BTM6DSM Business & Tourism Management assignment

Destination Management Module Assignment Brief

Programme: Business & Tourism Management

Level: Level 6

Module Title: Destination Management

Module code: BTM6DSM

Module leader/s:

• Dr. Augustine Imonikhe
• Deputy leader: Gabriela Cicenia
• Deputy leader: Shamso Vaziri

Assignment No: 1

Assignment Type: Essay

Assignment weighting %: 100%

Assignment Word Count: (or equivalent) 4,000 words

Penalties: All penalties are listed at the end of this document in the Table of Penalties.

Submission Dates, Times and Links

Submission Type	Date & Time	Link
Summative Date	Monday 2nd March 2026 14:00	BTM6DMA_SEP22: Essay – First Submission | Global Banking School
Late Submission	Wednesday 4th March 2026 14:00	BTM6DMA_SEP22: Essay – Late Submission | Global Banking School
Grade & Feedback Release Dates	All grades and feedback release dates are 21 days after the submission date.

Module Learning Outcomes

This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:

LO 1 Analyse and assess the importance of destination management.

LO 2 Utilise and apply relevant destination development models in a variety of international and regional tourism settings.

LO 3 Critically assess the role of Destination Management Organisations (DMO’s) in managing the destination’s resources and destination development.

LO 4 Evaluate the principles of sustainability in destination management in the tourism industry.

This assignment involves preparing an individual written essay that critically examines the role of Destination Management Organisations (DMOs) in fostering international and regional tourism development.

Assignment task

OVERVIEW

Task requirements

This individual-written essay requires a critical examination of Destination Management Organisations’ (DMOs) role in advancing international and regional tourism development. The assignment is designed to demonstrate achievement of the module’s learning outcomes: analysing destination management importance, applying destination development models, critically assessing DMOs’ resource management functions, and evaluating sustainability principles in tourism contexts.

TASK

You are required to produce a 4,000-word analytical essay titled “An Analytical Evaluation of the Strategic Role of DMOs in Sustainable Global and Regional Tourism Development.”

This task requires a critical evaluation of DMOs’ strategic contributions to tourism ecosystems across economic, social, and environmental dimensions. The essay must demonstrate a sophisticated synthesis of academic theories and industry evidence while addressing the module’s learning outcomes. You are expected to prioritise original critical analysis, ensuring that your conclusions are well-grounded in scholarly research and supported by contemporary case studies.

Essay Requirements

Task 1

Establish the significance of Destination Management Organisations within contemporary tourism landscapes. Contextualise DMOs’ evolving roles in addressing global challenges, while outlining the essay’s analytical scope on sustainable tourism development.

Task 2

Comprehensively examine tourism as a multidimensional strategic asset. Analyse economic dimensions, including GDP contribution and employment generation, social impacts on cultural preservation and community cohesion, and environmental stewardship imperatives. Apply theoretical frameworks to evaluate how DMOs balance these interconnected priorities, supported by empirical evidence from diverse geographical contexts.

Task 3

Critically engage with established destination development models and their contemporary relevance. Your evaluation should address the conceptual and practical validity of how these models are used to mitigate tourism challenges.

Task 4

Critically appraise DMOs’ leadership in Tourism Destination Planning (TDP). Focus areas may include infrastructure development, workforce capacity building, environmental conservation strategies, and innovative sustainability practices.

Task 5

Synthesise key findings that address emerging challenges such as geopolitical uncertainties, technological disruptions, and climate pressures. Proposing evidence-based recommendations for enhancing DMO effectiveness in sustainable destination governance.

Important Notes:

• Your essay must be based on reliable research and supported with peer reviewed journals and corporate publications. Academic concepts, theories, and research findings must be properly cited in accordance with the CCCU Harvard Referencing Style.

• Headers, pictures, graphs, bold or italic fonts should NOT be used in the body of the text in academic essays. Should you believe informative diagrams or graphs are useful, please attach them to the appendix.

Referencing and research requirements

Please reference your work according to the Canterbury Harvard style guidance, which you can access on Moodle.

Mandatory Referencing and Research Requirements

Referencing Style: CCCU Harvard Referencing Style.

Mandatory Sources to be included in the Assignment:

Core:

• Perez, W. (2022) Tourism Destination Management. New York: States Academic Press.

