HI6007 Assessment 3 – Final Business Research Proposal (2,500 Words)

Prepare a 2,500-word Final Research Proposal for HI6007 Statistics for Business Decisions that consolidates, strengthens, and substantially develops your initial proposal across nine structured components, including an ethics checklist, a Gantt Chart, and a focused literature review of two to three pages. This assessment is worth 20% of the final grade and must be submitted as a hard copy to Holmes Institute by 4:00 pm on Friday of Week 12.

Assessment Overview

• Course: HI6007 – Statistics for Business Decisions
• Faculty: Faculty of Higher Education, Holmes Institute
• Assessment: Assessment 3 – Final Research Proposal
• Word Count: 2,500 words
• Weighting: 20% of total course grade
• Due Date: Friday, Week 12, by 4:00 pm (hard copy submission to Holmes Institute)
• Submission Format: Printed hard copy; attach signed Ethics Checklist

Purpose and Learning Context

Assessment 3 requires students to refine and significantly expand the research proposal submitted in earlier weeks. Where Assessment 1 and Assessment 2 established the research topic and initial methodology, this Final Research Proposal demands that every component be strengthened with evidence, clarity, and practical planning. All students must pass this submission to proceed to the capstone research unit HI6008 in the following semester.

Core Task Instructions

The Final Research Proposal must address all nine (9) components listed below. Partial submissions or proposals missing any component will be assessed accordingly.

1. Business Research Topic

   State and refine the approved business research topic from your initial proposal. The topic must identify a specific business problem or opportunity and justify why it warrants academic investigation. Strengthen the framing by incorporating feedback received on earlier submissions.

2. Brief Literature Review (2–3 pages)

   Produce a literature review of two to three pages that provides substantive background on the research topic. The review must engage with peer-reviewed sources, draw connections between existing studies, and identify a clear gap or tension in the literature that your proposed research addresses. Do not simply summarise sources in sequence; synthesise them around the central problem.

3. Research Questions

   Present the refined research questions for the identified problem or opportunity. Each question must be specific, measurable, and directly tied to the research gap identified in the literature review. Improve the clarity and scope of questions submitted in the initial proposal.

4. Research Methodologies and Techniques

   Justify the selected research design, including whether the study is quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method, and explain why this approach is most appropriate for answering the research questions. Refer to established methodological frameworks where relevant.

5. Project Plan – Gantt Chart with Milestones

   Produce a Gantt Chart using Microsoft Project or equivalent project-management software. The chart must include clearly defined milestones aligned to the HI6008 capstone schedule:

   • Week 6 (HI6008): Literature Review due
   • Week 10 (HI6008): Data Collection and Analysis Report due
   • Week 14 (HI6008): Final Business Research (Capstone) Thesis due

   Group submissions must clearly identify each member’s individual tasks, contributions, and milestone responsibilities within the chart.

6. Description of the Research Process

   Outline the step-by-step process through which the research will be conducted, from initial data identification to analysis and reporting. Strengthen and expand on the description provided in the initial proposal.

7. Data Collection and Analysis Methods

   Specify the instruments, platforms, or procedures to be used for data collection (e.g., surveys, interviews, secondary datasets, financial reports). Describe how data will be coded, cleaned, and analysed, referencing specific statistical or qualitative techniques where applicable.

8. Expected Research Outcomes

   Articulate what the research is expected to find and why those findings would be meaningful to the relevant business sector, industry body, or policy context. Avoid speculating beyond what the methodology can reasonably support.

9. Completed Ethics Checklist

   Complete, sign, and physically attach the Holmes Institute Ethics Checklist for Student Researchers (reproduced below). Any “No” response to questions 1–10 or any “Yes” response to questions 11–20 requires a written explanation on additional pages. The checklist must bear the student’s original signature before submission.

Ethics Checklist for Student Researchers

This checklist must be answered before the research project is implemented and attached to the Final Research Proposal at the time of submission.

