LSBM302 Corporate Risk Management – Assignment Help Australia

LSBM302 Corporate Risk Management – Assignment Help Australia Adelaide, Brisbane, Sydney: 30% Off on Assignment Help Writing Service By Australian Writers

 

---

LSBM302 Corporate Risk Management

1.	Module Details
Module Name:		Corporate Risk Management
Module Code:		LSBM302
Level		6
Credit Value		30
Module Leader:		Arif Zaman
Delivery		2018
2.	Assessment Structure
Item of Assessment			Portfolio
Assessment Code			BABM/LSBM302/18
Weighting			This assignment is worth 60% of the module grade
Word Limit			The word limit for this assessment is 3,000 words
Submission Deadline			Monday/23 April 2018/3pm
Feedback and			Feedback  and  provisional  grades  will  normally  be  due  20
Provisional Grade1 due			working days after the submission deadline
Resubmission Date			Friday/17 August 2018/3 pm

This item of assessment covers the following learning outcomes. For the full list of learning outcomes for the module, please refer to the Module Study Guide.

• Identify the various risks facing organisations.
• Classify risks into categories using recognised frameworks and models.
• Understand and critically apply models and frameworks designed to measure and model different business risks including scenario planning.
• Critically analyse and apply risk modelling techniques to business situations.
• Recommend ways by which organisations can manage and reduce risk exposures.
• Analyse, evaluate and apply the relevant international regulatory frameworks and governance codes that impact an organisation’s risk management process.
• Use numerical models to assess risk.
• Analyse, synthesise and evaluate data to establish solutions.
• The grade is provisional until confirmed by the relevant assessment board(s).

4. Assessment Grading

Your work will be marked in grades rather than percentages. This is considered to deliver the most accurate and fair outcomes for students. Each assignment that you undertake will be assessed using the common grading system. Information about the grading system can be found in your Course Handbook.

The Grade Criteria can be found in Appendix 1.

5. Assessment 2 Details

5.1          Task
Focus on the following companies for analysis:

• Tesco
• HSBC
• British Airways

You need to:

• Review and assess the risk management of each company, based on any publicly available information
• Comment on each organisation’s main types of corporate risk, their strategy, assessment, response, governance and assurance in relation to risk
• Signpost how risk management for the companies may evolve in the future
• Discuss implications for both the company and regulators
• Identify any common themes and observations across the three companies
• Ensure that you draw directly on the course and the teaching of each week to apply a corporate risk management perspective
• Include any other material you consider relevant to demonstrate an understanding of the workability and impact of the corporate risk management of each organisation
• Use a range of academic sources for your report
• Use Harvard referencing throughout for your citations and the reference list.

The assessment should be in the form of a report with the following structure.

1. Introduction 

• an overview of each company and their strategy
• Assessment of risk 
• Identify key risks and
• Classify these risks into categories –
• Use recognised frameworks and models.
• Risk response 
• Review how each company responds to its risk exposure.
• Highlight best practices and governance approaches
• Critically apply models and frameworks designed to measure and model different business risks
• Risk review 
• Discuss any other points you consider relevant to demonstrate an
• Understanding of the of the workability and impact of the corporate risk management of each organisation.
• Risk communications 
• discuss how clearly and comprehensively each company
• communicates their risks to their key stakeholders.
• Findings and conclusions 
• Identify any common themes and observations across the three companies
• Explain how risk management for the companies may evolve in the future –
• Set out any implications for the company and regulators in the light of lessons learnt
• Analyse, synthesise and evaluate the data to establish solutions.

5.2          Submission requirements
You are required to submit this assignment by Monday/23 April 2018/3pm. You must submit your assignment by using the Turnitin gateway in the module’s Canvas site.
Please Note: The act of submitting your work electronically will be taken as an acceptance of the Declaration of Authorship (see Appendix 2).

6. Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances

Applications for extensions and mitigating circumstances, with supporting evidence (such as medical certificates), should be made through the Student Self-service Portal (SSP).
6.1          Extensions
If a student experiences unforeseen circumstances that may prevent the student submitting an assignment at the first opportunity, it is possible to request an extension of up to two weeks. The length of extension requested will be evaluated by the Academic Administrator.
The granting of an extension will depend upon the nature of the difficulty the student is experiencing, whether the difficulty could and should have been anticipated, and the extent to which the circumstances were outside of the student’s control. For example, health difficulties would usually provide legitimate grounds for an extension; last minute computer issues or clashing deadlines would not. If an extension of up to two weeks is not sufficient the student should make a claim for mitigating circumstances.

NB: No extensions can be granted for TCAs and examinations.

6.2          Mitigating circumstances
If a student is unable to sit an exam or submit an assignment, the student may be able to claim mitigating circumstances, which, if accepted, would allow the student to complete the assessment for the first time at a later date, and receive an uncapped mark for it. The exam would be taken at the next sitting or the assignment would be submitted at the next submission opportunity, following the acceptance of the student’s mitigating circumstances. A claim for mitigating circumstances must be submitted before the original date for submitting the assignment or sitting the exam.
Mitigating circumstances are defined as a serious or acute problem, or an event beyond a student’s control or ability to foresee, which has prevented completion of assignment/s or attendance at examination/s. If a student is experiencing unforeseen or unexpected events – such as serious illness or severe disruption to their personal life – that may affect the student’s ability to take assignment/s or sit examination/s, the student should meet with their Module Leader, Course Leader or a Student Success Advisor to discuss the available options.
The University of Northampton’s Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedure document can be accessed through our Quality and Enhancement Manual:

7. Word limits

All written assignments include clear guidance on the maximum amount that should be written in order to address the requirements of the assessment task (a ‘word limit’).
If the submission exceeds the word limit by more than 10%, the submission will only be marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be included in the final grade for the item of assessment.
Abstracts, reference lists, and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements.
Where a submission is notably under the word limit, the full submission will be marked on the extent to which the requirements of the assessment task have been met. Generally speaking, submissions under the word limit fall short of the requirements of the assessment task.
Appendix 1: Grade Criteria

An outstanding	A+	Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard
Distinction
A very strong Distinction	A	Work of distinguished quality which demonstrates strong, convincing and
		consistent evidence appropriate to the task or activity.
		Rigorous and authoritative command of academic / professional conventions
		appropriate to the discipline.
A clear Distinction	A-	Work of very good quality which displays most, but not all, of the criteria for the
		grade above in relation to the learning outcomes.
A Distinction	B+	Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade
		below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relation to the relevant learning
		outcomes.
A very strong Merit	B	Work of commendable quality which demonstrates good, robust and convincing
		evidence appropriate to the task or activity.
		Strong command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the
		discipline.
A strong Merit	B-	Work of good quality which contains most, but not all, of the characteristics of the
		grade above in relation to the learning outcomes.
A clear Merit		Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater
	C+	degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
A Merit	C	Work of sound quality which demonstrates evidence which is sufficient and
		appropriate to the task or activity.
		Sound command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the
		discipline.
A very strong Pass OR	C-	Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of the grade
Bare/Basic Merit		above in relation to the relevant learning outcomes.
A strong Pass	D+	Work of satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of reliably achieving the
		requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree.
		Acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the
		discipline.
A Pass	D	Work of broadly satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of achieving the
		requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree.
		Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to
		the discipline.
A bare Pass	D-	Work of bare pass standard which demonstrates evidence of achieving the
		requirements of the learning outcomes, but only to a limited degree.
		Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to
		the discipline.
A marginal Fail	F+	Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with the learning outcomes
		but which contains some significant omissions or misunderstanding, or otherwise
		just fails to meet threshold standards.
A Fail	F	Evidence included or provided, but missing in some very important aspects.
		Poor command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A comprehensive	F-	Negligible or inappropriate evidence.
Fail		Unsatisfactory command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the
		discipline.
Academic Misconduct	AG	Work submitted, but academic misconduct proven and penalty given was to award
		AG grade.
Late submission	LG	Work submitted but given an LG grade due to late submission.
Work of nil value	NG	Work submitted, but work comprises no value.
Non-submission/Nil	G	Nothing presented.
attempt

Appendix 2: Declaration of Authorship
By submitting this work electronically to LSBM and the University of Northampton, I/we confirm that
I/we have read and understood the Declaration and Definitions below:
Declaration of Authorship:

1. I/we hold a copy of this assignment which can be produced if the original is lost/damaged.

2. This assignment is my/our original work and no part of it has been copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made.

3. No part of this assignment has been written for me/us by any other person except where such collaboration has been authorised and as detailed in the Assessment Brief.

4. I/we have not previously submitted this work for any other course/module.

Definitions
I/we understand that:

5. Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is one’s own. It is a form of cheating and is a serious academic offence which may lead to expulsion. Plagiarised material can be drawn from, and presented in, written, graphic and visual form, including electronic data, and oral presentations. Plagiarism occurs when the origin of the material used is not appropriately cited.

6. Collusion is working with someone else on an assessment task which is intended to be wholly your own work.

7. Contract cheating/Commissioning is where you contract out academic assessment to writers and purchase back the finished work and submit it as your own.

8. Duplication/Replication is submitting the same material more than once for the purposes of obtaining academic credit.

9. Fabrication refers specifically to the falsification of data, information or citations in an academic exercise, typically an assignment. This includes false excuses for missing deadlines and false claims to have submitted work. It may be specifically referred to as falsification.

10. Your completed assignment is submitted and checked for plagiarism through the use of plagiarism detection software called Turnitin. The Course Leader’s decision based on the plagiarism report is final; no appeal may be made by a student once such a decision is made.

Please note: Submitting work which is not your own [and cheating in exams] can be considered as fraud² and handled in accordance with the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. Penalties can include:

Reduction in grade for assignment.

Grade for module reduced to AG [fail for academic misconduct] and right to repeat module withdrawn.

Termination from studies.

• If a student is suspected of commissioning (e.g. paying someone to write an assignment for them), this could be classed as fraud under student disciplinary procedures, separate to academic misconduct procedures. If proven, the consequences would be severe, including removal from their course of study.

Previous answers to this question

---

Get The Answer