Recommended:

• Boniface, B. Cooper, R. and Cooper, C. (2021) Worldwide Destinations. The Geography of Travel and Tourism. 8th edn. New York: Routledge
• Ryan, C. (2020) Advanced Introduction to Tourism Destination Management. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Von Magius Mogelhoj, H. (2021) Overtourism: The Role of Effective Destination Management. New York: Business Expert Press.
• Morrison, A.M. (2023) Marketing and Managing Tourist Destinations. 3rd edn. New York: Routledge

Students NO LONGER need to attach the cover sheet given with their essays, and DO NOT need to complete the particulars on the cover sheet. Marking will be done ANONYMOUSLY

Format of your submission and how your assignment will be assessed

This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time).

• Please ensure that your work has been saved in an appropriate file format (Microsoft Word). Your file must also contain at least 20 words of text, consist of fewer than 400 pages and be less than 40MB in size.

• You can submit your work as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your work more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version.

• Once you have submitted your work, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be sent to your forwarded e-mail address (provided you have set this up). Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original electronic copy of your assignment

• You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website: Academic Misconduct Policy. In submitting your assignment, you acknowledge that you have read and understood these regulations.

Assessment Criteria:

Your work will be assessed to the extent it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend on your use of academic referencing conventions.

This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 6; also see Table of Penalties enclosed to the Assignment Brief and Assessment Guide.

Submission Requirements

Submission Platform: This assignment should be submitted electronically using Moodle to the Module Submission link

Submission Date & Time:

• This assignment will be subject to Anonymous Marking by lecturers therefore you should not upload any front sheets for this assignment or put any information into the assignment brief that identifies you either by name or student ID.
• This assignment will be subject to Random interview selection. You will be asked to attend a meeting to demonstrate your knowledge of the assignment which should take no longer than 20-30 minutes. Please note that failure to attend the meeting means that the assignment will be graded zero until you have attended.
• All submission & resubmission dates and time are as stated at the beginning of this Assignment brief. You should submit your Assignment for all deadlines earlier than 2:00pm on the date stated.
• Late submissions can be accepted for Summative Submissions only up to a maximum of 2 working days after the submission deadline. This does not apply to resubmission deadlines. A 10-mark deduction will be made by CCCU for all late submissions.
• Work submitted more than two working days after the deadline will not be accepted and will be recorded as a non-submission.
• Assignments submitted to the Resubmissions deadlines will be capped at 40 by CCCU.

Exceptional Circumstances:

If you are affected by events which are unexpected, outside your control and short-term in nature (i.e. lasting one to two weeks), under the exceptional circumstances procedure you may be eligible for:

• A seven-day extension to your coursework (via self-certification request). • A 14-day extension to your coursework (via evidence-based request). • To defer your exam or time-constrained assessment if you have not yet submitted/attempted it (via self-certification or evidence-based request). • To re-take an exam/time-constrained assessment, if you feel your performance on your first attempt was negatively impacted (via impaired performance request).

Please note students are only eligible to have a maximum of 2 self-certification requests per academic year.

You can make a self-certification request up to 14 calendar days before your deadline: • it must be no later than 2pm on the deadline date

