Learning outcomes
- Demonstrate a broad and rigorous understanding of the frameworks and models associated with strategic management
- Discuss the strategic directions that can be chosen by organisations through the application of relevant theoretical concepts.
- Evaluate case studies in strategy direction, strategy implementation and strategic management.
- Assess the importance of strategic management processes.
- State the need for strategic alternatives and their selection.
- Define the process of strategy implementation and its links to strategic change
- Debate the need for strategy creation
- Illustrate the challenges faced by management when deciding on strategic direction.
- Apply a range of strategic theoretical frameworks to a variety of organisations studied.
Task:
You are working as a strategy consultant for a company of your choice. You can choose any well known company for which you will be able to collect enough information to carry out a high quality analysis. Drawing on a range of analytical models, undertake a strategic analysis of your selected organisation. Please ensure that you provide adequate rationale behind the choice of your analytical models and avoid using more than two models. You are also required to provide the company with advice on their performance and development. Your recommendations should be well founded and should clearly relate to your analysis.
Suggested format:
Part 1: Introduction of selected company, selection and justification of analytical models (Not more than 500 words) – 20% of total marks
Part 2: Critical analysis with application of the chosen models (1,500 words) – 60% of total marks
Part 3: Conclusion (Not more than 500 words) – 20% of total marks
Word count: 2500 (tables of content, lists of tables and figures, appendices, list of references, tables and diagrams are not included in the word count). Appendices should be used for essential information only and should be clearly referenced in the text. Total word count should be clearly indicated on the front sheet of the assignment.
Essential: the work should demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation, APA6 referencing method should be used where appropriate. There should be an evidence of a wider reading, particularly for the first section, to demonstrate your understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of your analysis (not only textbooks and the company websites but also academic journals).
Please note that you are not required to submit hard copies. Please note that submission of the assignment after the deadline without an approved extension or extenuating circumstances will result in the mark being capped at 40%. Please refer to the student regulations and your student handbook.
Marking Scheme Notes:
- Your coursework must be word-processed. APA6 referencing method should be used where appropriate.
- You must include a front sheet to your assignment that contains your name, student number, course, Module code (BHS0027) and your word count.
- Attention is drawn to the rules on academic misconduct (including unattributed citations from textbooks etc), refer to your Student Handbook for the penalties for non-compliance.
GENERAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – UNDERGRADUATE
The criteria below are not intended to be either exhaustive or definitive and are to be taken as guidelines rather than imposing absolute standards. In instances where these guidelines are not applicable, for example in the case of presentations or group work, the particular
assessment criteria to be used should be clearly specified.
Mark range 90 – 100%
A piece of work should fall within this class if it displays characteristics of:
- Original, incisive and creative research, using relevant and contemporary literature
- Outstanding comprehension displayed
- Insightful, outstanding analysis
- Compelling evidence, supporting analysis
- Complete and authoritative piece of work
Mark range 80 – 89%
Work in this category will display characteristics of:
- Original, incisive and creative research, using relevant and contemporary literature
- Outstanding comprehension displayed, with some evidence of misconceptions/errors
- Outstanding analysis, though lacking some relevant insights
- Compelling evidence, supporting analysis
- An authoritative piece of work, though may lack completeness
Mark range 70 – 79%
Work in this category should display an excellent understanding of the assessment area, with a clear demonstration of pertinent, critical analysis. Work presented will demonstrate an excellent understanding of appropriate concepts and contemporary, contextual appreciation of literature.
Mark range 60 – 69%
Work in this category should display a high level of competence, with clear demonstration of critical analysis relevant to assessment requirement and some contemporary, contextual appreciation of literature.
Mark range 50 – 59%
Work in this category should display overall competence, however it will be lacking in analytical depth and /or display a limited comprehension of the subject matter so that the work falls short of a B grade. A good deal of the relevant content may have been presented by the student but this will be less well articulated and developed than the grade B student. The more difficult concepts will be omitted or dealt with superficially. The application of the principles and theory to the problem/question will be more limited and perhaps dealt with in a more “re-gurgitative” manner. The work may contain minor errors; however there should be no major misunderstandings.
Mark range 40 – 49%
Work will fall into this category if it contains relevant material in relation to the issues raised by the problem/question, including the central issue. The answer will be presented in a coherent andlargely correct manner, although the analytical aspects and comprehension will be of a limited nature. Use of principles, theory and evidence may be poor and the overall coverage of the subject matter will be of a limited nature.
Mark range 30 – 39%
Work in this category has elements that are correct: however the work displays a number of major misconceptions that call into question the student’s comprehension of the material. The analytical contents may be very weak or even non-existent. Application of principles, theory and evidence to the problem may be weak. Overall coverage may be poor. Reference to sources or authorities may be weak or inappropriate. Structure may be weak.
Mark range – below 30%
The work is limited and contains fundamental errors that indicate a substantial lack of comprehension by the student. There will be little or no analytical content and the references to authorities and sources will very limited or non-existent. The presentation and structure of the work may be poor. The work may also be characterized by falling far short of the overall word limit and possibly repetition of material or arguments. Conclusions may be non-existent or limited
