THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER
ALLIANCE MANCHESTER BUSINESS SCHOOL

Academic Year 2020/21
Semester Semester 1
Course Unit Code BMAN71751
Course Unit Title Tools and Methods for Innovation Analysis

Assessment Overview
Coursework submission
This course assessment is 100% individual coursework, 20% from a research proposal and 80% from a
research report.
The coursework must be submitted electronically in the usual way, through the link on Blackboard /
Submit Course Work. Submit your work in .pdf, .doc or .docx formats (pdfs give more portability by
maintaining the file exact formatting between different platforms). The deadlines are:
 Research Proposal: 15:00hrs (3pm) on Friday 04 December 2020
 Research Report: 15:00hrs (3pm) on Wednesday 20 January 2021

Aims and Rationale
The objective of the assessment is to critically implement methods and approaches commonly used
in research and business analysis of innovation. It consists in the successful preparation and execution
of a project, including overall project development and planning, research design and implementation,
data analyses, and the interpretation of evidence.
A typical innovation analysis project has a narrow scope, focused on a specific research or business
question. Therefore, they are very similar to short academic articles, consultancy reports, or business
intelligence reports. The research question usually stems from the articulation of three components:
an innovation (typically a new technology), a specific issue (the challenge faced by a business or
community), and a context (a specific level of analysis, such as region, industry or business). For
instance, “Will Graphene [Innovation] provide ground-breaking new opportunities [Issue] for
biomedical engineering [Context]?”
The research project has two assessment milestones. First, the Research Proposal outlines the main
components of your research project, so you can receive an early feedback on your project. In the
process, you will learn how to write a successful research proposal following commonly used
standards. Second, the Research Report provides the full account of your research project, from the
formulation of a research question (and the related knowledge gap), to the identification of data, and
drawing analytical conclusions.

Writing the Research Proposal
Structure
Your research proposal must have the following sections:
1. Introduction: brief context of the study. Focus are on the key reasons that make this study
relevant from an innovation perspective.
2. Literature review: describe the state of the art. Identify key studies, particularly through the
perspective of the empirical methods and data used.
3. Research questions: what objectives you plan to achieve with this research. Identify the
knowledge gap you want to fill.
4. Methodological approach to data: link your research objectives to the data that would help
make informed decisions. At this stage, identify what data would be relevant, and provide a
critical appraisal of the quality and availability of such data.
5. Timeline (week by week) for the research, analysis and writing of the final research report
6. References
The work count limit is 1000 words. Tables, figures, as well as sections 5 and 6 do not have to be
counted. This is clearly an exercise in concision: focus on the relevant information and prefer clarity
to quantity. Remember that a nice visual (figure, diagram, chart) is sometimes better than a thousand
words...
Examples of Research proposals:
 The guidelines at the University of Manchester
o https://www.manchester.ac.uk/study/postgraduate-research/admissions/how-to-
apply/research-proposal/
 The “Foolproof Research Proposal Template”
o http://theprofessorisin.com/2011/07/05/dr-karens-foolproof-grant-template/
 Chapter 2, pp. 44-52 from Hair Jr., J.F. et al. (2015). The Essentials of Business Research
Methods. 3rd ed. Taylor and Francis.
o https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/permalink/44MAN_INST/bofker/alma
992976013229301631
Useful readings
 Chapter 8 from Saunders, M.N.K. and Lewis, P. (2011). Doing Research in Business and
Management: an essential guide to planning your project. 1st ed. Pearson Education UK.
o https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/permalink/44MAN_INST/bofker/alma
992976146642001631
o The ultimate guide to writing a research proposal, section by section, with examples
and advice. The sections being very similar to your final report (except for the Analysis
and Results), this reading helps you write the research proposal as your preliminary
research report.
 Chapter 4 from Layder, D. (2013). Doing excellent small-scale research. SAGE Pub.
o https://methods-sagepub-com.manchester.idm.oclc.org/book/doing-excellent-
small-scale-research/n4.xml?fromsearch=true
o A short but comprehensive discussion of all the sections of the research proposal. Can
be used as a check list when you go through the final reading of your proposal.
Writing the Research Report
Structure
Your research report must have the following sections:
1. Executive summary: brief presentation (bullet points) of your topic/question, methodological
approach, and, more importantly, main findings/insights/implications (must fit on 1 page)
2. Introduction: brief context of the study. Focus on the key reasons that make this study
relevant from an innovation perspective.
3. Literature review: describe the state of the art. Identify key studies, particularly through the
perspective of the empirical methods and data used.
4. Research questions: what objectives are achieved with this research. Identify the knowledge
gap you want to fill.
5. Research methods: make a distinction between two parts
o 4.1: data evaluation. Discuss critically the sources you have used and identify the gaps
in data availability. This is where you present all the technical aspects about data:
quality, exhaustivity, relevance, methods (quantitative methods, data transformation,
…) in order to focus the rest of your work on your research questions, not the
methodological choices and challenges.
o 4.2: link your research objectives to the data that would help make informed
decisions. Show how your data and method will provide useful insights and
implications for data-driven decision-making.
6. Results: show your quantitative analysis and data visualisation. Structure the presentation
based on the rationale shown in 4.2: e.g., different perspectives on the issue (customers,
businesses, policy, …), different levels of analysis (macro/national level, city/region level,
business level, micro/individual customer or manager level), etc.
7. Discussion: synthetise your results to generate clear answers to your research question(s).
8. Conclusions and recommendations: synthetise your entire work to show the new
knowledge/insights/implications that you have created.
9. References
The work count limit is 3000 words. Tables, figures, as well as sections 1 and 9 do not have to be
counted. This is clearly an exercise in concision: focus on the relevant information and prefer clarity
to quantity. Remember that nice visuals (figure, diagram, chart) are often better than a thousand
words...
Examples of Research reports:
 From NESTA (take some time to browse their work, https://www.nesta.org.uk/report/):
o Otubusen & al. (2020). Mapping the News, Media and Journalism Landscape link
o Reypens et al. (2020). From Starting to Scaling: How to foster startup growth in Europe
link
o Kapetaniou & McIvor (2020). Going Green: Preparing the UK workforce for the
transition to a net-zero economy. link
 From Frost & Sullivan (consulting firm specialised in market research/analysis, access through
Library)
o Caveat: their reports are heavy on descriptive data/facts, light on analysis, your own
report must be more analytical and less data-intensive. If the links below do not work
at first, try again once logged in.
o Frost & Sullivan (2020). How Blockchain is Transforming the Financial Services
Industry, Industry Research Analysis, K3AE. link
o Frost & Sullivan (2020). Digitalization Powering Innovative Mobility Solutions in India,
Growth Opportunities, PB16. link
Useful readings
 The University of Manchester’s Library has put an award-winning programme to help you with
essential skills related to developing and writing a research report
o https://www.library.manchester.ac.uk/using-the-library/students/training-and-
skills-support/my-learning-essentials/
o Browse the Online Resources to guide you through the stages of your research:
‘planning’, ‘organising’, ‘searching’, ‘being critical’, ‘writing’, ‘revising’, ‘referencing’
 Chapter 16, pp. 464-470 from Hair Jr., J.F. et al. (2015). The Essentials of Business Research
Methods. 3rd ed. Taylor and Francis.
o https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/permalink/44MAN_INST/bofker/alma
992976013229301631
o A short but comprehensive discussion of all the sections of the research report. Your
starting point to writing a research report.
 Primer (short book) by Fallon, M. (2016). Writing up quantitative research in the social and
behavioral sciences. Sense Publishers.
o https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/permalink/44MAN_INST/bofker/alma
992976017742001631
o Book entirely dedicated to writing quantitative research reports, with examples! A
must read to develop a successful strategy and make sure that your report answers
the 4 questions: “What question did you ask (and why should anyone care)? What did
you do? What did you find? What does it all mean (and why should anyone care)?”
 Chapter 6, pp. 164-199 from Krishnaswamy, O.R. and Satyaprasad, B.G. (2010). Business
research methods. Himalaya Pub. House.
o https://www.librarysearch.manchester.ac.uk/permalink/44MAN_INST/bofker/alma
992981287690701631
o If you are concerned by all the little technical decisions to be made when writing the
report, from the writing style to the formatting styles.

