MGT510 201660 Additional Assessment item
Type: Report
Value: 100%
Due date: 30 December 2016
Length: 3500 words
Submission method options: via Turnitin (you will be added to a MGT510 AA special class)
Task
Please identify a key strategy of an organization (you select a company of your own choice), evaluate whether this strategy is suitability for this firm, and use Hubbard’s implementing strategy model (on prescribed textbook page 345) to evaluate the strategy implementation process in the organisation.
Presentation
Please see presentation guidelines in the ‘Assessment Information’ section of the subject outline.
Requirements
You are required to write a 3500 word report including 200 words of an executive summary, but excluding references and appendix. You should also perform the following tasks:
1. Identify and discuss the strategy that the organisation (or SBU) is implementing/has implemented by examining its strategy statement and/or its value chain activities.
2. Evaluate the suitability of the organisation’s current strategy based on the outcomes of your analysis (e.g., the identification of the organisation’s current strategy and the most significant factors affecting the organisation’s performance, and your understanding of the organisation's strategy). If the current strategy is not suitable, please recommend no more than two alternative strategic initiatives that the organisation should pursue and justify your recommendations.
3. Evaluate the implementation of strategy.
4. Develop your conclusion.
Page 1 of 5
For this assessment APA referencing format is required. For guidance in the use of this referencing please see the CSU Referencing website at http://student.csu.edu.au/study/referencing-at-csu
Additional information to assist you with your assignment can be found here http://student.csu.edu.au/study/skills/guidesandtips/writing-at-uni
This assessment must be submitted via Turnitin. Text match should not be more than 20%.
Page 2 of 5
Marking criteria
This assessment will be marked out of 100. A mark of 50 or more will result in a PS grade for the subject. A mark less than 50 will result in a FL grade for the subject
FL (0 - 49%) PS (50% - 64%) CR (65% - 74%) DI
(75% - 84%) HD (85%-100%)
1. Executive summary
(10 marks) Does not identify/provides only a limited identification of the requirements for the executive summary. Provides an outline of the report structure, but significance and relevance of issues in not discussed. No/little justification provided. Provides the basic summary of the report and identifies the key issues and how they inter-relate, but limited justification of significance. The structure of the report explained. Provides a comprehensive summary of the report and a clear, succinct identification of the main points, but requires further justification of significance. The structure of the report clearly explained. A comprehensive summary that highlights the purpose and significance of the main points, which are clearly explained, justified and supported. The structure of the report is well signposted. /10
2.Understanding of strategic
management theory and tools, and the quality of
Information sources
(25 marks) Limited understanding of SM theory and tools involved and inappropriate information sources or relies primarily on only one source Some understanding of SM theory and tools involved and little variety of information, or not all sources are appropriate. Adequate understanding of SM theory and tools involved and good use of a range of appropriate information sources. Good understanding of SM theory and tools involved and good use of a range of appropriate information sources. Excellent understanding of SM theory, concepts, and tools involved and excellent use of wide range of information from appropriate sources. /25
3. Critical analysis and synthesis of argument (25marks) Little or no analysis or synthesis evident in assignment, argument lacks logic. Some evidence of independent, critical thought in problem identification and solving. Superficial attempt Attempted development of critical thought in problem identification and solving, but ideas/comments not Evidence of independent, critical thought in problem identification and solving.
Demonstrates and integrates Excellent critical analysis and evaluation Showing understanding of complex issues. /25
at critical/reflective analysis. supported. Demonstrates and integrates limited critical/reflective analysis. Evidence of some reflective thinking. some critical/reflective analysis. Evidence of reflective thinking skills. Excellent synthesis of complex ideas into a coherent, logical and convincing argument.
4. Application of strategic
management theory and tools (15 marks) Little or no application of strategic management theoretical frameworks or tools, or inappropriate tools used that did not support argument. Provides little analysis and evaluation of relevant theory, and limited linking of theory and concepts to practice. But makes attempts to use theory to support point of view and/or argument. Some analysis and critical evaluation of relevant theory developed through linking theory and concepts to practice.
Theory linked to point of view and/or argument. Provides analysis and critical evaluation of relevant
theory, with evidence of insight developed through linking theory and concepts to practice. Theory is integrated and linked well to argument. Provides a comprehensive analysis and critical evaluation of relevant theory, with evidence of insight developed through linking theory and concepts to practice. Theory is integrated exceptionally well into argument. /15
5. Depth and breadth of coverage (15 marks) Responses were superficial and/or inadequately addressed the aspects of assignment. Some attempt at depth and breadth of coverage. Some aspects of the assignment were addressed adequately. Most aspects of the assignment were addressed in great depth. All aspects of the assignment were covered in a thorough way. /15
6. Referencing and presentation (10marks) Unsatisfactory expression and presentation. Meaning unclear and/or grammar and/or spelling contain frequent errors.
Poor presentation (referencing does not follow APA style) and less than 10 journal articles utilised. Expression and presentation of ideas are comprehensible but lack clarity.
Poor referencing style (referencing uses APA style, but with errors). Demonstrates limited reading outside of topic materials provided and Expression is lucid and clear with precise use of language. Writing style appropriate to the assessment item. Few flaws in grammar and spelling. Referencing follows correct APA style, but requires improvement. Demonstrates reading of Expression and presentation of ideas is mainly accurate. Fluent writing style appropriate to the assessment item. Grammar and spelling are accurate.
Referencing follows correct APA style, but some small errors. Expression and presentation of ideas are developed and clear. Fluent writing style appropriate to the assessment item. Grammar and spelling are accurate.
Referencing follows correct APA style. /10
practical application; does not utilise the required 10 journal articles. topic materials provided and practical application; the required 10 journal articles utilised. Demonstrates reading outside of topic materials provided and practical application; the required 10 journal articles utilised. Demonstrates wide reading and practical application; going beyond the required 10 journal articles.
Total: /100