ACCOUNTING AND CORPORATE FINANCE

ASSIGNMENT London School of Business & Finance (LSBF)

Module Assignment Title Assignment Type Word Limit Weighting Student Cohort Issue Date Submission Date Feedback Date Issued by (Assessor) Internal Verifier Plagiarism

MBA

Accounting and Finance Working Capital Policy of listed companies Individual Assignment 2,000 (+/-10% allowed) 50%

6th November
Dr. Binam Ghimire

When submitting work for assessment, students should be aware of the LSBF guidance and regulations in concerning plagiarism. All submissions should be your own, original work. You must submit an electronic copy of submission will be electronically checked. your work. Your

Harvard Referencing Learning Outcomes

The Harvard Referencing System must be used. The Wikipedia website must not be referenced in your work. On successful completion of this assignment you will be able to:

1. enhance analytical skills and techniques important in areas of accounting and finance 2. gain specific knowledge managing short-term financial need of company 3. enhance ability to provide a critical evaluation of the performance of a company from an analysis of its financial statements 4. apply financial tools of analysis, comparison and evaluation

5. provide a critical appraisal of published journal articles in the related field

Grading Criteria

Please see separate Assignment Grading Criteria Autumn 2010 sheet for this Assignment.

Your Task

Critically appraise how companies set their working capital policies, and explain the factors that a company should consider in setting its working capital policy and in determining the level of working capital to be maintained. Support your arguments by reference to a listed UK FTSE250 company from the following list: WH Smith BAA Aviation Premier Foods Cable and Wireless Communications Easy Jet Synergy Health Comparison can be made with another company in similar business and listed in London Stock Exchange. Your comments should incorporate both theoretical/academic arguments, and real world practice. Financial calculations where relevant should be provided in appendices and only the results may be discussed in the text.

Guidelines

Assessment Criteria Introduction identification of key issues Knowledge Content i.e. evidence of good knowledge about the key issues and the ability to explain these logically and clearly. Debate demonstration of the ability to explain and argue the pros and cons of the points, and to justify their own interpretation of the issue Further Reading evidence that the student has researched the subject beyond the basic facts, and can provide references and critical commentary to support their points Conclusion that the student does come to a conclusion and that this is consistent with their answer

Marks Awarded 10 32 28 20

10 100

Note

This Assignment Briefing Sheet Autumn 2010 is available on http://docs.google.com/ for you to view and print off at a type size more convenient to you.

Guidelines Indicative Grade UK % Marks Characteristics

70%+

Very high standard of critical analysis using appropriate conceptual frameworks Excellent understanding and exposition of relevant issues Clearly structured and logically developed arguments Good awareness of nuances and complexities Substantial evidence of well-executed independent research Excellent evaluation and synthesis of source material Excellent use of relevant data and examples, all properly referenced

Distinction 70% and above

60 - 69%

High standard of critical analysis using appropriate conceptual frameworks Clear awareness and exposition of relevant issues Clearly structured and logically developed argument Awareness of nuances and complexities Evidence of independent research Good evaluation and synthesis of source material Good use of relevant data and examples, all properly referenced Uses appropriate conceptual frameworks Attempts analysis but includes some errors and/or omissions Shows awareness of issues but no more than to be expected from attendance at classes Arguments reasonably clear but underdeveloped Insufficient evidence of independent research Insufficient evaluation of source material Some good use of relevant data and examples, but incompletely referenced Adequate understanding of appropriate conceptual frameworks Answer too descriptive and/or any attempt at analysis is superficial, containing errors and/or omissions Shows limited awareness of issues but also

50 59%

40 49%

some confusion Arguments not particularly clear Limited evidence of independent research and reliance on a superficial repeat of class notes Relatively superficial use of relevant data, sources and examples and poorly referenced UOW Pass Mark = 40%

30 39%

Weak understanding of appropriate conceptual frameworks Weak analysis and several errors and omissions Establishes a few relevant points but superficial and confused exposition of issues No evidence of independent research and poor understanding of class notes Poor or no use of relevant data, sources and examples, and no references

02

%
Very weak or no understanding of appropriate conceptual frameworks Very weak or no grasp of analysis and many errors and omissions Very little or no understanding of the issues raised by the question No appropriate references to data, sources, examples or even class notes

Note

This Assignment Briefing Sheet Autumn 2011 is available on http://docs.google.com/ for you to view and print off at a type size more convenient to you.

