In this essay, you should apply the concepts, frameworks, and theories covered in the Artificial Intelligence in Business module (academic weeks 22 - 34). Please select a company or organisation of your choice (based in the United Kingdom

Academic Experts

01 May 2026 • 7 min read

NBS8665 Artificial Intelligence in Business Assessment Brief 2026 | Newcastle University

Assessment Brief – NBS8665

Module Code:	NBS8665
Module Title:	Artificial Intelligence in Business
Assessment Type:	Individual Report
Submission Date:	Monday 18^th May 2026
Submission Time:	12 noon
Submission Method:	Online via Canvas
Word Limit:	2000
Weighting:	100%

Assessment Brief

Intended knowledge Outcomes

IKO 1: An in-depth appreciation of the role that Artificial Intelligence can play for businesses
IKO 2: A comprehensive understanding of how AI technologies can be integrated into various business operations and the impact they can have e.g. when it comes to decision-making, automated processes, and the creation of new value propositions.
IKO 3: A critical appreciation of the ethical challenges associated with the adoption and implementation of AI technologies for businesses and their stakeholders.
Intended Skills Outcomes
ISO1: Be able to analyse how AI influences business strategies, models, and operations, and the capacity to propose recommendations based on business insights.
ISO2: Critique and implement literature in order to conceptualise a case/problem and propose appropriate recommendations.

Summative assessment essay

Your summative assessment for this module is a 2000-word essay, which accounts for 100% of your grade in the Artificial Intelligence in Business module. This document provides detailed information about the essay, including its expected structure.

Additionally, there will be an assessment surgery session, where you will have the opportunity to ask questions and receive feedback.

Task

In this essay, you should apply the concepts, frameworks, and theories covered in the Artificial Intelligence in Business module (academic weeks 22 - 34).

Please select a company or organisation of your choice (based in the United Kingdom or elsewhere). Discuss the AI technologies that the selected company has already adopted and how these technologies are used within the organisation. Propose an additional AI technology that you believe the company should adopt, and critically discuss the adoption process, including the potential challenges and benefits this specific AI could bring. Conclude the essay by examining the ethical and societal implications of using AI.

The expected structure of the essay is as follows:

1.Provide a brief introduction to the case company or organisation you have selected (approximately 100 words).

2.Drawing on secondary research, describe any example(s) of AI applications the company is using (e.g. intelligent robots, virtual assistants, chatbots, recommender systems, predictive analytics in customer support, relationships management and service personalization, self-recognition technology and etc.). If they have not adopted any AI technology, suggest possible reasons for this decision and justify your assumptions (approximately 200 words) (IKO1, ISO1).

3.Propose an AI technology or system you think the company should adopt and prioritise (or upgrade if they already excel in using AI) and justify your choice (approximately 200 words) (IKO1, IKO2, ISO1).

4.Critically analyse the challenges the company might face in adopting new AI technologies. In this section, analyse and discuss potential stages of AI technology adoption and apply relevant theories or frameworks to explain AI adoption in organizational settings. Rather than merely replicating theoretical assumptions (e.g., UTAUT, TTF, or TAM), discuss how the theory applies to your selected case (approximately 600 words) (IKO2, ISO1 and ISO2).

5.Critically evaluate the potential benefits and disadvantages that the suggested AI technology could bring to the company (approximately 600 words) (IKO 1, IKO2, ISO1).

6.Conclude the essay by discussing the ethical and societal implications of adopting AI (e.g., data privacy issues, biases, impacts on the workforce) (approximately 300 words) (IKO3).

Note: Use academic literature and industry sources to support your arguments.

The essay should show an understanding of the theoretical concepts discussed during the sessions in relation to real-life organisations using AI technology. You are free to use any structure for the report as long as you address the above-mentioned requirements. Remember that developing this essay would demonstrate your skills and ability to complete artificial intelligence in business analysis tasks (this can be used as part of your job-seeking portfolio).

Evidence of academic integrity

In addition to the 2,000-word essay, you must include a personal reflection of up to 200 words. This reflection should focus on your own academic journey in completing this assignment. Specifically, you should address:

What personally inspired you to choose your selected company or brand
Why you chose the specific theory or theoretical framework, and how you arrived at that decision. Specify the lecture(s) the selected frameworks derive from and reading sources.
How you approached your research process, including how you searched for, evaluated, and selected your sources
Any challenges you encountered during the writing process and how you addressed them
What you have personally learned from completing this assignment
This section must be written in the first person and reflect your own thinking, decision-making, and learning process.

References

You can use press articles, websites, and reports to provide examples regarding the AI technologies or/and discussing the selected case. However, you should support your arguments with references from academic literature (you can start from the literature provided in weeks 22-30 in the reading list). An accurate Harvard referenced list of all sources cited within the text should be provided at the end of the document. Sources for tables, figures and illustrations should be provided.

