MGF5020 Chap.14 AT3 Research Report Toolkit: Section Word Budget, Frameworks and Policy Recommendations (40%)
AT3 Research Report Toolkit: Section Word Budget, Frameworks and Policy Recommendations (40%)
AT3 is an individual 2,500-word research report worth 40%. Its guiding form asks how a specific entity should enact business practices demonstrating sustainable and responsible business ethics in a specific issue. The current-looking Semester 2 link shows Friday 23 October 2026 at 11:55 pm; a separate task page retains stale May strings. Confirm the current Moodle activity and do not transfer the May dates into the Semester 2 calendar.
The official six-part allocation is exact: Abstract 100 words; Introduction 250; Literature Review and Key Challenges 600; Research Method 200; Findings 800; Discussion and Conclusion 550. These total 2,500. The brief specifies 200 words for policy recommendations within the final 550, not as an extra allocation. Treating those 200 words as additional would incorrectly create 2,700.
The report uses secondary research. The brief points to scholarly work, government and industry material, company documents, media, NGO or activist reports and relevant international materials. It says primary data such as interviews is not permitted without specific research-ethics approval. For each important finding, distinguish verified fact, attributed allegation, corporate claim and the report's inference. Compare sources with different methods and interests, record uncertainty and avoid collecting identifiable personal information that is unnecessary for the analysis.
The rubric requires a minimum 12 scholarly sources and explicitly says Harvard style in its evidence criterion. Unit information separately says APA for written reports. These instructions conflict. Preserve both with their locations, obtain current authorised clarification and then use one instructed style consistently. Do not import AT2's different rule of 10 peer-reviewed academic sources and APA into AT3.
The method is the bridge from documents to findings. It should state framework, source categories, scope and period, inclusion logic, analysis or coding and limitations. Findings then present evidence-led patterns. Discussion interprets those patterns through the framework and answers the normative question. Policy recommendations need an actor, action, mechanism, implementation path, indicator, affected-party voice and remedy. Condition 1 also applies here: do not use generative AI to produce assessment material or content.
The AT3 task page says that hurdle requirements are not applicable to this assessment. Keep this scoped to AT3. Available unit information does not state whether the unit has a hurdle; it directs students to the Handbook, which must be checked separately.
What this chapter covers
- 012,500 words, 40%, and current versus stale timing
- 02Exact 100–250–600–200–800–550 word budget
- 03Secondary-data boundary and no informal primary research
- 04Minimum 12 scholarly sources
- 05Harvard rubric wording versus unit-level APA
- 06Evidence-led findings and implementable policy recommendations
Translate a finding into policy
- 2State the finding and qualify the evidence behind it.
- 2Name the accountable actor and the decision or rule to change.
- 2Explain the causal and ethical mechanism.
- 2Specify implementation resources, owner and timing.
- 2Add affected-worker participation before lock-in.
- 2Define an outcome indicator and independent verification.
- 2Provide correction or remedy if the policy fails or harm continues.
Key terms
- Secondary data
- Existing documents or records analysed without collecting new evidence directly from participants.
- Triangulation
- Comparison of sources, methods or positions to test convergence, contradiction and limitation.
- Finding
- An evidence-supported pattern answering part of the research question before full normative interpretation.
- Policy–practice gap
- A documented difference between a stated commitment and the incentives, conduct or outcomes implementing it.
- Recommendation mechanism
- The reason a named intervention should change the problem established by a finding.
- Task-level hurdle statement
- The AT3-specific statement that a hurdle is not applicable, distinct from any unit-level Handbook rule.
AT3 Research Report Toolkit: Section Word Budget, Frameworks and Policy Recommendations (40%) FAQ
How much and how long is AT3?
It is worth 40% and the six official section allocations total 2,500 words.
Is the 200-word recommendation extra?
No. It sits inside the 550-word Discussion and Conclusion allocation.
What date should be planned?
The current-looking S2 link shows 23 October 2026 at 11:55 pm; the May strings are stale. Confirm live Moodle.
How many scholarly sources?
The AT3 rubric requires a minimum 12 scholarly sources. Do not reuse AT2's ten-source floor.
Should APA or Harvard be used?
The AT3 rubric says Harvard while unit information says APA. Preserve the conflict and seek current authorised clarification.
Can interviews be used as informal context?
Not without specific research-ethics permission. The brief directs the task to secondary evidence.
Does AT3 prove that the unit has no hurdle?
No. It says no hurdle applies to this assessment. Unit-level hurdle information must be checked in the Handbook.
Can generative AI write any report section?
No. Condition 1 prohibits generated material or content for assessment.
What belongs in the 800-word Findings section?
Evidence-led patterns organised around the research question, including convergence, contradiction and source limits. Full normative interpretation belongs mainly in discussion.
Do 12 company documents satisfy the floor?
No. The rubric says a minimum 12 scholarly sources. Practitioner and organisational documents remain important for the case but serve different evidential functions.
What makes a policy recommendation implementable?
It identifies an accountable actor, specific action, mechanism, resources and sequence, outcome indicator, affected-party voice, verification and remedy after failure.
How should conflicting evidence appear in findings?
Present the pattern, identify the contradiction, compare source methods and interests and state what can and cannot be inferred. Do not hide a negative case or average incompatible measures together merely to create a cleaner recommendation. Uncertainty is a report finding when it affects the decision.
Assessment move
Lock the question as specific entity, specific issue, location or period, affected stakeholder, policy–practice gap and decision audience. Test whether enough secondary evidence and 12 scholarly sources exist before approval. Copy the official word budget into the drafting document: 100, 250, 600, 200, 800 and 550. Reserve the policy recommendation's 200 words inside the last figure. Build a research matrix with claim, document type, author interest, method, date, corroboration, contradiction and limitation. Convert the selected framework into coding questions and explain collection, inclusion and interpretation in the 200-word method. Organise the 800-word findings around three or four evidence-led patterns rather than sources. Use discussion to interpret the patterns and answer how the entity should enact responsibility. Design recommendations through actor, action, mechanism, implementation, indicator, participation and remedy. Audit all six rubric criteria and the minimum 12 scholarly sources. Resolve the APA–Harvard conflict through a current official instruction and save it. Confirm the 23 October activity, human authorship and final uploaded file.
Working through AT3 Research Report Toolkit: Section Word Budget, Frameworks and Policy Recommendations (40%) in MGF5020? Sia is AskSia’s AI Management tutor — ask any MGF5020 AT3 Research Report Toolkit: Section Word Budget, Frameworks and Policy Recommendations (40%) question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how MGF5020 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