London School of Business & Finance Postgraduate Marking Criteria Criteria Level of Achievement Indicators Fail 029% 1 Research Systematic identification and investigation of appropriate sources Little or no evidence of appropriate research 3039% Information presented does not relate sufficiently to the task; there may be evidence of rudimentary research Pass 40-49% Adequate research has been carried out and appropriate information has been gathered and documented from readily available sources applying standard techniques 50-59% Information is accurate and from a range of sources, with evidence of some analysis and evaluation 60-69% Well informed judgements made of the relative value of connected information from a wide range of academic sources 70+% Extensive independent research, accuracy, familiarity with the material, and sound judgments

029% 2 Analysis Examination and interpretation of resources Little or no evidence of analytical engagement

3039% Judgments (with or without complete data) are not sound; critiques are not well argued; response to complex issues is not systematic or creative

40-49% Key elements within relevant information are identified, but may lack accurate interpretation and analysis

50-59% Uses examination and interpretation of sources to make sound judgments ; shows critical awareness of current problems

60-69% Judgements are astute and well supported; able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively; critiques are insightful and well substantiated; offers new insights

70+% Evidence of analysis which potentially contributes new ideas, processes or knowledge to the field or is ground breaking in a way that would be recognized as valid by experts in the field

029% 3 Subject Knowledge Understanding and application of subject knowledge and underlying principles Inaccurate and/or incomplete knowledge of the subject field and its development

3039% Fragmentary and/or partial knowledge of the subject and its development

40-49% Evidence of understanding key aspects of the subject context, in current debates and/or historical background.

50-59% Knowledge is accurate and current within the field, and applied appropriately

60-69% Systematic and extensive knowledge, at the forefront of their field of study, perhaps informed by related or external fields, used creatively

70+% Brings a valid individual understanding to concepts and knowledge in the field Where appropriate, able to propose original ideas or hypotheses

029% 4 Experimentation Problem solving, risk taking, experimentation and testing of ideas and materials in the realisation of concepts Unable to identify problems; does not understand the purpose of risk taking or exploration of alternatives

3039% Exploration of methods or concepts is not sufficient to resolve barriers and/or move practice forward

40-49% Operates within familiar and well established ideas, processes, media and/or materials; some evidence of exploration of ideas and concepts

50-59% Decision making is based on sound judgement of available options; risk is managed appropriately; applies established techniques creatively in the discipline

60-69% Effective decision making in complex and unpredictable situations; demonstrates originality in tackling and solving problems; approach consistently moves practice forwards

70+% Risk taking shows a profound and precise understanding of the nature of the field, and progresses the field, perhaps in an individually distinctive way

029% 5 Technical Competence Skills to enable the execution of ideas appropriate to the medium Execution shows very limited command of techniques and poor judgement

3039% Techniques are limited or rudimentary in selection or skill

40-49% Skills are adequate to communicate ideas; accepted conventions and procedures are usually applied

50-59% Skilled command of conventions and procedures. Technical skills facilitate practice, conceptual development and the communication of ideas

60-69% Discernment and judgement are evident. Idea and technique are unified. Breadth of techniques adopted may be a feature

70+% Idea and technique are unified. Discernment and judgement are evident. Technical Skills may have contributed to conceptual advances

029% 6 Communication and Presentation Clarity of purpose; skills in the selected media; awareness and adoption of appropriate conventions; sensitivity to the needs of the audience Ineffective use of visual/ oral/ written communication conventions in the production and presentation of ideas

3039% Partial lack of awareness and observance of conventions and standards; lack of clarity in structure selection and organisation of information; lack of awareness of audience

40-49% Conventions and standards are applied; structure is clear; information selection and organisation shows awareness of audience requirements and preferences

50-59% Able to communicate own conclusions and explain and summarise existing work clearly, in appropriate media to specialist and non specialist audiences

60-69% Communication is persuasive and compelling; diverse audience needs are accounted for; message and medium are unified with personal style

70+% Communication shows an exceptional and integrated understanding of the topic and audience needs

029% 7 Personal and Professional Development Management of learning through reflection, planning, self direction, subject engagement and commitment Consistent lack of evidence of reflection or planning for learning. Little or no awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses in relation to task

3039% Evidence of reflection and planning for learning not consistently progressed. Incomplete awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses

40-49% Evidence that reflection and planning have led to increased subject engagement and commitment. Developing an awareness of strengths and weaknesses

50-59% Demonstrable capacity to continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level

60-69% Takes full responsibility for own learning and development through iterative cycles of well articulated purposeful analysis and planning, supported by extensive evidence

70+% Evidence of strong sense of motivation and commitment to personal and professional development, explicitly and clearly communicated and evidenced

029% 8 Collaborative and / or Independent Professional Working Demonstration of suitable behaviour for working in a professional context alone, or with others Shows little accurate knowledge of related profession; is unproductive working alone; does not collaborate effectively with others

3039% Insufficient understanding of professional life; struggles to plan and complete work alone; collaborates reluctantly; behaviour may be unsupportive of others

40-49% Awareness of main standards required of relevant profession. Able work both collaboratively and independently

50-59% Shows self-direction and/or originality in tackling and solving problems; can plan and implement tasks at a professional or equivalent level; able to work effectively in diverse teams

60%60-69% Regularly shows self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems; shows initiative and personal responsibility; consistently plans and implements tasks at a professional or equivalent level, autonomously or collaboratively; able to work effectively in diverse teams, in multiple roles

70+% Makes sound decisions readily in complex and unpredictable situations; operates both autonomously and collaboratively as a professional; a consistently strong contributor to any team, in any role