Student Name and ID: ___________________________________

Title of the Project: _______________________________________

1. Will the human subjects be informed of the nature of their involvement in the collection of data and of features of the research that reasonably might be expected to influence willingness to participate? Yes / No
2. Will the human subjects be told that they can discontinue their participation at any time? Yes / No
3. Will the human subjects in your study be aware that they are the targets of research? Yes / No
4. If the subjects are underage, will their guardians be asked to sign the consent form? Yes / No / N/A
5. Is the confidentiality of the human subject’s identity positively ensured? Yes / No
6. In cases where there is a possibility that the human subject’s identity can be deduced by someone other than the researcher, is the subject’s right to withdraw his/her data respected? Yes / No
7. Will the researcher fulfil all the promises made to the human subjects, including providing a summary of the findings upon request? Yes / No
8. Will all necessary measures be taken to protect the physical safety of the human subjects from dangers such as faulty electrical equipment, poor grounding, lack of oxygen, falls, traffic and industrial accidents, or the possibility of hearing or vision loss? Yes / No
9. Will the human subject be debriefed (told the true nature of the study) after the data has been collected? Yes / No
10. In cases in which the human subject is dissatisfied or registers a complaint about the researcher or procedure, will the researcher explain that the subject may express this complaint to the Subject Coordinator? Yes / No
11. Does the study involve concealment from and/or deception of the human subject? Yes / No
12. Will deception be used in order to obtain agreement to participate? Yes / No
13. Will the study involve human subjects who are legally or otherwise not in a position to give valid consent to participate, such as children, prison inmates, or mental patients? Yes / No
14. Will information on your human subjects be obtained from third parties? Yes / No
15. Will any coercion be exerted upon subjects to participate? Yes / No
16. Will the study involve physical stress to the human subjects, such as might result from heat, noise, electric shock, pain, sleep loss, or deprivation of food and drink, drugs, or alcohol? Yes / No
17. Will the study cause any mental discomfort to the human subjects, such as fear, anxiety, loss of self-esteem, shame, guilt, or embarrassment? Yes / No
18. Could publication of the research results possibly interfere with strict confidentiality? Yes / No
19. Could publication of the research results possibly harm the human subject, either directly or through identification with his/her membership group? Yes / No
20. Are there other aspects of the study that may interfere with the protection of the well-being of the human subjects? Yes / No

If you selected NO for any of questions 1–10, and/or YES for any of questions 11–20, provide written comments clarifying your choice. Attach additional pages if necessary.

Signature of Student Researcher: _______________________

Approved by (Subject Coordinator): _______________________    Date: ___________

Formatting and Submission Requirements

• Total proposal length: 2,500 words (excluding Gantt Chart, reference list, and ethics checklist)
• Font: Times New Roman or Arial, 12pt, 1.5 or double line spacing
• Referencing style: APA 7th edition throughout, including in-text citations and reference list
• Submission: Printed hard copy submitted to Holmes Institute reception by 4:00 pm, Friday of Week 12
• Gantt Chart: Produced in Microsoft Project or equivalent; printed and bound with the proposal
• Ethics Checklist: Physically signed and attached as the final page of the submission
• Group submissions: Each member’s name, student ID, and individual contributions must appear on the title page and within the Gantt Chart

Assessment Criteria

• Clarity and specificity of the research topic and research questions
• Quality, synthesis, and depth of the literature review (2–3 pages)
• Appropriateness and justification of the selected research methodology
• Completeness and logical sequencing of the Gantt Chart milestones
• Coherence of the data collection and analysis plan
• Realistic articulation of expected research outcomes
• Compliance with the Holmes Institute Ethics Checklist requirements
• Overall academic writing quality, referencing accuracy, and adherence to APA 7th edition

Learning Outcomes Addressed

• Identify a researchable business problem and frame it within the existing academic literature
• Design a research methodology appropriate to a business context
• Develop a structured project management plan using industry-standard tools
• Apply ethical research principles to a business research design
• Communicate research intentions clearly in formal academic writing

Example Student Response

This Final Research Proposal examines the relationship between supply chain disruption and small-to-medium enterprise (SME) profitability in the Australian retail sector between 2020 and 2024. The research topic emerged from gaps identified during the initial literature review, particularly the limited number of studies addressing how SMEs, as distinct from large corporations, absorb the financial consequences of logistics delays. A growing body of evidence suggests that inventory management capabilities and supplier diversification strategies may moderate the severity of revenue losses during disruption events; as Ambulkar, Blackhurst, and Grawe (2015) demonstrate in their study of supply chain disruption orientation and firm resilience, firms that proactively invest in disruption sensing and response capabilities tend to recover more quickly than those relying on reactive measures alone. The proposed study will employ a mixed-method design, combining quantitative analysis of publicly available ABS retail trade data with semi-structured interviews conducted with owners of ten SMEs operating in Melbourne and Sydney. Data will be coded thematically using NVivo and cross-referenced against financial performance indicators drawn from ASIC company filings. The Gantt Chart attached to this proposal schedules the literature review completion for Week 6 of HI6008, data collection and analysis for Week 10, and the final capstone thesis submission for Week 14, in accordance with the milestones specified in the assessment brief.

