NEED A PERFECT PAPER? PLACE YOUR FIRST ORDER AND SAVE 15% USING COUPON:

4.8/5

Financials Ratios

Financials Ratios

Module Name Financial Decision Making
Level 7
Module Leader Ewan Tracey
Module Code FINM036
Assessment title:
Written Assignment
Weighting: 50%
Submission dates: Please see NILE
Feedback and Grades
due: Please see NILE
1
Assessment Task
This assessment requires students to produce an individual report analysing the performance and operations
of a publicly listed company within a selected sector. A list of companies will be provided for students to
select from. This assessment represents 50% of the total marks.
Module Assignment Information
Due date: To be determined – UK semester 1 / overseas assignment
due from 1st September 2022 to 31st August 2023
FINM036 Written Assignment
The aim of this assignment is to test students’ knowledge and understanding of key accounting and
corporate finance concepts, theories and tools that can be used to critically analyse organisations. It will also
test the ability to present non-financial information
Required:
You have been asked to write a report to the board of directors of one of the selected companies below as
part of the interview process for your first appointment as a Finance Director of a company listed on AIM
(which is the Alternative Investment Market for small companies) within the London Stock Exchange (LSE).
The board of directors have asked you to write a report about your vision and strategic financial goals for the
company.
The companies are within a selected sector of the AIM. Assume that your selected company has ambitions
and plans to become a FTSE 100 (the largest UK listed companies) company in the near future.
Guide:
You need to introduce the company, discuss the product or services, location, turnover, number of
employees, etc. The report should be maximum 2,500 words (+/- 10%). Remember you need to make an
impression on the board of directors for you to be considered for the critical post of Finance Director.
The essence of this assignment is to test your knowledge and understanding of key accounting and
corporate governance concepts, theories and tools and ability to present data in a concise manner.
Required:

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

You have been asked to write a report to the board of directors of one of the selected companies below as
part of the interview process for your first appointment as a Finance Director of a AIM company. The board of
directors have asked you to write a report about your vision and strategic financial goals for the company.
The companies are within the AIM index. Assume that your selected company wants to become a FTSE 100
(the largest UK listed companies) company in the near future.
Additional Guidance
You need to introduce the company, discuss the product or services, location, turnover, number of
employees, the contribution of the sector to the UK economy. To analyse, you need to compare the financial
data / ratios of your selected company with either a competitor within the sector or the average of the sector.
2
The report should be maximum 2,500 words. Remember you need to make an impression on the board of
directors for you to be considered for the critical post of Finance Director.
Please note that you must select a company from the list below for 2019/20
List of companies to select from for 2019/2020
Company Name ICB
Super-Sector
Country of
Incorporation
Market Company Market Cap
(£m)
ACCSYS TECHNOLOGIES PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £87.65
BILLINGTON HOLDINGS PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £37.25
EPWIN GROUP PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £114.34
JAMES HALSTEAD PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £848.53
MICHELMERSH BRICK HOLDINGS PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £82.33
NEXUS INFRASTRUCTURE PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £78.90
SIGMAROC PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £56.46
VAN ELLE HOLDINGS PLC Construction &
Materials
United Kingdom AIM £72.80
Section A- 2000 words.
1. Analyse the performance of your chosen company using relevant financial and non-financial ratios (5
years). Your analysis should include profit ratios, efficiency, liquidity and other ratios that you
consider relevant.
Section B 500 words
1. Critically evaluate the company’s corporate governance compliance and its impact on the brand and
reputation as reported in the press (print, online and social media)
2. Discuss the proposed medium term financial strategies for your selected company to become a
FTSE100 company or for your company to become dominant in the industry / sector.
Please note:
If you select a company outside of the list above, you will automatically fail this part of the
assignment, unless you get a prior written approval from your tutor.
You can use www.northcote.co.uk, pro-share and the FT to identify companies within their sectoral
classifications. It is essential that all sources of information are correctly referenced using the Harvard
system.
Word Limits
The word limit for this assignment is 2500 words (+/- 10%)
Where the submission exceeds the stipulated word limit by more than 10%, the submission
will only be marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be
included in the final grade for the assessment item. Abstracts, bibliographies, reference
lists, appendices and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements.
3
Where a submission is notably under the word limit, the full submission will be
marked on the extent to which the requirements of the assessment brief have been
met.
Assessment Learning Outcomes
The learning outcomes to be addressed through this assignment are:
(a) Demonstrate a critical understanding of the nature and role of the finance professional
and how financial control processes impact on the organisation and its stakeholders.
(b) Critically evaluate the impact of the external context on the financial domain, both
domestically and internationally.
(c) Identify, critically appraise and analyse the content, relevance and use of key financial
accounting information and techniques, both within organisations and by reference to
relevant research.
(d) Demonstrate the ability to evaluate critically and communicate effectively the financial
performance of an organisation by reference to internal or published financial information.
Assessment Grading Criteria
The marking criteria
Criteria Exceptional 70-100% A- to A+ Good C- to C+ Pass D- to D+ Fail F- to F+
Introduction,
presentation
and refereeing
of the report
10%
7-10
Exceptional report. The
introduction is exemplary and
provides evidence of a complete
understanding of the company’s
activities. The industry and the
company analysed are outline
and justified clearly. The
significance of the industry and
comparative report is presented
clearly. There is clear evidence of
originality and ability to justify the
research effort. Compelling
evidence of research.
6 -6 points
Good: The introduction is
relevant and illustrates an
attempt to address the
assessment requirements.
The industry and company
are described in detail. The
rationale and comparative
data is limited. Good
rationale, but lacks the
details expected to score top
marks probably due to
general unsupported
statements or grammatical /
spelling mistakes.
5 to 5 points
Satisfactory: The
introduction shows
some correlation with
the project
requirements. There is
irrelevant information.
The rationale and
objectives are not
vague. Generally
descriptive. There is
very limited evidence of
research.
1 to 4 points
Fail. The introduction is
descriptive and irrelevanThe work lacks clear
justification of the report
purpose. Industry and
company choice are not
justified. Limited supportfor the information given.The student selected a
company not on the list
without approval
Application of
the theories
underpinning
the report
20%
16to 20 points
Exceptional. A clear
demonstration of complete grasp
of knowledge of the key factors
that drive performance in the
chosen company and the industry
in general. Critical relevant
theories are identified such as the
application of PESTEL or any
other competition or management
theories to support your argument
must apply and critically appraise
the theories. Industry examples
13 to 15 points
Good: The analysis
demonstrates adequate
knowledge of a fair range of
the factors that affect
company performance.
There is intermittent
evidence of an appreciation
of the significance of the
factors to the industry being
analysed. Critical success
factors are outlined. Some
examples and limited
10 to 12 points
Satisfactory: The
analysis is largely
descriptive and narrative
with little evidence of
analysis. There is no
clear evaluation of how
the identified factors
affect the selected
company. Critical
success factors are
vague. Limited evidence
of research. Lack of
1 to 9 points
Fail: The analysis is not
linked to the company.
The analysis is
descriptive and generallyirrelevant to the companyCritical success factors
are not clear or missing.
No relevant examples arpresented. Little evidencof research
4
Criteria Exceptional 70-100% A- to A+ Good C- to C+ Pass D- to D+ Fail F- to F+
and published literature are used
to develop a logical case on the
relevance of the sector, its
importance and some key
financial indicators such as the
GDP contribution of the sector or
contribution to the country’s
economy over the past five years.
Theories such as the SWOT
analysis (strength, weaknesses,
opportunities and threats) within
the sector or PEST analysis
(Political, economical, social and
technological) impact of the
industry or sector
literature are used.
Contributions of the sector to
the county’s economy may
be missing
concrete supporting
evidence
The student selected a
company not on the list
without approval.
Depth of
research
including the use
of appropriate

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Financials Ratios
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

ratios / explained
30%
22 to 30 points
Exceptional. The selected
financial ratios are clearly justified
within the context of the industry
being analysed. Selected
financial ratios for the past five
years are shown and clearly
presented and labelled in
appendices. Comparison to the
competitors financial and non
financial data or the sector
figures. The use of examples and
published literature to justify
choice of ratios is compelling. The
interpretation of financial ratios
and their importance
demonstrates complete grasp of
knowledge. Relevant examples
and references used in
discussion
18 to 21 points
Good: Financial ratios are
selected and outlined clearly.
Most of the financial ratios
for the past five years are
presented in appendices.
The interpretation and
justification of financial ratios
lack consistency. There is
intermittent evidence of an
understanding of the
significance of the financial
ratios. Some examples and
references are used in
discussion.
15 to 17 points
Satisfactory: Financial
ratios are stated but not
clearly justified.
Incomplete financial
ratios for the past five
years are presented in
appendices. A basic
argument is evident but
lacks clarity and
coherence. Limited
examples and
references used in
discussion
1 to 14 points
Fail: Financial ratios are
defined and described
with no justification.
Financial ratios for the
past five years are
incomplete or missing.
Insufficient evidence of
knowledge and researchNo examples and lack ofcited published work.
The student selected a
company not on the list
without approval
Formulation of
an effective
summary of key
issues
and potential
actions/ changes
30%
22 to 30 points
Exceptional. The report
summarises the key elements
and brings out the compelling
reasons why potential investors
and other stakeholders should be
keen to invest in the company.
The strategic direction of the
company and key advice on
competitor’s analysis and the
future of the company when
compared to other sectors within
the economy.
The main CG rules and the
analysis of the company’s
compliance with corporate
governance rules such as rules
on diversity, effectiveness,
control, directors’ attendance at
board meetings
The arguments are logical and
backed up with supporting
evidenced that are within the
report. Exceptional comparisons
with competitors and advantages
are enumerated and clearly
stated including plan for future
financial strategy for the company
18 to 21 points
Good: A good attempt to
construct a coherent and
logical discussion of the
relevant issues. The report
shows some relevance and
justification but does not give
details on corporate
governance compliance by
the selected company
There is a lack of focus and
consistency in the
discussion. There is
tendency to narrate and
lacks analysis. Some
examples and limited
literature are used.
15 to 17 points
Satisfactory: Basic
understanding of the
report is understood, but
lacks coherent and
logical flow of the
discussion. Some of the
analysis are not
customised to the
selected company or
comparison made to the
industry.
Very descriptive outline
of company. Limited
analysis with no links to
industry. No or limited
CG compliance issue
1 to 14 points
Fail. Intermittent and
vague description of the
report requirements andtheir impact on the
industry. The writing
rarely goes beyond
simplifying paraphrase othe essential elements ofthe requirements of the
report without adequate
justification or any
convincing demonstratioof essence of the report
No discussion of CG
rules or application of therules to the selected
company
5
Criteria Exceptional 70-100% A- to A+ Good C- to C+ Pass D- to D+ Fail F- to F+
Conclusion
10%
7 to 10 points
Excellent. The conclusion is a
summative review of the report. The
evaluation is compelling,
interpretation is accurate and the
discourse is clear. Citation and
referencing is accurate, up-to-date
and well presented.
Justification for appointment into the
FD role
6 to 6 points
Good:. The conclusion is a
good review of the report. The
discussion is clear and orderly.
Citation and referencing is clear
throughout. No details on the
justification for the post
5 to 5 points
Satisfactory: The
conclusion is descriptive
and lacks analysis and
critical evaluation. Citation
and referencing is good in
some parts. Lacks the
reason for the appointment
as FD
1 to 4 points
Fail: The conclusion show lack of understanding of thereport requirement and
material presented in the
document. Conclusion has
some information that is
irrelevant to the report.
Citation and referencing is
incorrect / missing in most
parts
Generic Grading Criteria for Level 7
See grading criteria below
Assessment Support/Feedforward
Please look out for announcement on NILE on additional support to help with your work. We
are unable to provide individual review of the draft of your work
Assessment Submission
To submit, please go to the ‘Submit your work’ area on the NILE site and use the AS1
submission point to upload your work. The deadline for this is 11.59pm (UK local time) on the
date of submission.
The work will be subject to Turnitin anti-plagiarism detection software. Turnitin checks
student work for possible textual matches against internet available resources and its own
proprietary database.
N.B Work emailed directly to your tutor will not be marked.
Late submission of work
Use either:
If an item of assessment is submitted late and an extension has not been granted, the
following will apply:
● Within one week of the original deadline – work will be marked and returned with full
feedback, and awarded a maximum bare pass grade of C-.
● More than one week from original deadline – maximum grade achievable LG (L
indicating late).
Or, if a resit
Any work submitted late will be awarded a LG grade.
Extensions
Use either:
The University of Northampton’s general policy with regard to extensions is to be supportive
of students who have genuine difficulties, but not against pressures of work that could have
reasonably been anticipated. Please refer to Appendix I of the Post Graduate Handbook for
advice on extensions.
Or, if a resit
6
There are NO extensions for resits
Feedback and Grades
Your grade and overall summary feedback will be available in Grade Centre. Please also click
through to Turnitin for within text comments.
Academic Practice and Integrity
This is an individual assignment.
The University of Northampton policy will apply in all cases of copying, plagiarism or any other
methods by which students have obtained (or attempted to obtain) an unfair advantage.
Support and guidance on assessments and academic integrity can be found on: SkillsHub:
https://skillshub.northampton.ac.uk/ . If a case of academic misconduct is suspected the tutor
will apply a ZZ grade in NILE.
Mitigating Circumstances
For guidance on Mitigating circumstances please go to
https://www.northampton.ac.uk/about-us/governance-and-management/university-policies-p
rocedures-and-regulations/ where under Student Issues you will find detailed guidance on the
policy as well as guidance and the form for making an application.
Please note, however, that an application to defer an assessment on the grounds of mitigating
circumstances should normally be made in advance of the submission deadline or
examination date.
7
GENERIC GRADE CRITERIA
These are the criteria required to achieve each classification at:

ORDER A PLAGIARISM FREE PAPER NOW

Level 7
An
outstanding
Distinction
A+ Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional
standard
A very strong
Distinction
A Work of distinguished quality which is evidenced by an authoritative
comprehensive, detailed and systematic knowledge base and understanding
for specialised area of study. A key feature will be the ability to work with
creativity and originality using knowledge and insights at the forefront of the
area of study. There will be a confident grasp of disciplinary methodologies for
the discipline/area of study which will be consistently reflected in both own
research and advanced scholarship, effectively integrating advanced skills of
analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application on a firm foundation of critical
facility. Work will be characterised by strong technical expertise to high
professional standards, and there will be sustained evidence of confident,
autonomous operation and judgment in complex and unpredictable
professional situations both in relation to working with others and in relation to
own functioning. Self-direction, creativity, practical understanding will be
combined to demonstrate the qualities expected of an effective self critical
independent learner exercising excellent measured judgment, and will be a
consistent feature of work.
A clear
Distinction
A- Work of very good quality which displays most but not all of the criteria for the
grade above.
An
outstanding
merit
B+ Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the
grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant advanced
intellectual or specialised skills.
A very
strong
Merit
B Work of commendable quality demonstrating a detailed and systematic
knowledge base and understanding in specialised areas, informed by critical
awareness of current issues, research based/theoretical insights at the
forefront of the area of study. This will be supplemented by a good
comprehensive understanding of disciplinary methodologies relevant to own
research or advanced scholarship, which will be reflected in work which
integrates skills of advanced analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application with
critical awareness. There will be some evidence of originality in application of
skills/knowledge, underpinned by good technical expertise which permits
confident, autonomous operation in a range of complex and unpredictable
professional situations. The ability to work autonomously, as a self critical
independent learner exercising good and considered judgment, will be a
consistent feature of work.
A Merit B- Work of good quality which contains most, but not all of the characteristics of
the grade above.
An
Outstanding
Pass
C+ Work which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater
degree of capability in relevant advanced intellectual or specialised skills.
8
A Very Good
Pass
C Work of capable quality which clearly demonstrates a systematic
understanding of knowledge in specialised areas and a critical awareness of
current issues, research based/theoretical knowledge at the forefront of the
area of study, together with a sound understanding of methodologies
applicable to own research or advanced scholarship. There may be limitations
to the application of this knowledge and/or conceptual understanding of
advanced scholarship, but there will be evidence of critical awareness in
relation to analysis, synthesis, evaluation and application. The ability to
exercise initiative as an independent and self critical learner in complex and
unpredictable professional contexts will be demonstrated, as will threshold
levels of technical expertise, although the scope of expertise may be limited.
A Pass C- Work of satisfactory quality which contains most, but not all of the
characteristics of the grade above.
Fail F+ Work which indicates some evidence of a systematic, coherent and
analytical engagement with key aspects of the field of study, including
familiarity with current scholarship, and evidence of ability to utilise specialised
skills, but which also contains significant limitations.
F Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in relation to one or
more of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills at this level.
F- Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal understanding,
application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity with
knowledge or skills appropriate to the field of study at this level.
AG Work submitted but academic misconduct proven and penalty given was to
award AG grade
LG Work submitted but given an LG grade due to late submission
NG Work submitted but work comprises no value
G Nothing presented

Financials Ratios

 

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Our Experts can help. Use the coupon code SAVE30 to get your first order at 30% off!
Open chat
Scan the code
Need help with this or a different assignment? We offer CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL (Turnitin/LopesWrite/SafeAssign checks), and PRIVATE services using latest (within 5 years) peer-reviewed articles. Kindly click on ORDER NOW to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and doctorate-prepared writers.