Table of Penalties

Issue with the Assignment	Penalty to be Applied
Suspected Academic Misconduct or Breach of Academic integrity	The Assignment will be graded zero. Written feedback will be ‘This assignment has been identified as potential Academic Misconduct/Breach of Academic Integrity. You will be invited to a meeting to discuss’.<br><br>You will be invited to a meeting with an academic Misconduct reviewer. When you attend the meeting if Academic Misconduct or the breach of Academic Integrity is upheld you will be asked to rewrite the section of the assignment it applies to and re-submit the assignment.<br><br>Do not upload any assignments to the AMC submission links before the meeting otherwise it will be removed.<br><br>Failure to attend the meeting means the assignment will remain graded at zero and you will be unable to pass the module until you have attended the meeting.
The assignment is more than 10% over the prescribed wordcount i.e. for 3,000 words, if 3,400 is submitted excluding the cover page, table of contents, references and appendices.	A 10-mark deduction applied to the overall grade that is manually entered by the Lecturer. This deduction is capped at 40%, which means an assignment cannot get less than 40% if a deduction has to be made.<br><br>For example, if the mark for the assignment was 60. The lecturer would deduct 10 marks, and the mark will be 50. Written feedback will also state ‘This assignment is 10% over the wordcount and 10 marks have been deducted’.
Where assignments are more than 10% less than the prescribed wordcount and lecturers cannot identify if the learning outcomes have been met.	This assignment will be graded below 40.
Where a student submits a .pdf instead of a word document.	This assignment will be graded a Fail.<br><br>The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This is a pdf submission and is not allowed. All submissions should be in Microsoft Word format’.
Where a written assignment has text that is unable to be read by Turnitin because it is either a graphical image (excluding Presentations & Posters); for example, a screenshot or the assignment is written within text boxes on each page.	This assignment will be graded 0 and the written feedback should state ‘This assignment is unreadable by Turnitin and cannot be checked for Academic Misconduct. It has been referred for an AMC meeting’.<br><br>The assignment will then be referred for Academic Misconduct investigation.
An assignment that does not make use of any Mandatory references provided in the assignment brief/Module Handbook.	The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero
An assignment has a reference list, but no citations.	The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero. Written feedback should state ‘The reference criteria has been graded Zero as no citations have been used. Please include citations in your assignment to support the academic points being made’.
An assignment has no citations and no reference list.	Foundation & Level 4 – The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero. The written feedback will state ‘Please ensure that you use citations and references to support your assignment submission’.<br><br>At Level 5 and Level 6 this would be graded as a Fail. The lecturer will grade as 1 and written feedback will also show ‘This assignment has no citations and no reference list’.
Where False references are included in an assignment.	This will be referred for Academic Misconduct.<br><br>This assignment will be graded 0 and the written feedback should state ‘This assignment contains false references and has been referred for Academic Misconduct. You will be invited to attend an Academic Misconduct meeting’.
Assignment is submitted after the Late Deadline or if it is a Resubmission, after the Resubmission deadline	This assignment will be graded a Fail.<br><br>The lecturer will grade as 1 and written feedback should state ‘This assignment was submitted after the deadline. Please resubmit at the next resubmission opportunity.’

Student Integrity and Academic Misconduct

The values of student integrity expected by CCCU are:

• Honesty – being clear about what is your work and where your ideas come from other sources. • Trust – others can have faith in you being open about your work and acknowledging others’ work. • Fairness – you do not try to gain an unfair advantage in using others’ work. • Responsibility – you take an active role in applying the principle of Academic Integrity to your work. • Respect – you show respect for the work of others.

Peer-support:

Students might choose to get support from their peers when preparing assessments, such as discussing the subject of the assessment, exchanging ideas, and receiving suggestions for improving the work. This is peer-support, and the University accepts this as a reasonable expectation when completing assessments. However, peers must not make any changes to anyone’s assessments as such actions could lead to allegations of academic misconduct.

Use of English as the medium of assessment:

Students cannot write an assessment in another language and subsequently translate their work into English or have it translated by any form of third-party. Use of translation software or third-party translators is a form of academic misconduct.

Artificial Intelligence (AI):

Students must write the entire assessment without using AI software such as ChatGPT. Submitting an assessment that contains any form of AI is a form of academic misconduct.

Proofreading:

Students can make use of Microsoft Word’s grammar and spell-checking functions but the use of Grammarly is not allowed as it uses AI text generation. If student’s use third-party proofreaders, these cannot make any changes that alter the assessment in anyway including correcting language or citation format errors. Third-party alterations to the assessment are a form of academic misconduct.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism can be defined as incorporating another person’s material from books, journals, the internet, another student’s work, or any other source into assessment material without acknowledgement. It includes:

• Using exactly the same words (sentences, phrases or even expressions not in everyday use, invented or created by an author to explain an idea) as used originally • Rephrasing by making slight adjustments • Paraphrasing in a way which may deceive the reader as to the source. • Plagiarism in whatever form it takes is form of academic misconduct.

Collusion:

If students submit work for assessment that is falsely presented as the student’s own work but was jointly written with somebody else; this is a form of academic misconduct.

