply specify if you want your preferred expert to write your paper and we’ll make that happen.

Grammar Check Report

Get an elaborate and authentic grammar check report with your work to have the grammar goodness sealed in your document.

One Page Summary

You can purchase this feature if you want our writers to sum up your paper in the form of a concise and well-articulated summary.

Plagiarism Report

You don’t have to worry about plagiarism anymore. Get a plagiarism report to certify the uniqueness of your work.

Free Features $66FREE

  • Most Qualified Writer $10FREE
  • Plagiarism Scan Report $10FREE
  • Unlimited Revisions $08FREE
  • Paper Formatting $05FREE
  • Cover Page $05FREE
  • Referencing & Bibliography $10FREE
  • Dedicated User Area $08FREE
  • 24/7 Order Tracking $05FREE
  • Periodic Email Alerts $05FREE
image

Our Services

Join us for the best experience while seeking writing assistance in your college life. A good grade is all you need to boost up your academic excellence and we are all about it.

  • On-time Delivery
  • 24/7 Order Tracking
  • Access to Authentic Sources
Academic Writing

We create perfect papers according to the guidelines.

Professional Editing

We seamlessly edit out errors from your papers.

Thorough Proofreading

We thoroughly read your final draft to identify errors.

image

Delegate Your Challenging Writing Tasks to Experienced Professionals

Work with ultimate peace of mind because we ensure that your academic work is our responsibility and your grades are a top concern for us!

Check Out Our Sample Work

Dedication. Quality. Commitment. Punctuality

It May Not Be Much, but It’s Honest Work!

Here is what we have achieved so far. These numbers are evidence that we go the extra mile to make your college journey successful.

0+

Happy Clients

0+

Words Written This Week

0+

Ongoing Orders

0%

Customer Satisfaction Rate
image

Process as Fine as Brewed Coffee

We have the most intuitive and minimalistic process so that you can easily place an order. Just follow a few steps to unlock success.

See How We Helped 9000+ Students Achieve Success

image

We Analyze Your Problem and Offer Customized Writing

We understand your guidelines first before delivering any writing service. You can discuss your writing needs and we will have them evaluated by our dedicated team.

  • Clear elicitation of your requirements.
  • Customized writing as per your needs.

We Mirror Your Guidelines to Deliver Quality Services

We write your papers in a standardized way. We complete your work in such a way that it turns out to be a perfect description of your guidelines.

  • Proactive analysis of your writing.
  • Active communication to understand requirements.
image
image

We Handle Your Writing Tasks to Ensure Excellent Grades

We promise you excellent grades and academic excellence that you always longed for. Our writers stay in touch with you via email.

  • Thorough research and analysis for every order.
  • Deliverance of reliable writing service to improve your grades.
Place an Order Start Chat Now
image

+1 587-331-9072
WHAT'SAPP US, WE'LL RESPOND
AustralianEssayHelp
We will write your work from scratch and ensure that it is plagiarism FREE, you just submit the completed work.