BUS9058M Strategic Management Assignment Answers

ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
Module Name: Strategic Management

This will be a report (4000 words) which explores a case study organisation. The report will capture the strategic position and intent of the organisation and judge the value of the strategy making tools and practice. The work will conclude with justified recommendations to align the resources of the organisation to the adopted strategic position.

LO1 Critically assess the range of concepts on which sustainable strategies can be found.
LO2 Critique a range of frameworks for analysing strategic issues in a      global context.
LO3 Generate a range of practical resolutions for complex strategic         challenges, based on sound rationale and analysis, supported by    rigorous research.
LO4 Evaluate and recommend solutions taking into account both the short-        term commercial imperatives and a longer term sense of         responsibility.
LO5 Critically evaluate the importance of corporate culture, structure and the change processes essential to the development of a set of         capabilities and resources required in a turbulent context.
Additional Assessment Information:

The report structure is shown below:

 

Part One: Describe the generic strategy (as discussed in class) of one of the company’s strategic business units (i.e. business level strategy). In addition to identifying the business’s generic strategy, you should evaluate the relative success of this strategy in the context of the competitive environment.

 

Part Two: Analyse the overall company’s portfolio of businesses (i.e. corporate level strategy) using one appropriate framework. A key goal of this question is to evaluate whether or not the company has strategic business units that may not relate to its core capabilities and/or market environment and if so, what strategic actions it should take on them. You should refer to relevant academic literature to critically reflect on the company’s portfolio.

 

Part Three: Identify, evaluate and recommend specific strategic options for the company’s future international strategy of one of its strategic business units (i.e. business level strategy).

 

Part Four: Identify and evaluate initiatives the company (either at corporate and/or business level) has taken to practice corporate socially responsible management and how these relate to meeting particular stakeholder interests (e.g. shareholders, home government, specific communities; the broader community)

 

Note: Feedback & grades will be available electronically on blackboard. If you have any specific questions relating to the feedback comments email the module co-ordinator to discuss.

DIRECTIONS TO STUDENTS
Further Guidance:

Your work must provide a detailed list of cited reference sources that is consistent and follows standard referencing conventions. N.B. use of the Harvard author, date system is required.

 

Apart from the basic considerations of legibility, grammar, structure and presentation, emphasis in assessing your written work at final degree level will be placed on your demonstration of:

 

Logical development of critical analysis and arguments that are supported with academic and practical evidence.

Evidence of a range of secondary research using texts, journals, magazines, newspapers, and computer based information sources.

Originality of analysis and conclusions derived.

 

Please note the contents of the section relating to academic offenses in the   current edition of University Regulations. These regulations and their variations are available in http://secretariat.blogs.lincoln.ac.uk/university-regulations/

 

To pass the unit you must achieve an overall mark of at least 50%

 

Format:

This is written assessment.

 

Please follow to the formatting guidelines:

– Font / Size:                              Arial or Times New Roman / 12

– Spacing / Sides:            1.5 / Single Sided

– Pagination required:      Yes

– Margins:                        At least 2.54 to left and right and text ‘justified’

– Referencing:                  Full compliance with Harvard protocols

 

Note usual practice is to allow +/-10%. If you submit an assignment which exceeds the prescribed word limit, marking will cease at the point at which the limit has been exceeded and the mark will be awarded on the basis of the extent to which the criteria for assessment have been met up to that point.

Marking Details:

Please see criteria grid attached

 

All work is assessed in line with University of Lincoln Marking and Grading Policy.  All marks are provisional on Examination Board decisions (which take place at the end of the Academic Year)

 