The decision to focus on Australian retail SMEs reflects a substantive gap in the disruption resilience literature, which has historically prioritised manufacturing and global logistics chains over domestic service-oriented industries. Data published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics indicates that SMEs account for approximately 97% of all Australian businesses and contribute around 57% of private sector employment, figures that underscore the sector’s economic significance despite its underrepresentation in supply chain scholarship. Cousins, Lamming, Lawson, and Squire (2008), writing on strategic supply management, argue that relational capital between buyers and suppliers functions as a buffer during systemic shocks, a proposition this study intends to test within the specific context of post-pandemic Australian retail. By triangulating interview data with archival financial records, the proposed methodology addresses both the interpretive and empirical dimensions of the research questions, producing findings with potential implications for federal small business policy.

From an ethical standpoint, this research presents a low-risk profile. Participation is entirely voluntary, all interview subjects will be informed of the study’s purpose before data collection begins, and no personally identifying information will appear in the final thesis. Each participant will be offered a summary of findings upon request, consistent with the ethical obligations outlined in the Holmes Institute checklist. The sole area requiring additional consideration is whether aggregated financial data drawn from ASIC filings could indirectly identify individual firms; to mitigate this risk, financial figures will be reported at the industry-segment level rather than attributed to named entities, and all raw data files will be stored on a password-protected university server for the duration of the project.

Follow-on Assessment – HI6007 Assessment 4 / HI6008 Week 6 Literature Review

Course: HI6008 – Business Research Project (Capstone)  |  Assessment: Assessment 1 – Literature Review  |  Due: Friday, Week 6 of HI6008  |  Word Count: Approximately 2,500–3,000 words  |  Weighting: 20%

Building directly on the two-to-three-page background literature review submitted as Component 2 of the HI6007 Final Research Proposal, this assessment requires students to produce a full, standalone academic literature review of 2,500 to 3,000 words on their approved capstone research topic. Students must synthesise a minimum of 15 peer-reviewed sources, organise the review around thematic or conceptual sub-sections rather than a simple source-by-source summary, and conclude with a clearly argued rationale for the research gap the capstone project addresses. Unlike the proposal-stage review, this submission must demonstrate critical engagement: students are expected to evaluate methodological limitations of cited studies, identify points of scholarly disagreement, and position their own research within a specific theoretical framework. Submission is electronic via the HI6008 Moodle portal by 11:59 pm on Friday of Week 6; no hard-copy submission is required for this assessment.

1. How do I write the HI6007 Assessment 3 Final Research Proposal for Holmes Institute with all 9 components?
2. HI6007 Assessment 3 Final Research Proposal Holmes Institute 2500 Words Week 12 Submission

•  Prepare a 2,500-word Final Research Proposal for HI6007 at Holmes Institute, covering all nine required components including a literature review, Gantt Chart, methodology justification, and signed Ethics Checklist. Due Friday of Week 12, worth 20%.
•  Submit a 10-to-12-page Final Research Proposal for HI6007 that refines your earlier submission across nine structured sections, from research questions and Gantt Chart milestones to a complete Holmes Institute Ethics Checklist — due Week 12.
• Complete the HI6007 Final Research Proposal with nine required components, a Gantt Chart, and a signed Ethics Checklist — your gateway to the HI6008 capstone semester.

• References

• Ambulkar, S., Blackhurst, J., & Grawe, S. (2015). Firm’s resilience to supply chain disruptions: Scale development and empirical examination. Journal of Operations Management, 33–34, 111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.09.002
• Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2023). Counts of Australian businesses, including entries and exits. ABS. https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/economy/business-indicators/counts-australian-businesses-including-entries-and-exits
• Cousins, P., Lamming, R., Lawson, B., & Squire, B. (2008). Strategic supply management: Principles, theories and practice. Pearson Education. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803765
• Holmes Institute. (2024). HI6007 Statistics for Business Decisions – Course outline and assessment guide. Faculty of Higher Education, Holmes Institute.