Duplication/Self-Plagiarism:

The inclusion in assessments of a significant amount of identical or substantially similar material to that already submitted for assessment by the student and graded for the same course or any other course or module at this University or elsewhere is classed as self-plagiarism. It does not include a resubmission of the same piece of work allowed by the examiners in an improved or revised form for reassessment purposes. Self-plagiarism is a form of academic misconduct.

Further clarification of the above can be found in CCCU’s Academic Misconduct documents below:

1. CCCU Student Academic Misconduct Procedures can found below: Please click the link to Open. https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Misconduct-Procedures-staff-students.pdf
2. CCCU Student Academic Integrity Policy can be found below: Please click the link to Open. https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Integrity-Policy.pdf

Assessment Rubrics

Area	Reference	Weighting %	Criteria	100-80: Excellent	79-70: Very Good	69-60: Good	59-50: Sound	49-40: Satisfactory	39-20: Fail	19-0: Fail
1	20	Knowledge<br>Knowledge and application of the subject and theories	Knowledge and understanding of theory are very detailed and beyond what has been taught.<br><br>Demonstrate a coherent understanding of the limits of subject-specific theories throughout the work. The approach to the assessment task is appropriately and theoretically informed.	Demonstrate an extensive, accurate, systematic understanding of the subject and a range of key theories.<br><br>Appropriately selected theoretical knowledge is synergised into the overall assessment task.	Shows a good, systematic, and accurate understanding of key subject-specific theories, which are appropriately integrated within the context of the assessment task.	Sound descriptive knowledge of key theories with appropriate application; may be balanced towards the descriptive rather than the critical or analytical.	The selection of theory is satisfactory, and terminology, facts and concepts are handled accurately, but the application and/or understanding is generalised.	In this assignment, some of the theories presented are not appropriate.<br><br>Terminology, facts and concepts are presented inaccurately and/or with omissions in key areas. The application and/or understanding is limited.	In this assignment, there is a lack of relevant subject-specific theory.<br><br>The demonstration is limited.
2	10	Information<br>Information gathering/processing	Uses initiative to seek out new sources of information, evaluates their validity against a range of relevant information and synthesises and evaluates their validity comprehensively.<br><br>Selects a broad range of highly relevant information.	Demonstrates a developing understanding of the complexity of the information and processes it comprehensively.<br><br>Selects appropriate information and processes it thoroughly with some critical evaluation.	Selects appropriate information and evaluates, and comments on it with some critical evaluation, includes some readings beyond the set range.	Selects generally appropriate research and primary sources and shows ability to comment on them adequately.	The selection of sources/data here is not appropriate to the task, and there are not enough evidence-based evaluations of readings and research to support the work.	The selection of sources/data here is not appropriate to the task, and the evidence gathered is not evaluated systematically.
5	10	Referencing<br>Referencing	Sources used are acknowledged in the text and reference list and used fluently to support the discussion. Referencing follows a systematic approach, appropriate to the discipline. All elements of individual references are present.	Sources used are acknowledged in the text and reference list and used to support the discussion. Referencing follows a systematic approach, appropriate to the discipline. All elements of individual references are present.	Sources used are acknowledged in the text and reference list and support the discussion. Referencing follows a systematic approach, appropriate to the discipline. All elements of individual references are present.	Sources used are acknowledged in the text and reference list. Referencing follows a systematic approach, appropriate to the discipline. Most elements of individual references are present.	Sources of information are acknowledged and integration between text and reference list is mainly effective. Attempts to follow a systematic approach appropriate to the discipline. Elements of individual references are generally complete.	Some sources of information acknowledged, but links between the text and the reference list is unclear. Referencing does not follow a systematic approach. Elements of individual references are incomplete and/or absent.	Little or no acknowledgement of sources of information in text and/or reference list in this submission.