Indicative marking criteria
Research Proposal

Assessment Criteria
[and Indicative
Weight]
Scale Descriptors
Sections 1 & 2
[40%]
1st Excellent set-up and overview of the literature. The essential
material is presented thoroughly and accurately and weighed
appropriately.
2.1 You provide evidence of appropriate independent reading and
thinking and draw upon the literature coherently to substantiate
your claims. The depth and originality of the reflection could be
improved.
2.2 Decent overview but suggests lack of clarity in thinking, better
references could be found. To improve future marks you should
increase your level of critical appraisal and independent reading,
and seek to demonstrate a deeper, and more fully researched,
understanding of the subject.
3 Weak. To achieve a higher mark you need to make sure that all
your points are fully supported with data or evidence from the
literature.
F Below standard.
Sections 3 & 4
[40%]
1st Excellent logic of the research approach and perfect discussion of
the data. Your approach to the question is ambitious and
perceptive.
2.1 You provide evidence of appropriate independent reading and
thinking and develop a clear plan for your research project. The
depth and originality of the reflection could be improved.
2.2 A decent discussion of data but mostly descriptive that suggest an
underdeveloped research design.
3 A basic argumentation and poor discussion of data with many
mistakes. To achieve a higher mark you need to make sure that
your analysis follows the same standards that can be found in the
relevant literature.
F Below standard.
Presentation,
referencing and
Language (spelling,
editing, aesthetics)
[20%]
1st Excellent, professional level with excellent use of publishing tools.
2.1 Very good, inconsistent in places.
2.2 Good, decent academic level.
3 Weak language skills / poor presentation.
F Below standard.


Research Report
Assessment Criteria
[Indicative Weight]
Scale Descriptors
Sections 2 & 3
[25%]
1st Excellent set-up and overview of the literature. The essential
material is presented thoroughly and accurately and weighed
appropriately.
2.1 You provide evidence of appropriate independent reading and
thinking and draw upon the literature coherently to substantiate
your claims. The depth and originality of the reflection could be
improved.
2.2 Decent overview but suggests lack of clarity in thinking, better
references could be found. To improve future marks you should
increase your level of critical appraisal and independent reading,
and seek to demonstrate a deeper, and more fully researched,
understanding of the subject.
3 Weak. To achieve a higher mark you need to make sure that all your
points are fully supported with data or evidence from the literature.
F Below standard.
Sections 4 & 5
[25%]
1st Excellent logic of the research approach and perfect discussion of
the data. Your approach to the question is ambitious and
perceptive.
2.1 You provide evidence of appropriate independent reading and
thinking and develop a clear design for your research project. The
depth and originality of the reflection could be improved.
2.2 A decent discussion of data but mostly descriptive that suggest an
underdeveloped research design.
3 A basic argumentation and poor discussion of data with many
mistakes. To achieve a higher mark you need to make sure that your
analysis follows the same standards that can be found in the
relevant literature.
F Below standard.
Sections 6-7-8
[30%]
1st Excellent use of the data to provide novel and original insights on
the research problem with perfectly clear and concrete
recommendations and implications
2.1 The data is used appropriately to develop clear and concrete
implications. The work shows consistency in the quality of the
analysis but could be improved in terms of depth or originality.
2.2 A decent use of the data but mostly descriptive that suggest an
underdeveloped understanding of the research problem, or vague
recommendations.
3 Weak, very limited use of the data. The mark could be improved by
providing a better logic articulating the research questions with the
empirical analysis and the subsequent implications.
F Below standard.
Executive summary,
professionalism
(spelling, editing,
aesthetics)
[20%]
1st Excellent, professional level with excellent use of publishing tools.
2.1 Very good, inconsistent in places.
2.2 Good, decent academic level.
3 Weak language skills / poor presentation.
F Below standard.