1. This assignment must be submitted electronically by 2pm on the submission date
2. To submit electronically you must upload your work to the e-submission area within the respective module on blackboard. Click Submit> Browse (find the correct file to upload) Upload> Submit
3. Multiple drafts can be submitted up to the submission date.
4. Please remember you must leave at least 24 hours between submissions if you make changes to your work. Each submission will overwrite the previous one until the due date and time has passed.
5. You will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission. This will be sent to your Bucks e-mail address; please keep this for reference.
6. You are reminded of the University’s regulations on cheating and plagiarism. In submitting your assignment you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.
7. Late submission within 10 working days of the deadline will result in the mark being capped at a maximum of 40%. Beyond this time the work will not be marked.
8. You are reminded that it is your responsibility to keep an electronic copy of your assignment for future reference.
This assignment tests the following Learning Outcomes for the module:
1. Critically review and analyse an organisation’s strategic position in the market and visa-vis its competitors.
2. Critically assess criteria for making strategic choices, evaluate the impact of these choices on an organisation and make strategic recommendations based on the strategic choices available that will meet stakeholder expectations.
The Assignment Task:
Your task is to analyse a chosen organisations* strategic position and critically assess the strategic options open to it in order to recommend an appropriate strategy that would be suitable.
a) Strategic Purpose including an Introduction to the Organisation
External environment analysis: PESTLE
Competitive Industry analysis: Porter’s 5 Forces
Strategic Capability analysis: Threshold and distinctive resource/capabilities
Use a SWOT table or other appropriate framework to summarise the analysis for your organisation 30%
b) Building on the analysis in the first task, propose strategic choices for that organisation. These should include strategic choices in the areas of EITHER Business or International strategy. 20%
c) Critically evaluate the strategic choices developed in the second task, including critical assessment and justification of the criteria for that evaluation. This should include an assessment of the level and type of innovation and the application of a SAFe evaluation. Evaluation criteria should also include stakeholder expectations and mention of potential barriers to implementation such as organisation, funding and leadership. (25%)
d) Based on the evaluation in the third task, recommend a preferred strategic choice and explain how this meets stakeholder expectations. (25%)
*You will be advised about the chosen organisation at the CW1 briefings in weeks 18 & 19.
Instructions to Students:
Please note that this assignment is an INDIVIDUAL piece of work. Although it builds on analysis undertaken as a group, the strategic choices and evaluation need to be developed independently. Excessive similarity between members of the same CW1 group will be treated as plagiarism.
• Word limit: 2,500 words MAXIMUM +/-10%
• A recommended structure for the assignment is as follows:
Front cover including word count, Table of contents.
Abstract (brief summary of your work including recommendations – 200 words maximum not included in word count).
a) Introduction to your organisation, summary of internal and external factors and SWOT analysis with clear identification of critical points. (1,000 words).
b) Development of strategic choices (500 words).
c) Evaluation of strategic choices (500 words).
d) Recommendation of preferred strategic choice and conclusion (500 words).
e) References.
f) Appendices.
• The table of contents, the abstract, the references and the appendices are not included in the word count.
• Any parts of the main analysis should be in the main text and not in tables in the appendices.
• Your assignment will be marked on the basis of the justification you provide, the conceptualisation of the idea, the applicability of the relevant theory and the managerial relevance of your work.
• Regarding your assignment, you should focus on the following aspects:
a) Summary of the internal and external analysis for your organisation INCLUDING:
1. Strategic Purpose including an Introduction to the Organisation
2. External environment analysis: PESTLE,
3. Competitive Industry analysis: Porter’s 5 Forces
4. Strategic Capability analysis: Threshold and distinctive resource/capabilities
5. SWOT analysis
b) Development of appropriate strategic choices using either: Generic Competitive business strategy or Strategy Clock; Porter’s 4 International Strategies.
c) Development of appropriate evaluation criteria and evaluation of strategic choices, SAFe analysis
d) Selection and justification of the optimum strategy. You should use your own critical ability to analyse the issue properly and provide the rationale for your reply.
Quality Assurance Record
Internal Approval:
K M External Approval:
ing:
Summary of analysis
10% Answer shows an excellent summary of an organisation’s strategic position (Internal and External). Answer shows a good summary of an organisation’s strategic position (Internal and External). Answer shows an good summary of an organisation’s strategic position (Internal and External) but may contain some gaps or errors. Answer shows a summary of an organisation’s strategic position (Internal and External) but contains significant gaps and errors or is hard to understand. Answer shows no summary of an organisation’s strategic position (Internal and External).
Knowledge & Understanding:
Strategic Choices
30% Answer shows excellent application of theory to develop appropriate strategic choices which are fully justified and explained relating to the previous analysis. Answer shows good application of theory to develop strategic choices which are mainly appropriate. A good attempt has been made to justify the choices on the basis of the previous analysis.. Answer shows some application of theory to develop strategic choices which are generally appropriate for the organisation. Limited justification is made and links with the previous analysis may be missing. Answer shows limited application of theory to develop strategic choices which are mainly inappropriate and not justified. Answer shows no application of theory. Strategic choices are inappropriate or absent. There is no attempt to justify the strategic choices.
Evaluation: Development and application of Criteria 30% Excellent evaluation criteria have been critically assessed and applied showing deep understanding of the organisation, environment and relevant theories. Generally good critical assessment of evaluation criteria, showing a reasonable understanding of the organisation, environment and relevant theories. Some critical assessment of evaluation criteria, but there are gaps or errors. There are gaps in understanding of the organisation, environment and how to select and apply relevant theories. Limited critical assessment of evaluation criteria with significant gaps or errors. Significant weaknesses in understanding of the organisation and environment Relevant theories are missing or poorly applied. There is no critical assessment of evaluation criteria.
Evaluation: Recommendation 25% Sound recommendations, fully supported by evidence, analysis and evaluation. Generally sound recommendations, supported by reasonable evidence, analysis and evaluation. Recommendations have gaps and weaknesses. Some gaps or errors in evidence, analysis and evaluation. Limited recommendations, not really supported by sufficient evidence, analysis and evaluation. Recommendations are absent or unsound and are not supported by evidence, analysis or evaluation
Assignment Parameters
10% Clearly written and presented, fully and clearly referenced, and within +/-10% of the word limit
Fully Harvard referenced. In general, answer is clearly written and presented, fully and clearly referenced, and within +/- 10% of the word limit.
Correct Harvard referencing. Despite a small number of specific problems, answer is easy to follow with sound referencing. Answer may suffer from weak communication and presentation, but is understandable with reasonably sound referencing Weak communication and/or presentation limited effectiveness/ comprehension of argument. Poor or no referencing