This assignment will require the use of quantitative tools and qualitative analysis in responding to the assignment requirements.
accounting
Description
This assignment will
require the use of quantitative tools and qualitative analysis in responding to
the assignment requirements.
Instructions
For this assignment, you
are expected to select a company and three competitors from the same industry
and prepare an analytical report in which you will critically evaluate,
analyse, discuss and comment on the key issues in the financial appraisal.
You will be expected to
use the latest financial statements of the companies.
The report will make
reference to scholarly research and explicitly address the
following:
- An analysis of the current
business and financial health of your company. You are expected to employ
financial ratios and the Altman Z-score (specific formulas for different
types of companies) to examine the financial health of your chosen company
in comparison to its competitors.
- A research evaluation and
critical analysis of the industry sector and a financial analysis of three
other companies in the same sector
- You can benchmark based
on prior years’ data.
- A critical appraisal of the
financial strengths and weaknesses of your chosen company compared to the
listed competitors.
- A critical evaluation of the
financial techniques (i.e., ratio and the Z-score) applied in the
analysis.
- Recommendations suitable for
your company on how they can achieve the changes you feel are necessary.
- A reasoned conclusion and
summary of your findings.
- Use charts bar graphs etc., to
visualize your findings.
The report will be
assessed base on the financial techniques employed and a critical discussion of
the subject literature, not on a “right” conclusion.
Report (100%) (Main body) should not materially exceed
2,500 words, excluding bibliography / references, appendices and tables.
Detailed calculations
used in the report should be documented in an appendix, with the results in the
main body.
Assignment grading
|
Category |
Less than 70% |
70%-79% |
80%-89% |
90%-100% |
|
Introduction and Background |
Limited introduction on the topic
and aims and objectives of the assignment |
Focused topic, but incomplete aims
and objectives. Context is incomplete |
Aims and objectives clearly
articulated in the introduction. Context very well-articulated |
Excellent introduction. The
aims, objectives and roadmap of the report provided |
|
Understanding of key issues |
Minimal understanding of the key
issues surrounding the topic |
Key issues identified, but are
lacking in focus and development |
Good understanding of the key
issues; but, fail to contextualize the importance |
Excellent understanding of the key
issues and contextualizing the importance |
|
Evidence of Research |
Little evidence of research other
than citing the literature; important work not cited; key evidence ignored |
Evidence of reading; Literature
and key concepts applied, but not adequately developed |
Very good use of the literature;
use literature to analyze arguments and support the findings |
Demonstrate high level of
scholarship; engage critically with the literature; publishable report |
|
Performance Measures |
Identification and application of
the ratios are weak and lack awareness regarding the key aims and objectives |
Identification and application of
the ratios is reasonably researched covering the key ones with
generally sound arguments |
Identification and application of
the ratios is well researched covering the key ones with informed and
rationalized arguments |
Identification and application of
the ratios is critically researched with insightful arguments covering
all key sources and arguments |
|
Analysis |
Mostly descriptive; no analysis of
the key issues; data analysis inaccurate |
Some critical analysis; arguments
contains inaccuracies |
Relevant analysis; good use of the
ratio measures in the analysis |
Comprehensive analysis; utilized
both the ratio measures and literature in the analysis |
|
Presentation, evaluation of
evidence, clarity, structure and conclusion |
Some evidence provided; poor
citation; lack of structure; grammatical mistakes |
Appropriate evidence
assessed critically; weak interpretation of the findings; reasonable and
clear presentation; few grammatical mistake |
Critical assessment of the
selected literature; use literature to inform arguments; some evidence
of independent thought; demonstrate good writing skills; accurate citation;
very few grammatical errors |
Excellent critical assessment of
the literature; excellent use of literature to inform arguments;
evidence of independent thought and insight; excellent writing skills; accurate
citation; no grammatical errors |
