You are asked to write one individually researched review of one of the following articles:

Holmes, RM, Zahra, SA, Hoskisson, RE, Deghetto, K & Sutton, T 2016, ‘Two-way streets: The role of institutions and technology policy in firms’ corporate entrepreneurship and political strategies’, Academy of Management Perspectives, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 247-272.
OR
Liedong, TA, Ghobadian, A, Rajwani, T & O’Regan, N 2015, ‘Toward a View of Complementarity: Trust and Policy Influence Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Political Activity’, Group & Organization Management, vol. 40, Iss. 3, pp. 405 – 427.

The word limit for this assessment is 500 words (excluding references, 10% more or less is allowed).
With this assessment, you need to show the reader that you:
• have a clear understanding of the key concepts and theories related to the article;
• can identify and assess the strengths and weaknesses of the key arguments of the article;
• can identify and discuss the significance of the article in relation to the existing literature. You should include at least three scholarly references (in addition to your chosen article) to demonstrate you have attempted to draw links between your chosen article with other works in the field; and
• can present a clear and convincing argument using an effective academic writing style including consistent referencing and citation (using Harvard style)

* Please refer to
– https://emedia.rmit.edu.au/isearch/scholarly-information for more information about scholarly references; and
– http://www1.rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=8rwjnkcmfoeez and http://www.lib.rmit.edu.au/easy-cite/ for more information on Harvard referencing style.
Your review should include;
• A statement about the main theme, plot or organising principle of the article you are reviewing;
• A statement about the place of the article in a wider field—other articles on the same topic or by the same author. You should be able to explain points of similarity
or difference—what is the conversation with previous research the article is entering? What contribution does the article make to the field of research? What are its limitations? You should discuss these ideas in a context. This means engaging with (and citing) the underlying theoretical narrative that is the foundation for past research;
• An analysis of the article’s strengths and weaknesses with examples of each. Is there any puzzling information or unclear section of the text? For example, “what does the author mean by that?”
• Conclusion that brings together the main points of the review but is more than a recapitulation of what has been said. Summarise the article by pointing out its most important parts.
• ‘Because you are writing about other people’s work it is easy for your own ‘voice’ to be lost. It is important that your ‘voice’, that is, your perspective or standpoint, is clearly identifiable in the literature review.

Some tips for this assessment
Before beginning the review, think about what are the central arguments the author is trying to put forward. You should also think about the purpose of the review. What should the reader of the review know about the topic? What is the significance of the article you are reviewing?
You review of the article should;
• Offer relevant evidence to support your point of view or opinion;
• Avoid quotations that do not clearly illustrate a specific critical issue (In general, use direct quotations only if you have a good reason. Most of your paper should be in your own words to demonstrate your understanding of the ideas of the author);
• Make consistent use of thorough referencing and clear bibliographic detail; and
• Familiarise yourself with the marking criteria regarding the standards expected.
The criteria against which the paper will be graded are:
• evidence of extensive reading and understanding of the article as seen in the critique of the theories;
• critical evaluation of the article’s significance to the existing literature; and
• presentation which includes a clear writing style, good grammar and spelling and appropriate referencing.
In short, your review must meet academic requirements with regard to structure, content and references and be of a standard acceptable at the Master’s level.