STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT SIM336

ASSIGNMENT 1 - TITLE:

Strategic Analysis

Issue Date: Friday 13th February 2015

Due Date: Friday 17th April 2015
Learning outcomes:

Strategic analysis of an organization(s).

Synthesis of ideas or solutions relating to strategy issues

Skills outcomes:

Moderated by:

Research skills
Critical evaluation
Creativity
Communication
Derek Harwood

All work submitted must adhere to the University Policy on Cheating, Collusion
and Plagiarism
You must not submit an assignment that analyses the mobile phone industry
and or a mobile phone company.
Task:
You are required to submit an individual report of 3,000 10% words, which
can be based on an organization or idea of your own choice.
The strategic analysis must be related to a recognised aspect of business
policy, strategic management or the philosophical underpinning of a particular
methodology within the public or private sector strategic management
domain.
If your analysis is of an organisation then do not submit a functional analysis;
for example do not submit a strategic marketing analysis or a strategic human
resource analysis. You should be applying the concepts and models from the
topics that are within the module to your chosen organisation.

The report must be written in a recognised style, i.e. table of contents, introduction, main
analysis, conclusions, recommendations, references and bibliography. You must apply the
Harvard system of referencing in your report.
Objectives
To analyse a business policy or strategic management topic, to carry out individual
research or evaluation of an organization.
Requirements
Meet the learning outcomes listed above, identify and critically analyse fundamental
issues related to strategic management. Undertake a study that shows clear evidence of
synthesis and evaluation.

There are a number of ways you might carry out this assignment: here are a few ideas:

Use a theoretical model to reflect upon the reality (practice) of a situation. Use theory to
predict the outcomes of practice. Use practice to reflect upon / modify theory;
( dung theory chng minh thc ti, hoc d on trc tng lai ca 1 cng ty, hoc dng s
thnh cng ca cng ty modify li theory)

Compare theory and practice: Does M.E. Porters (1985) model of competition support the
experience of practitioners? i.e. use a practical example /case / issue to reflect on Porters
model(s) and examine success and / or failure.
( nh gi theory c p dng c trong trng hp ny ko, p dng nh th no v ra sao?)

A case study approach: Is Satya Nadella, C.E.O. managing Microsoft as effectively as he

might? i.e. do an analysis of Microsofts performance in relation to declared (or undeclared)
strategy and the efficacy of his strategy.

A recovery plan: My advice to the Chief Executive Officer of the Sony Corporation is i.e.
suggest a way forward for the organization in light of their poor performance over the last 5
years.

A risk management strategy: My advice to JP Morgans Chief Executive Officer in light of

their 2012 $6 Billion trading loss.
2

These are merely examples of approaches you might take; thinking up your own ideas
might be more productive and fun.
Assessment Criteria
Your seminar tutor on the basis of the following general criteria will assess the paper:

Content - the quality of research and analysis undertaken and the use of initiative
in finding sources of information;

Process - the quality and clarity of the assignment and your ability to demonstrate
command over the subject area and the development of a case or argument;

Discretion - additional credit may be awarded to a student who tackles a difficult

subject well.

The assignment will be graded for individuals on the basis of the specific criteria outlined
on the following page.
The Presentation element of the Generic Assessment Criteria will be used to assess the
report structure.

Generic Assessment Criteria Undergraduate

These should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working and related to the assessment criteria for the module
Categories
Grade
86 100%

Relevance
Knowledge
Analysis
Argument and Structure
Critical Evaluation
Presentation
Reference to Literature
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

76-85%

demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
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.
The work examined is excellent and is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also

70 75%

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.
Directly relevant to
A substantial knowledge A good strategic
Generally coherent and logically
May contain some
Well
written,

60 69%

with Critical appraisal of up-todate

the requirements

of strategy material,

analysis,

structured, using an appropriate

distinctive or independent

standard

of the assessment

showing a clear grasp of

clear and orderly

mode of argument and/or

thinking; may begin to

grammar, in a readable Recognition

theoretical mode(s)

formulate an independent

style

position in relation to

format

themes, questions and

Pass

issues therein

spelling

with

and and/or

40 49%

of

literature.
different

acceptable perspectives.
Very good use of source material.

strategic theory

50 59%

appropriate

Uses a range of sources

Some attempt to address

Adequate knowledge of a Some analytical

and/or practice.
Some attempt to construct a Sound
work

the requirements of

fair range of relevant

treatment, but may be

coherent argument, but may suffer expresses

the assessment:

strategy material, with

prone to description, or loss of focus and consistency, position only in broad terms from

may drift away

intermittent evidence of

to narrative, which

with issues at stake stated only

from this in less

an appreciation of its

lacks clear analytical

vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) conformity to one or more acceptable format

substantive amount beyond library

focused passages

significance

purpose

couched in simplistic terms

texts. Competent use of source

Largely descriptive or

material.
A basic argument is evident, but Some evidence of a view A simple basic style but Some

Some correlation with Basic understanding of

the requirements of the the

strategy

assessment but there are

addressing

instances of irrelevance

range of material

but narrative, with little mainly supported by assertion

limited evidence of analysis

which Competently

written, Uses a variety of literature which

coherent with only minor lapses includes some recent strategic

and in uncritical

texts and/or appropriate literature,

standard grammar, with though not necessarily including a

standard views of strategy.

starting to be formed but with

up-to-date

and/or

significant appropriate literature used. Goes

and there may be a lack of clarity mainly derivative.

deficiencies in expression beyond the material tutor has

and coherence

or format that may pose provided. Limited use of sources

obstacles for the reader

to support a point.

35 39%

Relevance to the

A limited understanding Heavy dependence on

Little

requirements of the

of a narrow range of description, and/or on

argument: lacks development and the

assessment may be very

strategic material.

Fail

intermittent, and may be

evidence

of

paraphrase, is common may be repetitive or thin

coherent Almost wholly derivative: Numerous deficiencies in

rarely

writers
goes

contribution expression

Barely adequate use of literature.

and Over

reliance

on

material

beyond presentation; the writer provided by the tutor.

simplifying paraphrase

may achieve clarity (if at

reduced to its vaguest

all) only by using a

and least challenging

simplistic or repetitious

30 34%

terms
style
The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied for compensation consideration.
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

15-29%

responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.
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

0-14%

and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
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.