Complete the title page with all necessary student details and ensure that the student declaration is ticked.
All assignments must be submitted as an electronic document in MS Word to the LMS (Use 12 Times New Roman script).
All assignments must be submitted with an accompanying Turnitin report.
Assignment that is not submitted to the LMS by the prescribed deadline will be accepted ONLY under the REDO and RESIT submission policy of Westford.
The results are declared only if the student has met the mandatory attendance requirement of 75% and/or a minimum of 50% under extenuating circumstances approved and ratified by the Academic Director. The student has to repeat the module (with additional fees applicable) if the attendance is below 50%.
The assignment should not contain any contents including references cited from websites like www.ukessays.com, www.studymode.com, www.slideshare.net , www.scribd.com.
Students can refer Wikipedia as a source of information, but the references cited in Wikipedia must be mentioned.
Submit the assignment in a MS Word document with the file name being:
First Name Last Name_ abbreviation of the subject.
Example: John Smith_SM.
Quick reference Checklist for the Faculty/Instructor to accept/reject the assignment before evaluation:
Adherence to the deadline of submission date.
Original cover sheet and format retained.
Student information and signature intact.
Font style and size used as instructed.
Harvard Referencing Style is strictly followed.
Assignment Strategic Management
Learning Outcome 1: Critically evaluate the relationship between strategy, stakeholder expectations and organizational performance.
PC 1.1: Critically analyse the main concepts and theories of strategic management.
PC 1.2: Discuss the effectiveness of your organization’s vision, mission and strategic objectives.
PC 1.3: Assess your organisation’s competitive position and its strategic drivers.
PC 1.4: Evaluate the organizational design of your chosen organisation and its impact on performance effectiveness.
PC 1.5: Analyse your chosen organization’s influence on its external business environment based on its current stage of the organisational lifecycle.
Learning Outcome 2: Evaluate the impact of current and emerging Economic, Political and Cultural factors on the strategic management of an organization.
PC 2.1 Critically analyse the external environment in which your chosen organization operates.
PC 2.2 Evaluate the impact of at least two key environment factors on a business.
PC 2.3 Evaluate the effectiveness of your organization’s response to environmental factors.
Learning Outcome 3: Formulate innovative business strategies designed to contribute to the success of an organization.
PC 3.1 Apply strategy formulation tools to design a business strategy for an organization.
PC 3.2 Critically discuss the factors that enhance change readiness and innovation within organizations
PC 3.3 Prepare a plan for strategy implementation.
PC 3.4: Discuss the critical success factors that need to be in place in a strategic plan to ensure organisational success.
Learning Outcome 4: Critically assess different leadership styles in developing corporate values, social responsibilities and managing strategic change.
PC 4.1 Critically assess various leadership styles and the benefits of each in a business context.
PC 4.2 Discuss the application of different leadership styles and its effect on organizational performance.
PC 4.3 Critically evaluate and share recommendations of possible leadership styles that would support development of corporate values in your chosen organization.
PC 4.4 Assess the impact of leadership styles on managing change and fulfilling corporate social responsibilities.
Assignment Task Report [100 Marks] [6000 Words)
Read the following Scenario and prepare a Report with the guidelines provided.
For this assignment you can choose your organization where you are currently working or where you have worked earlier. If you are choosing any other organization it has to be one about which you have firsthand knowledge so as to fulfill the requirements of the assignment. You will write a Report on the chosen organization’s strategic management changes that it wants to incorporate, to find answers to certain questions set up in the main assignment task given below.
The assignment will have the following important components/steps:
Analyse the current vision, mission, objectives and existing strategy of the organization
Conduct a detailed environmental analysis using the tools in the modules and identify the environmental challenges and possible opportunities
Identify an important environmental challenge and discuss the possible impact of it on the organization and its stakeholders
Create a strategy using tools learned to overcome this challenge and discuss how you would implement it in your organization.
Discuss the various challenges you would face in the implementation and discuss how you would improve innovation as well as make effective use of change management principles.
Suggested Report Format
Executive Summary (10 marks) – The Executive Summary content should not be more than one A4 page size. It will contain briefly all-important elements of discussion brought about in your report.
