Business Management IA Grader

This page is designed to help you understand the assessment criteria for the IB Business Management Internal Assessment (IA) and interpret your grades effectively. An embedded grader is available to facilitate self-assessment and improve your work.

Quick Start Checklist

Before you begin, ensure you have the following:

1. Research Question: A clear, focused question related to a real business issue and aligned with one of the key concepts: change, creativity, ethics, or sustainability.
2. Supporting Documents: Three to five contemporary sources (published within the last three years) that provide depth and breadth to your analysis.
3. Methodology Outline: A plan detailing how you will collect and analyze primary and/or secondary data.
4. Conceptual Lens: Identification of the key concept through which you will analyze the issue.
5. Word Count Compliance: Ensure your report does not exceed 1,800 words.
6. Proper Referencing: Full citations for all sources and a complete bibliography.
7. Structured Report: A well-organized document with a title page, table of contents, headings, and subheadings.

Rubric Breakdown (Paraphrased & Plain English)

Understanding the assessment criteria is crucial for maximizing your IA score. Below is a breakdown of each criterion:

Criterion A: Identification of the Context (5 marks)

What It Tests: Your ability to clearly define the business issue, its relevance, and the application of a key concept.

Performance Levels:

• High (4–5 marks): The business issue is well-defined, directly related to the syllabus, and analyzed through a clearly identified key concept.
• Medium (2–3 marks): The issue is identified but lacks clarity or a strong connection to the syllabus or key concept.
• Low (0–1 mark): The issue is poorly defined with minimal relevance to the syllabus or key concept.

Common Mistakes:

• Choosing a vague or overly broad issue.
• Failing to explicitly state the key concept.

Evidence Required:

• A clear statement of the business issue.
• Explicit mention of the key concept on the title page.
• Background information linking the issue to the syllabus.

Criterion B: Supporting Documents (4 marks)

What It Tests: The relevance, depth, and variety of your supporting documents.

Performance Levels:

• High (3–4 marks): Three to five recent, relevant documents offering diverse perspectives.
• Medium (2 marks): Documents are somewhat relevant but lack depth or variety.
• Low (0–1 mark): Documents are outdated, irrelevant, or insufficient in number.

Common Mistakes:

• Using outdated or irrelevant sources.
• Relying on a single perspective.

Evidence Required:

• Highlighted sections of each document relevant to your analysis.
• Assessment of each document's reliability and validity.

Criterion C: Analysis and Evaluation (10 marks)

What It Tests: Your ability to apply business management tools and theories to analyze the issue and evaluate findings.

Performance Levels:

• High (8–10 marks): Comprehensive analysis using appropriate tools, leading to well-supported conclusions.
• Medium (4–7 marks): Analysis is present but may lack depth or proper application of tools.
• Low (0–3 marks): Superficial analysis with minimal use of tools and weak conclusions.

Common Mistakes:

• Misapplying business tools.
• Failing to link analysis to the research question.

Evidence Required:

• Detailed application of business tools.
• Clear connection between analysis and conclusions.

Criterion D: Conclusions (2 marks)

What It Tests: The clarity and relevance of your conclusions in addressing the research question.

Performance Levels:

• High (2 marks): Conclusions are clear, directly answer the research question, and are well-supported by analysis.
• Low (0–1 mark): Conclusions are vague, unsupported, or do not address the research question.

Common Mistakes:

• Providing conclusions that do not stem from the analysis.
• Failing to answer the research question explicitly.

Evidence Required:

• A concise conclusion section directly addressing the research question.

Criterion E: Evaluation of the Work (2 marks)

What It Tests: Your reflection on the strengths and limitations of your research and analysis.

Performance Levels:

• High (2 marks): Insightful evaluation of the research process, acknowledging limitations and suggesting improvements.
• Low (0–1 mark): Superficial or no evaluation of the research process.

Common Mistakes:

• Overlooking the evaluation section.
• Failing to discuss limitations or suggest improvements.

Evidence Required:

• A reflective section evaluating the research process and analysis.

Criterion F: Structure (2 marks)

What It Tests: The organization and coherence of your report.

Performance Levels:

• High (2 marks): Logical structure with clear headings, subheadings, and a coherent flow.
• Low (0–1 mark): Disorganized structure hindering readability.

Common Mistakes:

• Lack of clear headings or logical flow.
• Inconsistent formatting.

Evidence Required:

• Title page, table of contents, and appropriately structured sections.

Criterion G: Presentation (2 marks)

What It Tests: The visual presentation, including formatting, citations, and overall professionalism.

Performance Levels:

• High (2 marks): Consistent formatting, accurate citations, and professional appearance.
• Low (0–1 mark): Inconsistent formatting, inaccurate citations, or unprofessional appearance.

Common Mistakes:

• Inconsistent citation style.
• Poor formatting choices affecting readability.

Evidence Required:

• Consistent use of fonts, spacing, and citation style.

How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool

The embedded grader provides a score based on the IA criteria. Here's how to interpret your results:

1. Score Breakdown: Review scores for each criterion to identify strengths and areas for improvement.
2. Overall Score: Sum of all criteria scores, out of 25.
3. Grade Conversion: Use the latest grade boundaries to convert your score into a final grade.

Improvement Actions:

• Low Scores in Criterion A: Refine your research question and ensure clear identification of the key concept.
• Low Scores in Criterion B: Select more relevant and recent supporting documents.
• Low Scores in Criterion C: Enhance your analysis by correctly applying business tools and theories.

Annotated Examples

High-Band Excerpt:

"The analysis of Company X's expansion strategy through the lens of sustainability reveals that... This is supported by data from Document A, indicating a 20% increase in... Applying the SWOT analysis, we find..."

Why It Scores High:

• Clear application of the key concept.
• Effective use of business tools.
• Well-supported analysis with relevant data.

Mid/Low-Band Excerpt:

"Company X is expanding. This might be good for sustainability. Document A talks about this."

What's Missing:

• Lack of depth in analysis.
• Minimal application of business tools.
• Insufficient connection to the key concept.

Grade Boundaries & Converting Your Mark

Grade boundaries can vary by session. Below are the latest confirmed figures:

May 2024 Grade Boundaries for Business Management IA: