Assessment criteria Explanatory comments on the assessment criteria Maximum marks for each section Content, style, relevance, originality Clear demonstration of rigorous research from recognised authoritative sources. Audience focus. Meeting the deliverables. 50% Format, referencing, bibliography Rigorous use of the Harvard Methodology for citation and referencing; page numbering; correct display of direct quotations. 10 % Constructive critical analysis, introduction, conclusion Demonstration of a clear understanding of the issues. Use of academic models. Full articulation of ideas developed. Offering well-argued solutions and/or alternatives. 40% Page 2 of 5 Assignment Task Can Britain retain ownership of its former imperial oil company – BP? BP was a member of the "Seven Sisters" collective of international oil companies in the 1970s, rubbing shoulders with Exxon and Shell as one of the top 3 oil giants of that era. Since then, it has encountered several troubles, not least of which was its involvement with the Texas City refinery fire and the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. The cost of the Gulf of Mexico debacle, at $43 billion and still counting, in fines, legal costs and clean-up has seen enter into asset sales of some $40 billion to help finance these gigantic bills. Whilst doggedly maintaining its generous shareholder dividends, on which many private and institutional portfolios rely on both sides of the Atlantic, BP shares have fallen by one-fifth in the past 10 years. This contrasts significantly with broader stock market indices which show growth of some 20% in the same period. Shareholders have become nervous, not only because the dividend returns are slightly negative, even if the yield remains good and attractive, but that BP is rapidly becoming a potential take-over target. Stock market capitalisation is still large at $107 billion, but in April 2010 BP's market capitalisation was at a high of $190 billion. BP still has some strengths – its expertise in deep-water drilling and a 20% stake in Rosneft, Russia's biggest oil company. More recent reactions by BP senior management to falling oil prices and the on- going USA lawsuits have seen a 15% reduction in capital expenditure this year, and the announcement of a $1 billion restructuring programme. Is all this enough to keep BP independent, or will rivals seek to capitalise on BP's weakness and make a take-over bid for it? In a 2,000-word essay, discuss both the attractions and disadvantages of BP as a possible take-over target, and identify the most probable bidders for BP. Give some examples of the problems that face these potential bidders in terms of political issues and managerial styles. Discuss whether a continuation of low oil prices, as seen in the first quarter of 2015, will accelerate any take-over bid, or would low prices be another barrier. Your own interpretations and conclusions from your researches are fundamental. Supporting your own arguments in a robust and objective manner will qualify for better marks than a simple re-statement of the data and opinion found in the research. Total marks for assignment: 100 Page 3 of 5 Generic Criteria for Assessment at Level 5 Marks Assessment categories Knowledge & Understanding of Subject Cognitive/ Intellectual Skills (e.g. analysis and synthesis; logic and argument; analytical reflection; organisation and communication of ideas and evidence) Use of Research- informed Literature (including referencing, appropriate academic conventions and academic honesty) 0-25 (Fail) Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level. Significant inaccuracies. Unsubstantiated generalizations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable conclusions or missing conclusions. Lack of analysis and relevance. No evidence of reading. Views are unsupported and non- authoritative. Academic conventions largely ignored. 26-39 (Fail) Gaps in knowledge and only superficial understanding of the well-established principles of area(s) of study. Some inaccuracies. Views/ findings largely irrelevant, illogical or contradictory. Generalisations/ statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance and/or validity. Evidence of little reading appropriate for this level and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Academic conventions used weakly. 40-49 (3rd) Threshold level. Some knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed. Threshold level. Awareness of main issues. Structure of argument effective, but with some gaps or weaknesses. Some evidence provided to support findings, but not always consistent. Some relevant conclusions. Threshold level. Evidence of reading relevant sources, with some appropriate linking to given text(s). Academic conventions evident and largely consistent, with minor weaknesses. 50-59 (2.2) Broad knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed. Issues identified and critically analysed within given areas. An awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support argument. Ability to apply concepts and principles outside context of study context. Generally sound conclusions. Knowledge and analysis of a range of literature beyond core text(s). Literature used accurately and analytically. Academic skills generally sound. 60-69 (2.1) Very good knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed. Good level of analysis and synthesis. An awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence convincingly to support argument. Ability to apply concepts/ principles effectively beyond context of study. Valid conclusions. Knowledge of the field of literature used consistently to support findings. Research-informed literature integrated into the work. Very good use of academic conventions. 70-85 (1st) Very good, detailed knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge. Excellent analysis and synthesis. A range of perceptive points made within given area for this level of study. Arguments logically developed, supported by a range of relevant evidence. Explicit acknowledgement of other stances. Strong conclusions. Critical engagement with a range of reading. Knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Consistently accurate use of academic conventions. 86-100 (1st) Exceptional knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge Exceptional analysis and synthesis are consistent features. Perceptive, logically connected points made throughout the work within an eloquent, balanced argument. Evidence selected judiciously and thoroughly analysed. Persuasive conclusions. Exceptionally wide range of relevant literature evaluated and used critically to inform argument, balance discussion and/or inform problem-solving. Consistently accurate and assured use of academic conventions. Page 4 of 5 86-100 (1st)