1 1. Introduction to the company (5 marks) - Here you can give a current brief of your organization including vision, mission, strategic objectives, product/services offered, regions served ,revenues, employee size etc.
1.2 Current Business Scenario (10 marks) - How is the company faring in the current changing business scenario? Analyze its competitors and how the company ranks among them. Critically evaluate strengths and weaknesses and core competencies? Identify and discuss the specific sources of its competitive advantage. Use a minimum of 2 models /tools such as Miles and Snow typologies, VRIO model, Porter’s 5 forces and Business portfolio analysis, to critically analyze and describe current strategies of the organization to control external challenges. Evaluate how is its current strategy affecting organizational performance? Analyze the organizational design as well as lifecycle and how it affects the organizational performance.
Environmental Analysis and need for change (15 marks) - Using a minimum of 2 relevant tools/models (PESTLE, Environmental Uncertainty Model, SWOT and Scenario planning) conduct an environmental analysis and critically analyse impact of key factors the organization will have to consider in order to ensure its success. Evaluate how effective was your organization’s response to these environmental factors.
Strategy Identification and implementation
3.1. Strategy to overcome challenge/s (10 marks) – Apply minimum any two strategy formulation tools to design a business strategy for your organization and discuss the success factors that will be critical to organizational success.
Implementation of strategy (15 marks) – Prepare a plan of how would you implement this strategy? Critically evaluate some of the possible consequences (positive and negative) of how will the change management principles be useful for handling the shift in strategy during implementation? Also, carry out a critical discussion on how would you improve innovation and readiness to change in your organization?
Leadership Values to Manage Strategic Change
4.1 Leadership styles and Organizational Performance (20 marks) – Does adopting different leadership styles affect organizational performance? Critically analyze and discuss using academic articles on how different leadership styles in your organization will affect the organization’s performance and effectiveness to manage the strategic change they want to implement. How would it retain or change the organization’s corporate values? What could the leadership do to fulfill some its corporate social responsibilities? You can bring in various debates and insights academic articles as well as include your own experiences in the work place to discuss the impact and effectiveness of the various leadership styles. You are expected to refer only peer reviewed journal articles (5-8) for your analyses and for supporting your statements.
Recommendations (5 marks) – Give out your recommendations of changes you envisage and the corporate values you need to incorporate to effectively implement these changes in your chosen organization.
Conclusions (5 marks) - Summarize the strategic management issues including the solution. Analyze the possible limitations of the strategy identified and main assumptions that drove the new strategy formulation process. Discuss briefly how the strategy identified is the best, given the context.
Presentation & References (5 marks) - You should present the whole report written well in a good format, and which makes good use the Harvard Referencing System (HRS).
Performance descriptors indicate how marks will be arrived at against each of the above criteria. The descriptors indicate the likely characteristics of work that is marked within the percentage bands indicated.
Assessment Criteria (70-100%)
Work of an outstanding, excellent & v. good standard (*) (60-69%)
Work of a good standard. (50-59%)
Work of a pass standard. D (40-49%)
Fail E (0-39%)
A critical overview with the help of Executive Summary. Bring out relevant authors, rival theories, and major debates to a very good, possibly excellent (even outstanding) standard. References beyond those identified in session sources.
A synthesized overview of the Executive Summary, where good use of existing academic work and evaluation of main work is given out coherently. Some review of relevant authors, rival theories, and major debates.
. A reasonable overview of the Executive Summary, where satisfactory summary is given of the whole produced work. There is evidence of engagement with pertinent issues. Key authors & major debates are presented. Evidence of suitable basic reading.
Limited overview of Executive Summary. The work may be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation, and very limited presentation of the whole summary. No counterarguments or alternative frames of reference are generated or considered.
. Confused overview of Executive Summary. Fundamental misconceptions of how to write an Executive Summary. The work is mainly descriptive and shows little or no understanding of summary requirements.
