DISSERTATION FEEDBACK FORM

School of Business
Student Name: PRATT, Omoyemi
Student ID Number: 129054073
Marker Name: Vincent Pieterse
Final Mark: 45

This work has been subject to moderation in accordance with University of Leicester Senate
Regulations.

Research focus/research questions

The dissertation was adequately framed with clarity in terms of what the main drivers for
the research are. The research background was developed in a coherent and reasonable
way. You included some helpful background information to contextualise your study as well
as explaining its personal interest to you as the researcher. Your research questions were
reasonably clearly stated and provided a satisfactory focus for your project. An overview of
each chapter was noted.

Literature Coverage:
The literature review showed a good understanding of concepts. The review showed some
critical insights. You employed a reasonable range of sources in your literature review. You
ended with a useful section that presented your conceptual framework. You make some
claims which needed to be supported with evidence.

Research Design/Methodology:
Your methodology includes the theoretical justification your chosen approaches though
this chapter needed to be more focussed on your own research. With around 2,200 words
(guidance is 1,500) this chapter is rather long. There are some major referencing problems
in here, with the Turnitin showing chunks of text which appear to be taken verbatim from
external sources but which are not referenced as such.

Quality of Argument/Level of Analysis:

The data analysis section was neat. The chapter included a number of graphs and tables.
There was an attempt throughout to interpret the findings. The research questions were
readdressed, though you answered seven research questions while you’ve only described
five in your introduction. Although you mentioned an interview as a chosen approach an
in-depth analysis of this is missing. With a word count of almost 2,400 (guidance is 4,500)
this chapter is rather short. The conclusions chapter summarised the research though you
needed to underpin this more with theory. The theoretical implications needed more
consideration. The recommendations could have been cross referenced more closely to the
results in chapter 4. You have explained the limitations of your study and considered future
research briefly. You needed to include your reflections to show your own skills
development. With a word count of almost 1,000 (guidance is 3,000) this chapter is rather
short.
 DISSERTATION FEEDBACK FORM
School of Business

Construction, Style and Expression: Elements such as appropriate organisation, linkages,

writing style and fluency in expression
The Dissertation used appropriate language. None of the required appendices are included
(see DL Dissertation Handbook, page 26).

Overall Comments: Please provide a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the
dissertation
I’m sorry, but this Dissertation does not meet the required pass standard as you have not
demonstrated an adequate understanding of how to design, conduct and report original
management research. The three main issues are (1) the high Turnitin score of chapter 3,
(2) a missing in-depth analysis of the interview, and (3) a rather short chapter 5 with some
missing sections. Please make contact with the supervisor via Blackboard to discuss your
revisions.

Moderator Comments:

I agree with the comments of the first marker. The dissertation has not adequately fulfilled
the requirements of a pass dissertation. The dissertation is rather descriptive in places, in
particular in relation to the literature review and methodology. You seem to regurgitate
materials without evaluating its limitations and demonstrate how the theory and methods
can be applied to the topic of celebrity endorsements. There is no indication of qualitative
analysis. The quantitative data is heavily reliant on descriptive statistics. Please be mindful
of the high turnitin score, as the first marker has pointed out above.