6	10	Clarity<br>Clarity of objectives and focus of work	This work defines appropriate objectives in detail and addresses them logically, coherently, comprehensively and with creativity, showing some sophisticated interpretation of complex ideas.	This work defines appropriate objectives in detail and addresses them logically and coherently, interpreting complex ideas clearly.	This work defines appropriate objectives and addresses them coherently and logically throughout the work while engaging with complex ideas.	This work outlines appropriate objectives and addresses them logically and coherently, which gives a focus to the work with some engagement with complex ideas.	This work uses generalised objectives to provide adequate but limited focus to the work. Overall, logical and coherent, but with limited engagement with complex ideas.	In this piece of work objectives are not appropriate and/or clearly identified – focus is not logical or coherent.	In this piece of work, no objectives are identified, and the submission lacks focus and coherence.
8	20	Analysis<br>Analysis	Demonstrate an outstanding grasp of relevant analytic techniques and the ability to apply these to new and/or abstract information and situations.<br><br>Shows an exceptional appreciation (for this level) of the limits and/or appropriate uses of analytic approaches.<br><br>Makes excellent use of a range of relevant analytic techniques and applies these to new and/or abstract information and situations.	Shows well-developed ability to compare Critically alternative theories and/or analytic approaches (where relevant).	Makes effective use of established techniques of analysis relevant to the discipline. Shows developing ability to compare with some insight alternative theories and/or analytic approaches (where relevant).	Makes consistent, albeit conventional, use of established techniques of analysis, relevant to the discipline.	Makes satisfactory but limited use of established techniques of analysis, relevant to the discipline.	The submission includes analysis, but the analysis is ineffective and/or uninformed by key disciplinary techniques.	This submission does not contain effective analysis and does not yet engage with key disciplinary techniques.
9	10	Conclusions<br>Conclusions	Conclusions are coherent, well-developed and show some originality.<br><br>They form an integrated part of well-substantiated overall arguments and/or discussion, reflecting commanding grasp of a wide range of theory and/or evidence and/or literature and appropriate forms of conceptualisation.<br><br>Demonstrates sophisticated critical insight and interpretation of complex matters and ideas	Conclusions are coherent, well-developed, analytical, and show some sophisticated insights. They are systematic and thoroughly grounded in a wide range of theory and/or evidence and/or literature and use appropriate forms of conceptualisation, forming an integrated part of well-substantiated overall arguments and/or discussion. Demonstrates development of sophisticated critical insight and interpretation of complex matters and ideas	Conclusions show development of critical insight and relate clearly and logically to substantiated arguments based on a wide range of sources of evidence and/or theory and/or literature. A range of views and information is critically evaluated and synthesised, and there is a perceptive interpretation of complex matters and ideas.	Logical and evidence-based conclusions are drawn from the evaluation of a range of sources of evidence/or theory, and/or literature.<br><br>Shows the ability to consider and evaluate a range of views and to explain complex matters and ideas clearly.	Adequate conclusions are drawn, which are derived from an understanding of evidence/or theory and/or literature. Shows the ability to consider alternative views and explain complex matters and ideas.	The work demonstrates an extremely limited or inaccurate understanding of the evidence and does not draw together arguments effectively.	The work Either lacks a conclusion or presents an unsubstantiated and/or invalid conclusion.
15	10	Communication<br>Communication and presentation (appropriate to discipline)	Exceptional communication which demonstrates a comprehensive and sophisticated understanding of the discipline.	Accomplished communication which demonstrates a particularly good understanding of the discipline.	Very good and thorough communication in a format appropriate to the discipline.	Effective communication in a format appropriate to the discipline.	Clear communication and in a format which shows awareness of the discipline’s academic style.	Here the communication. The presentation is unstructured and unfocused, and/or in a format not appropriate to the discipline.	Here, the communication is disorganised and/or incoherent and does not show understanding of the discipline’s academic style.
16	10	Expression<br>Clarity of expression (incl. accuracy, spelling, grammar, punctuation, and numeracy)	Excellent writing control, appropriate to the assignment, which enhances the argument. Grammar, spelling, and numeracy are flawlessly accurate.	Accomplish a writing style appropriate to the assignment. Grammar, spelling, and numeracy are almost always accurate.	Fluent writing style; use of language fluent, nuanced, and expressive. Grammar, spelling, and numeracy are mainly accurate.	Language is clear, consistent, and conveys nuances. Grammar, spelling and/or numeracy are mainly accurate with some errors. Punctuation, grammar and numeracy need to be improved.	Understandable and clear writing style, but accuracy of spelling, grammar, punctuation, and numeracy need to be improved. Errors which detract from the argument.	In this piece of work, the meaning is often unclear with frequent errors in grammar, spelling, and or numeracy.	In this piece of work, the meaning is unclear throughout. Errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation and/or numeracy are interpreted as challenging for an assessor.