Appendix Three: Assessment Criteria

LO Fail

0-39

Marginal Fail

40-49

Pass
50-59
Merit
60-69
Distinction
70-85
Distinction
85+
LO1 Critically assess the range of concepts on which sustainable strategies can be found. Typically, demonstrates little knowledge of the field, with significant weaknesses in the knowledge base, and/or simply reproduces knowledge without evidence of understanding. Shows little or no critical ability. Poor, inconsistent analysis. Typically, demonstrates limited knowledge of the field and some awareness of current evidence and issues, but with some notable weaknesses. Lacks knowledge and understanding of some key areas. Offers some appropriate analysis, but with some significant inconsistencies which affect the soundness of argument and/or conclusions. Demonstrates very limited critical ability Generally demonstrates a sound knowledge and understanding of material within a specialised field. Demonstrates an understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted. Provides evidence of relevant and sound analysis within the specialised area, with some critical evaluation. Is able toanalyse complex issues and make appropriate judgements. Produces work with a well-defined focus. Demonstrates a systematic knowledge, understanding and critical awareness of current problems/professional practice, academic debate and/or contemporary discourse.  Is able to evaluate critically and to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, making sound judgements in the absence of complete data. Produces work of exceptional standard, reflecting excellent understanding. Displays mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge and skills, with notable critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights at forefront of field. Shows excellent ability to evaluate knowledge critically and, where appropriate, to propose new avenues for research. Deals with complex issues systematically and creatively, making excellent judgements This work meets and often exceeds the standard for distinction, as described in the 70-85 band, across all subcategories of criteria. Typically, the work is of such a quality that indicates a student capable of doctoral research in the discipline and, in principle, has potential for publication or exhibition with further refinement as appropriate.  Reflects critically on own positionality, nature and status of knowledge with discipline.
LO2 Critique a range of frameworks for analysing strategic issues in a global context. Likely to make unsubstantiated generalizations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/ missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise or evaluate. Poor communication of ideas. Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and contradictory. Generalized statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance. Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance. An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support the argument. Valid conclusions Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence. Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and convincingly. Sound, convincing conclusions. Thoroughly logical work, supported by judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. High quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Strong conclusions. Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Highly persuasive conclusions.
LO3 Generate a range of practical resolutions for complex strategic challenges, based on sound rationale and analysis, supported by rigorous research. Typically, little or no skill demonstrated in relevant techniques applicable to own practise, research, professional practice or advanced scholarship. Lacks any understanding of how established techniques and/or methods of enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. Fails to evidence or discuss/apply appropriate examples of literature relating to current research and advanced scholarship in the field. References to literature/ evidence and use of academic conventions are flawed/irrelevant. Typically demonstrates some skill in selected techniques and/or approaches applicable to own practise, research or advanced scholarship, but with significant areas of weakness. Can evidence and discuss/apply examples of literature relating to current research but lacks critical engagement. References to appropriate literature/ evidence and use of academic conventions are insufficient and/or inconsistent. Lacks sufficient understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. Demonstrates understanding of and skills in selected techniques/ approaches applicable to own practise, research or advanced scholarship. Shows understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline. Can evaluate critically examples of literature relating to current research and advanced scholarship in the field. Makes consistently sound use of appropriate academic conventions and academic honesty. Displays a comprehensive understanding of and skills in techniques/approaches applicable to own practise, research or advanced scholarship. Shows some originality in the application of knowledge, and a good understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline. Is able to evaluate critically a range of sources relating to current practice and advanced scholarship in the discipline. Makes consistently good use of appropriate academic conventions and academic honesty. Highly effective and appropriate use of technical, research and/or professional skill. Displays exceptional grasp of a range of techniques applicable to own practice, research or advanced scholarship. Shows originality in application of knowledge, and excellent grasp of how knowledge is created and interpreted in the discipline.  Is able to evaluate critically, with notable insight, a range of sources relating to current practice, research and advanced scholarship in the discipline. Makes consistently excellent use of appropriate academic conventions and academic honesty.
LO4 Evaluate and recommend solutions taking into account both the short-term commercial imperatives and a longer term sense of responsibility. Typically significant weaknesses evident in transferable skills which could include such as digital literacy, communication, problem-solving and project management. Inability to adapt. Inability to work flexibly, independently and/or as part of a team. Typically demonstrates some effective transferable skills, which could include communication and problem-solving, but with some problematic areas of weakness. Limited ability to adapt. Ability to work flexibly, independently and/or as part of a team, but with areas of weakness. Typically a consistent competency in transferable skills, which may include team working, project management, digital literacy, creativity and flexibility. Demonstrates capabilities to support effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts. Shows consistent ability in tackling and solving demanding problems. Can plan and direct own learning. Demonstrates ability to advance own knowledge and skills. Demonstrates the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development. Shows a high level competence in transferable skills, including team working, project management, digital literacy, creativity and flexibility. Demonstrates very effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts. Demonstrates self-direction in tackling and solving demanding problems. Can act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level. Demonstrates attitudes needed to advance own knowledge, understanding, and skills. Demonstrates the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development. Shows a very high level of competence transferable skills, including team working/leadership, project management, digital literacies ad practices, creativity and flexibility. Demonstrates very high-level communication skills in a range of complex contexts, and ability to write at publishable standard. Demonstrates autonomy and notable originality in tackling and solving demanding problems. Shows a high level of consistency and autonomy in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level. Demonstrates the skills and attitudes needed to advance own knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level. Demonstrates the independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.
LO5 Critically evaluate the importance of corporate culture, structure and the change processes essential to the development of a set of capabilities and resources required in a turbulent context. Typically, demonstrates little knowledge of the field, with significant weaknesses in the knowledge base, and/or simply reproduces knowledge without evidence of understanding. Shows little or no critical ability. Poor, inconsistent analysis. Typically, demonstrates limited knowledge of the field and some awareness of current evidence and issues, but with some notable weaknesses. Lacks knowledge and understanding of some key areas. Offers some appropriate analysis, but with some significant inconsistencies which affect the soundness of argument and/or conclusions. Demonstrates very limited critical ability Generally demonstrates a sound knowledge and understanding of material within a specialised field. Demonstrates an understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and how these affect the way the knowledge base is interpreted. Provides evidence of relevant and sound analysis within the specialised area, with some critical evaluation. Is able toanalyse complex issues and make appropriate judgements. Produces work with a well-defined focus. Demonstrates a systematic knowledge, understanding and critical awareness of current problems/professional practice, academic debate and/or contemporary discourse.  Is able to evaluate critically and to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, making sound judgements in the absence of complete data. Produces work of exceptional standard, reflecting excellent understanding. Displays mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge and skills, with notable critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights at forefront of field. Shows excellent ability to evaluate knowledge critically and, where appropriate, to propose new avenues for research. Deals with complex issues systematically and creatively, making excellent judgements This work meets and often exceeds the standard for distinction, as described in the 70-85 band, across all subcategories of criteria. Typically, the work is of such a quality that indicates a student capable of doctoral research in the discipline and, in principle, has potential for publication or exhibition with further refinement as appropriate.  Reflects critically on own positionality, nature and status of knowledge with discipline.
Presentation of work, clarity and referencing Negligible evidence and information base; negligible understanding of the discipline underlying concepts and principles. Wholly imitative. Negligible evidence or use of skill,  evaluation or interpretationNegligible use of/ reference to resources.  Negligible use of structure/ accuracy in expression. Negligible evidence of academic/ intellectual skills and practical/ professional skills

 

Disorganised/

Incoherent. Deviates significantly from the required parameters.

Meaning unclear and/or grammar and/or spelling contain frequent errors. Uses unsuitable/misuses academic and industry specific terminology.

Referencing is absent/

unsystematic.

Portfolio is not presented in a manner which allows it to be identified as such.

 

Negligible use of structure/ accuracy in expression.

Negligible use of/ reference to resources

Some attempt to organise Portfolio in a logical manner.

Some elements missing or incomplete.

Little attention to detail.

Portfolio deviates slightly from the required parameters.

Meaning apparent, but language not always fluent.

Grammatical and/or spelling errors. Uses some appropriate academic terminology throughout Portfolio.

Some attempt at referencing throughout Portfolio.

Portfolio shows organisation and coherence.

Work within Portfolio submitted within prescribed parameters.

Evidence of attention to detail.

Language mainly fluent.

Grammar and spelling mainly accurate.

Uses appropriate academic terminology throughout Portfolio.

Referencing inconsistent throughout Portfolio.

Carefully and logically organised Portfolio.

All work within Portfolio submitted within prescribed parameters.

Demonstrates clear attention to detail.

Language fluent.

Grammar and spelling accurate.

Uses appropriate academic terminology throughout Portfolio.

Referencing generally accurate throughout Portfolio, though minor errors and/or inconsistencies in evidence.

Polished and professionally presented Portfolio.

All work within Portfolio submitted within prescribed parameters.

Attention to detail in clear evidence throughout the Portfolio

Appropriate, fluent writing style throughout.

Grammar and spelling accurate.

Uses appropriate academic terminology throughout Portfolio.

Referencing consistently accurate throughout Portfolio.