Business Events in a Global Context

BEG609_Assessment_1_Brief_Case Study Due Week 5 Page 1 of 5

ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF

Subject Code and Title
BEG609: Business Events in a Global Context

Assessment
Case Study

Individual/Group
Individual

Length
2,000 Words (Essay format)

Learning Outcomes
This assessment addresses the following subject learning outcomes:
a. Critically reflect upon the impact of major, hallmark and mega
events on local, national and international economies and how they
integrate with the hospitality industry.
b. Evaluate the role of key business event bodies and associations
local, national and international perspectives.

Submission
By 11:55pm (AEST/AEDT), Sunday, Week 5

Weighting
40%

Total Marks
100 marks

Context:
The purpose of all BEG609 assessments is for you to reflect upon theories learned throughout
the term. Reflecting on the subject’s theories, class discussions, research materials, and
activities, will give you the ability to apply event management principles in your future career
in the Hospitality Industry and Global Business sector.
Instructions:
Compare two (2) mega/major/hallmark events of the same genre (e.g. Oktoberfest and
Carnivale; FIFA World-Cup & Olympics) held world-wide within the last five (5) years. The
activity requires you to write an essay with a structure which covers the following inclusions.
Provide a brief background of your chosen events and target market. Are they mega, major
or hallmark events and why, when, where and for whom were they held? Compare and
discuss both events with respect to the:
• Social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts (each)
• The push and pull factors, plus destination images used to promote the event to target
markets and audiences
BEG609_Assessment_1_Brief_Case Study Due Week 5 Page 2 of 5
• Your recommendations for improvement of the events. If you were the organiser,
what would be your recommendations based on your findings? Consider
technological enhancements, venue, marketing strategies, event timing,
sustainability, revenue etc.
Assessment must include theories covered within module one to three (1-3) and cite
academic articles in the text.
Submission Instructions:
• Typed and formatted following the Assessment Structure Style Guide and uploaded
to BlackBoard on time the day before presentation, no later than 11:55 PM.
• To be submitted in electronic form as a word-processed file to BlackBoard
PDF-PROCESSED FILES WILL INCUR AN AUTOMATIC FAIL WITH A ZERO GRADE.
• Please keep essay length to 2,000 words +/- 10%.
• Students must refer, in text, to a minimum of 12 academic articles plus other as
required, in order to show competency in the assessment.
• All referencing must be in accordance with the Academic Writing Guide: APA 7th
Edition on SharePoint.
• A TUA cover sheet to be attached to your paper
• Essay format must be professionally displayed, Arial 12, 1.5 spacing and justified.
• See marking rubric attached in the following page(s) and remember you do not need
to attach this rubric to your submissions.
NOTE: Referencing
You must refer to a minimum of 12 academic articles, plus others as required, in order to
show competency in the assessment. You may reference chronologically, rather than
alphabetically, for ease of presentation. It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for
citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here in the
Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills website.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is
appropriately referenced and academically written according the Academic Writing Guide.
Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic
Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These
are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
BEG609_Assessment_1_Brief_Case Study Due Week 5 Page 3 of 5
Assessment Rubric

Assessment Criteria
Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75 -84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%

Use of
literature/evidence
of reading
20%
Either no evidence of
literature being
consulted or irrelevant
to the assignment set.
Pdf file submitted.
Literature is presented
uncritically, in a purely
descriptive way and
indicates limitations of
understanding.
Clear evidence and
application of
readings relevant to
the subject; uses
indicative texts
identified.
Able to critically appraise
the literature and theory
gained from a variety of
sources, developing own
ideas in the process.
Has developed and
justified using own
ideas based on a
wide range of
sources which have
been thoroughly

analysed, applied

and discussed.

Inaccurate or
Selection of theory is
Most key theories
Insightful and
Assignment

inappropriate choice of
appropriate, but some
are included in the
appropriate selection of
demonstrates

Knowledge of theory
theory.
aspects have been
work in an
theory in key areas.
integration and

20%
Pdf file submitted.
missed or
appropriate
innovation in the

misconstrued.
straightforward
selection and

manner.
handling of theory.

Fails to analyse
Can analyse a limited
Can analyse with
Able to analyse a range
Can analyse new

information.
range of information
guidance using given
of information with
and/or abstract data

Analysis, Discussion
Response demonstrates
with guidance using
classification /
minimum guidance, can
and situations

and
a lack of reflection on, or
classification /
principles.
apply major theories and
without guidance

Recommendations
personalization of, the
principles.
Response
compare alternative
using a wide range

40%
theories, concepts,
Viewpoints and
demonstrates a
methods and techniques
of techniques

and/or strategies
interpretations are
minimal reflection
for obtaining data.
appropriate to the

presented in the course
unsupported or
on, and
topic.

BEG609_Assessment_1_Brief_Case Study Due Week 5 Page 4 of 5

materials to date.
supported with flawed
personalization of,
Response demonstrates
Response

Viewpoints and
arguments. Examples,
the theories,
personalization of, the
demonstrates an in

interpretations are
when applicable, are
concepts, and/or
theories, concepts,
depth reflection on,

missing, inappropriate,
not provided
strategies
and/or strategies.
and personalization

and/or unsupported.
presented. or are
Viewpoints and
of, the theories,

Examples are not
irrelevant
interpretations are
concepts, and/or

provided.
supported. Appropriate
strategies presented

Pdf file submitted.
examples are provided,
in the course

as applicable.
materials to date.

Viewpoints and

interpretations are

insightful and well

supported. Clear,

detailed examples

are provided, as

applicable.

Presentation and
Referencing
20%
Unsatisfactory level of
Presentation quality to
Presentation quality
Very effective
Excellent use of

presentation quality.
a minimal level.
to a competent
presentation quality.
graphics (photos,

None or almost no
Somewhat reasonable
level.
Good use of graphics.
diagrams, tools etc.)

photos, diagrams etc.
level of graphic use:
Reasonable level of
Good level of
Superior

Incompetent level of
understanding of
relevant software.
No evidence of any
very few photos,
diagrams etc, however
no context.
Very little evidence of
graphic use, some
photos, diagrams,
drawings etc.
Reasonable
understanding of the
relevant software.
Good citing and
reference list.
understanding of the
relevant software.
Extremely creative
presentation ideas

significant idea for
an idea for the
evidence of an idea
Variety of sources
well resolved and

presentation.
presentation.
for presentation.
implemented.

Incorrect citing.
Somewhat reasonable
Reasonable
Excellent citing and

understanding of the
understanding of the
reference list.

BEG609_Assessment_1_Brief_Case Study Due Week 5 Page 5 of 5

No and/or very poor
reference list.
Pdf file submitted.
relevant software.
Incorrect citing.
Poor reference list.
relevant software.
Appropriate citing
and reference list.
Wide variety of
quality sources.