Introduction should explicitly bring out relevant details necessary to understand the context of strategic management practices in the organization. The business scenario paints a clear picture of current situation using facts and figure or related information from academic and non-academic sources where necessary. Introduction should bring out good relevant details necessary to understand the context of strategic management practices in the organization. The current company details discussed in the context of the strategic management. focus. The business scenario clearly described using adequate terminology. Some external sources (academic or non-academic) referenced and included to support discussion. Introduction should bring out satisfactorily the local, national and regional context of strategic management practices in the organization. The current company details discussed in the context of the strategic management. focus. The business scenario described but has gaps. External sources (academic or non-academic) not included or poorly used. Introduction is not satisfactorily bringing out the internal and external context of strategic management practices in the organization. The current company details are not discussed in the context of the strategic management. focus. The business scenario has not been adequately described. External sources (academic or non-academic) not evidenced or minimal. Poor/insufficient use of facts and figures observed. Too few references to appropriate literature and no evidence of independent thought and/ or criticality. Introduction is very sketchy and does not satisfactorily bring out the vision, mission, employee size, revenues and other information required to understand the organization in the context of strategic management practices in the organization at all.
Environmental Analysis and need for change (15%)
Demonstrate ability to accurately apply relevant tools and frameworks to analyze and identify the various factors that have a significant influence on the organization. Has critically analyzed the factors in the external environment and evaluate their impact in the relevant business context. Demonstrates a critical understanding of how the environmental factors can have a significant effect on the strategic management process. Strategy, organizational design and lifecycle and its effect on Organizational performance accurately identified and discussed. Demonstrates excellent analytical ability. The key factors identified effectively.
Demonstrates a good understanding of frameworks and tools from academic resources. Good analysis done well in respect to application of relevant strategic management frameworks.
Examples of effective use of academic frameworks in order to analyse the case scenario. Examples of sound argument and logical interpretation.
Strategy, organizational design and lifecycle and its effect on Organizational performance discussed Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of environmental analyses framework and tools for analysis. Some analysis done in respect to application of relevant models, tools and frameworks.
The work is mainly descriptive, but has achieved all the performance criteria.
Some mention of Strategy, organizational design and lifecycle and its effect on Organizational performance but not very accurate or insightful. The work may be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal and descriptive interpretation of the tools and frameworks and very limited evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation.
A superficial and routine description of the factors some of which may not be logical or accurate.
Strategy, organizational design and lifecycle and its effect on Organizational performance mentioned but not very accurate and superficially discussed. Fundamental misconceptions /lack of knowledge of the tools and frameworks used in analyzing the environment Limited analysis of a superficial nature only lacks any attempt at analysis, relying on description instead.
Strategy, organizational design and lifecycle and its effect on Organizational performance not included in adequate detail.
Strategy Identification and implementation (25%)
Has conducted a detailed and accurate interpretation of the situation.
Demonstrates excellent knowledge and understanding of the concepts and techniques for strategy formulation.
The discussion, analysis and interpretation demonstrate excellent knowledge of the strategic management process and ability to formulate and evaluate strategies and consequences well thought out and addressed in detail. A detailed, logical implementation plan with an excellent understanding of the change management principles has been evidenced.
The work demonstrates a good level of understanding of the situation/business scenario. Relevant concepts and theories have been utilized in the formulation. Some meaningful evaluation of the strategies within the context described. Fairly elaborate and in-depth with the different factors considered for implementation and the consequences identified and discussed. A fir use of change management principles and understanding of it evidenced. The work demonstrates a competence to apply the tools for analyses and adequately the various factors and interpret them to formulate suitable strategies in context of the business scenario described. Has some awareness and has reflected on the factors identified as well as consequences Some helpful insights and fairly good knowledge on the application of change management principles. There may be little evidence of an ability to come up with sound strategy and chart out a proper implementation plan. Formulated strategies not very related to the scenario or lacking in understanding of core issues to be resolved. Implementation plan and discussion primarily superficial and lacking in depth and adequate logic. Does not show awareness of the possible outcomes and lack a good understanding of the change management principles observed. No application of principle and concepts in the strategic management module. Strategy devised Primarily based on wrong or faulty assumptions Conclusions and interpretations of the tools confused or illogical and unsubstantiated. Implementation and understanding of change management either superficial or lacking. Possibly no real attempt to address the consequences and contemplation of the strategy or its outcomes.
