Fluent Essays

UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND AND MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE ___________________________________________________________________________ Course : Bachelor of Arts (Hons) Business and Marketing BMTD5 2123A_ BAMD5 2106A_ BAMD2 2008A_ BAMD2 2009A Module : SIM336 Strategic Management MDIS Module Tutor : Mr. Ho Soo Kwang Assessment : Individual Assignment Due Date : Marketing students -22 Oct 2021 Business & Management: 26 Nov 2021 Word Length : 3,000 words +/- 10\% Please refer to AQH-F15 Guidance for Students on the Penalty for Exceeding the Limit for Assessed Work. Weighting within Module : 100\% ___________________________________________________________________________ Assignment Submission Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submitted through JIRA will be marked. Any other submission including submission to your study centre in hard copy will be treated as a non-submission. If your centre supports Turnitin©, a copy of your Turnitin© originality report must be submitted in conjunction with your assignment. PLAGIARISM/INFRINGEMENT STATEMENT All Assessments are subject to the University’s Policy on Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism. Students found guilty of this are subject to severe penalties. This is an INDIVIDUAL piece of work - If there is evidence that the work is not wholly attributable to you, the Universitys policy on Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism will be applied Link to University Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy • https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155 https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155 SIM336 Strategic Management_ Page 2 of 5 ASSIGNMENT TITLE: Strategic Management Report Learning outcomes: To strategically analyse an organization. To synthesise ideas or solutions relating to strategic issues Skills outcomes: Research skills Critical evaluation Creativity Communication All work submitted must adhere to the University Policy on ‘Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism’ Assignment Task: Deliverable: One written individual report; Submission; You must submit the assignment as a word-compatible document. When you submit the document, *name your file with the full name e.g. JaneLee.doc*. This way I can identify you. You are required to conduct a strategic analysis and construct strategic recommendations for your chosen company based on current information. A key outcome with this report is to ensure that you are able to construct plausible strategies grounded on solid research, thorough analysis and logical argument, all presented them in a report that is persuasive and clear. This report, as is obvious from the mark allocation, is going to require considerable work from you. In addition to the use of all matrices and strategic tools taught in the course, you will also be expected to seek out data on your own. The report is expected to be clear and concise. Length is NOT an indicator of quality. Any padding will be frowned upon. The format of the report is given below. The maximum length of the report is 3,000 words, excluding cover sheet, executive summary, contents page and references. In addition, you are permitted to have up to 5 pages of appendices. Your appendices are to be comprised of tables, figures, charts and diagrams only. Penalty for exceeding the word limit can be found on page 4. One often neglected aspect of case studies is the inclusion of the theoretical underpinnings of your recommendations. This aspect will be covered in the lectures but it is worth mentioning that this unit, while recognising the role of trade publications, places special emphasis on refereed journal articles. SIM336 Strategic Management_ Page 3 of 5 • citations from trade journals and the like will be acceptable only to provide examples to support your argument; • theory must be cited from textbooks and refereed sources; • Wikipedia, CIA, essay site fee or free and blog references are banned As this is an individual assignment, it is in your interest to ensure that the report is fully and properly referenced. If intellectual dishonesty is established beyond any reasonable doubt, academic misconduct proceedings will be enacted. I will also penalise poor referencing (i.e. the effort was made but referencing was poorly done). Required format for case report: 1. Executive summary 2. Introduction 3. Current Company Situation a. Company profile b. Financials c. Manpower strength d. Turnover e. Country/countries of operation f. Number of divisions g. etc 4. External analysis: a. identify trends, opportunities and threats b. If necessary, define the scope of (a): e.g., Asia only or B2B only 5. Internal analysis; a. Identify the capabilities behind the competencies that create value b. Will this endure into the future? 6. Issue/Problem definition: a. What issue/s is/are you trying to resolve? b. Given this issue what goal(s)/objective(s) must be set? 7. From (6), briefly describe your recommended strategy, based on your SWOT analysis, that will resolve the issue/s 8. Appendices: SIM336 Strategic Management_ Page 4 of 5 a. E.g. Ratio analysis (place conclusions stemming from this analysis in your main body) b. Tabulate your Porter’s analysis, SWOT, PEST. c. Others as appropriate Objectives and Requirements This assignment is to be undertaken individually. It is primarily designed for you to demonstrate your understanding of key concepts, theories, or models covered in this unit and apply/link them to business reality/your personal experience to facilitate your learning. Be assertive to draw conclusions for your analyses and evaluations. You are strongly encouraged to reflect on your own managerial experience, if you have, in developing business strategy in your organisation. Using secondary data in the form of literature or publications is expected. The length of this part of the assignment should NOT exceed 3,000 +/- 10\% word count, double spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font, 2.5 cm margins all sides. Assessment Criteria The assignment will be graded for individuals on the basis of the specific criteria outlined below. SIM336 Strategic Management_ Page 5 of 5 Categories Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature P a ss 86 – 100\% The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also ample excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse. 76-85\% The work examined is outstanding and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be outstanding in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse. 70 – 75\% The work examined is excellent and is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse. 60 – 69\% Directly relevant to the requirements of the assessment A substantial knowledge of strategy material, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and issues therein A good strategic analysis, clear and orderly Generally coherent and logically structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s) May contain some distinctive or independent thinking; may begin to formulate an independent position in relation to strategic theory and/or practice. Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable format Critical appraisal of up-to date and/or appropriate literature. Recognition of different perspectives. Very good use of source material. Uses a range of sources 50 – 59\% Some attempt to address the requirements of the assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant strategy material, with intermittent evidence of an appreciation of its significance Some analytical treatment, but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks clear analytical purpose Some attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency, with issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in simplistic terms Sound work which expresses a coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical conformity to one or more standard views of strategy. Competently written, with only minor lapses from standard grammar, with acceptable format Uses a variety of literature which includes some recent strategic texts and/or appropriate literature, though not necessarily including a substantive amount beyond library texts. Competent use of source material. 40 – 49\% Some correlation with the requirements of the assessment but there are instances of irrelevance Basic understanding of the strategy but addressing a limited range of material Largely descriptive or narrative, with little evidence of analysis A basic argument is evident, but mainly supported by assertion and there may be a lack of clarity and coherence Some evidence of a view starting to be formed but mainly derivative. A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader Some up-to-date and/or appropriate literature used. Goes beyond the material tutor has provided. Limited use of sources to support a point. F a il 35 – 39\% Relevance to the requirements of the assessment may be very intermittent, and may be reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms A limited understanding of a narrow range of strategic material. Heavy dependence on description, and/or on paraphrase, is common Little evidence of coherent argument: lacks development and may be repetitive or thin Almost wholly derivative: the writer’s contribution rarely goes beyond simplifying paraphrase Numerous deficiencies in expression and presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic or repetitious style Barely adequate use of literature. Over reliance on material provided by the tutor. The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration. 30 – 34\% The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators. 15-29\% The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators. 0-14\% The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.