Your work on assignment 1 should be considered the basis for this report, since it should have provided you with theoretical and practical insights about the selected social issue and your approach to address it.
During the second phase of the module (and in preparation of assignment 2), you will be presented with concrete methods and tools, some of which you will be using in practice during seminar work. You are expected to develop a good understanding of these methods and tools, in order to design a comprehensive entrepreneurial response to your chosen social issue.
Your own skills, passions and dreams – your lived experience and knowledge equity – is of essence in this part of the module and assignment.
Group discussions during seminars will provide you with a good opportunity for a hands-on evaluation of methods and tools when applied to specific social/environmental issues and/or social entrepreneurs’ skills. However, as with assignment 1, this report is strictly individual; you must present your own views!
This report should reflect your ability to apply concepts, tools and methods to conceptualise an innovative idea to address the same social issue that you have been working on since the start of the module.
Your report will be marked according to the rationale shown in table 5:
Table 5 – Marking criteria for assignment 2 (report)
|Understanding of the social issue||The report needs to show a sound understanding of the social issue guiding the project work. The presentation of the problem should be concise, insightful and compelling, including (if required) necessary improvements in relation to the outcome from assignment 1. The understanding of the social issue should reflect a good use of both relevant concepts and elements from secondary research.||20%|
|The innovative idea||The report needs to show a coherent progression from the understanding of the social issue to a value proposition which you develop. This needs to include: A brief justification for the particular approach used to address the social issue (NFP, BL NFP, or FP). A clear representation of the innovative/creative features of the idea.An outline of how the idea was developed, including the use of inner and external stakeholder analyses, as well as mind mapping.Explicit acknowledgement of the operations required to materialise the idea (brief!).Consistency: it is important to keep alignment between the approach to SE used (NFP, BL NFP or FP) and the presentation of the idea. For instance, it would be strange to speak of profit if your approach is NFP; likewise, it would be wrong to omit talking about income streams if your approach is either BL NFP or FP.||25%|
|Overall use of methods and tools||The report should demonstrate a good application of methods and tools, including: Inner stakeholder analysis (include tabular display as an appendix) External stakeholder analysis (include tabular display as an appendix) Mind mapping (including draft as an appendix) Lean startup strategy outline: showing the idea’s MVP and how to build it, a clear idea of what to measure and how, when showing the MVP to the public (i.e. selection of indicators), the strategy to learn from the measurement|
(your ‘theory of change’ and ‘feedback loops).
|Reflection||The report needs to include a reflective section. Here, the student is expected to expand on the way her/his inner stakeholder analysis informs the innovative idea and the lessons that can be extracted from this for future career aspirations.||10%|
|Overall presentation||The report needs to be well structured, showing a coherent, consistent, and compelling flow of arguments all the way from introduction to the concluding remarks. Students are expected to use of the full range of word-processing functions to present the report in a ‘professional-looking’ layout. Criteria include: quality of the executive summary, word count, spelling / grammar, header, footer, page numbering, proper use of tables, figures and charts,appendices, table of contents, table of figures, table of appendices,accurate referencing according to Harvard Referencing Style.||20%|