Note: Harvard Style: Harvard style is one of the main referencing styles used at Newcastle University - link

Formatting

Cover sheet providing assignment title and word count, Times New Roman 12; 1,5 or double (2) spaced; justified, pages should be numbered

Submitting Your Work

A step-by-step guide to Canvas Assignment Submission and guidance on dealing with submission issues is available on the Academic Skills Kit website Assignment Submission Guidance. pages.
Canvas displays a confirmation message when your work has been submitted.
If you do not see the confirmation message, you should assume that your submission has not been registered and try to submit your work again.

Formative Feedback

You are welcome to approach the lecturers to discuss the report before submission. Furthermore, some of the weekly activities as part of the unit are designed as an opportunity for formative group-level feedback. In the final week of the unit there will be an assignment surgery when you will have the opportunity to ask further questions about the assignment. You will receive written feedback on your submission and marks through Canvas. Please note that the lecturers will not be able to provide written feedback on the assessment before submission. Also generic feedback on Canvas will be provided after finishing the marking as a post assessment support.

Summative Feedback

Your feedback for this assessment will be available to you after 20 working days (not including weekends or public holidays). You can expect feedback in the form of include details here. For guidance on how to understand, interpret and the implement feedback from your assessment please visit the Academic Skills Kit website.

Contacts

Module leader: Dr Davit Marikyan – Davit Marikyan@newcastle.ac.uk

Policies

Students are reminded of Newcastle University regulations concerning Student Progress site. and Plagiarism. You may wish to change or supplement this link with school specific guidelines
Up until the submission deadline your assignment may be submitted.
1.Re-submission is not possible, please ensure your work is final and complete before submitting.
Submissions made after the deadline will be identified as late and penalised. The University’s Policy on Assessment and Feedback outlines that work submitted after the deadline will be capped according to a sliding scale.

Assessment Criteria

Criteria	Distinction 70-100%	Merit 60-69%	Pass 50-59%	Fail 40-49%	Fail 0-39%
Knowledge and understanding (40%)	A high level of knowledge and understanding of concepts covered across the module with no outright mistakes.	A good level of knowledge and understanding of key concepts covered across the module although some minor inaccuracies and/or variation in understanding across topics.	A reasonable level of knowledge and understanding of key concepts covered across the module but inaccuracies and/or variation in understanding across topics.	An inadequate level of knowledge and understanding of concepts covered across the module. Does not address the assignment brief. Uses inaccurate or inappropriate content/theory.	Very little or no evidence of understanding of key concepts covered across the module. Content is largely irrelevant, inaccurate, or missing. Demonstrates fundamental misunderstandings and failure to address the assessment task.
Analysis and approach (40%)	A well-developed ability to engage critically with key concepts and effectively apply concepts to real-world examples (e.g., AI adoption process, advantages and challenges associated with the adoption of AI in organisational context).	A good ability to engage critically with key concepts/theories and appropriately apply concepts to real-world examples (e.g., AI adoption process, advantages and challenges associated with the adoption of AI in organisational context).	Some evidence of the ability to engage critically with key concepts and apply concepts to real-world examples (e.g., AI adoption process, advantages and challenges associated with the adoption of AI in organisational context), although not fully developed.	Little evidence of appropriate critical evaluation of key concepts nor suitable application of concepts/theories to real-world examples (e.g., AI adoption process, advantages and challenges associated with the adoption of AI in organisational context).	No meaningful attempt to critically evaluate concepts or apply them to appropriate organisational contexts. Work is largely descriptive or incoherent, with incorrect or no application to real-world examples (e.g., AI adoption processes, challenges, advantages). Lacks analytical depth entirely.
Organisation and Structure (5%)	Excellent organisation and structure of arguments throughout.	Good organisation and structure of arguments.	Acceptable organisation and structure of arguments.	Arguments unorganised and unstructured.	Work is very poorly structured, disorganised, and difficult to follow. Arguments are unclear, absent or not justified. Lack of logical flow between sections severely limits readability and coherence.
Use of sources (10%)	Comprehensive integration of relevant academic and industry sources throughout, with evidence of extensive additional reading. Referencing accurate and conforms exactly to conventions.	Appropriate integration of relevant academic and industry sources, with evidence of additional reading. Referencing conforms to conventions with few inaccuracies.	Some use of mostly appropriate academic and industry sources, although mostly reliant on reading list. Referencing generally conforms to conventions with occasional inaccuracies.	Little or no use of appropriate academic and industry sources. Referencing contains numerous inaccuracies in citation and/or attribution.	Very little or no use of appropriate academic or industry sources. Referencing is absent or fundamentally incorrect throughout.
Style and Presentation (5%)	Excellent use of language to communicate ideas, very good structure of content, and consistently high-quality presentation throughout.	Very good use of language to communicate ideas, good structure of content, and consistent presentation throughout.	Ideas generally communicated clearly, although use of language could be more effective at times; structure and presentation meet expectations.	Language not used effectively to clearly communicate ideas; structure and presentation fail to meet expectations.	Very poor standard of academic writing. The work contains mistakes and is difficult to read. Formatting does not follow the assignment guidelines, and visual presentation is poor.