Leadership Styles & Org Performance (20 marks) Demonstrates a clear understanding of literature reviewed from good academic resources, peer reviewed articles and journals. Critical analysis done well in respect to application of relevant concepts and theories with adequate examples
Clear evidence of independent thought and very effective use of academic frameworks in order to analyze, evaluate the relationships. There is a synthesis of the various insights. Demonstrates a good understanding of literature reviewed from academic resources. Good analysis done well in respect to application of relevant leadership styles and the relation to organizational performance.
Examples of effective use of academic frameworks in order to analyze the relationship observed. Examples of sound argument and solid evidence. Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of literature reviewed from academic resources. Some analysis done in respect to application of leadership styles to Organizational performance.
The work explores and analyses issues, but is not strong on the critical reflection and is mainly descriptive, Overall, it has the component and elements required to meet the performance criteria. The work may be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation of the literature, and very limited evidence of analysis, synthesis or evaluation.
Recommend-dations (5 marks) Well-organised, logical, fully supported by evidence, recommendations clear and arise from results/discussion; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of issues. Very well-articulated recommendations of changes envisaged and the corporate values incorporated to implement the changes. Well-organised, logical, supported by evidence, recommendations fairly clear and arise from results & discussion; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of assumptions and limitations of the strategy. The discussion is well articulated as recommendations of changes envisaged and the corporate values incorporated to implement the changes. Reasonably well-organised, logical, generally supported by evidence, recommendations fairly clear and arise from results & discussion; practical and feasible, with un clear or weak consideration of assumptions and limitations of the strategy identified. Recommendations of changes envisaged and the corporate values incorporated to implement the changes just brought out satisfactorily. Poor organisation; gaps in reasoning; some obvious recommendations omitted for the list; other conclusions not especially driven by the findings but from ‘common sense’. No real implications and reflection on the recommendations of changes envisaged and the corporate values incorporated to implement the changes.
Assertions little related to evidence, frequently illogical or arbitrary; recommendations if presented are disorganized; alternatives not considered; no real understanding of the need to draw conclusions, implications and recommendations from results. Very poorly brought out recommendations of changes and the corporate values incorporated to implement the changes.
(5%) Well-organized, logical, fully supported by evidence, conclusions clear and arise from results/discussion; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of marketing issues. Recommendations driven by good deductions from findings. Well-organized, logical, supported by evidence, conclusions fairly clear and arise from results & discussion; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of marketing issues. Recommendations driven by decent deductions from findings. Reasonably well-organized, logical, generally supported by evidence, conclusions fairly clear and arise from results & discussion; practical and feasible, with un clear or weak consideration of marketing issues. Recommendations not always driven by good deductions. Poor organization; gaps in reasoning; some obvious conclusions omitted for the list; other conclusions not especially driven by the findings but from ‘common sense’. No real implications and recommendations week and incoherent.
Assertions little related to evidence, frequently illogical or arbitrary; conclusions if presented are disorganized; alternatives not considered; no real understanding of the need to draw conclusions, implications and recommendations from results.
c A balanced, well-structured work, generally coherent in approach. Well-written, well presented and largely free of spelling and/or typographical errors. Breadth of appropriate, current, and relevant references and correct application of the Harvard Referencing Method. A balanced, well-structured work. Overall clear well-written, well presented. Some small repeated errors in grammar. Good application of Harvard referencing system. Breadth of appropriate, current, and relevant references and almost correct application of the Harvard Referencing. Case is cohesive, but may be hindered by inappropriate balance, structure or writing style. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar. Current and relevant references and correct application of the Harvard Referencing Method. Whilst some of the characteristics of a pass have been demonstrated, the work does not address the case requirements overall. Possibly lacking in balance, structure or writing style. Some repeated errors in referencing and/or grammar. Limited use of references. Significant failings in case balance, structure or writing style. Repeated possibly significant errors in referencing and/or grammar. Critical failings in case balance. Possibly lacking in coherence is unstructured and/or is badly presented.
Get Free Quote!
359 Experts Online