UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

AND
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE
IN TASHKENT

Course : BA (Hons) in Business & Management

Module Code and Title : Strategic Management (SIM336)

MDIS Module Leader : Ken Kieran SK Ho

Assessment : Individual Assignment

Submission Due Date : 10 January 2020

Word Length : 3000 words (+/- 10%)

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 University's 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

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 1 out of 5

SIM336 – STATEGIC MANAGEMENT

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’.

All students are required to submit their assignment via the module in Canvas.
The penalty for students that do not submit their assignments through the module in Canvas is
that they will fail the assignment.
Students may submit assignment drafts prior to the submission date to generate originality
reports. The last submission of the assignment prior to the submission date will be deemed to
be the final submission for assessment purposes.

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:

General
(PEST)

Your essay:
Resources,
Outline the extent to which Needs/Wants
Capabilities, Competencies Value the value created by the firm, deemed valuable Trends
activities
via its value chain, is deemed by the market
valuable by the market

Industry

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 2 out of 5

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*.

You are required to conduct an 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. 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 is 10% for every 100 words above 3,000 words.

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.
 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.

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 3 out of 5

Required format for case report:

1. Executive summary

2. Introduction

3. Current Company Financial Situation

a. Past performance assessment
b. How strong is the company financially? What can it do or not do?

4. External analysis:
a. identify trends, opportunities and threats
b. If necessary, define the scope of (a): e.g. Asia only or B2Bonly

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 are you trying to resolve?
b. Given this issue what goal(s)/objective(s) must be set?

7. From (6), briefly describe the strategy that resolve the issue.

8. Implementation: Outline:
a. how the corporate value chain will need to change;
b. given these changes, list 3 key measures that will help you determine if strategy
implementation is on track;

9. Appendices:
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.

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 4 out of 5

Assessment Criteria
Your seminar tutor on the basis of the following general criteria will assess the paper:

 The university generic assessment criteria

 Discretion - additional credit may be awarded to a student who tackles a difficult subject
well.

The “Presentation” element of the Generic Assessment Criteria will be used to assess the report
structure.

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 5 out of 5

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 Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature
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.
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, with Critical appraisal of up-todate
60 – 69% the requirements of strategy material, analysis, structured, using an appropriate distinctive or independent standard spelling and and/or appropriate literature.
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 of different
themes, questions and theoretical mode(s) formulate an independent style with acceptable perspectives.
Pass

issues therein position in relation to format Very good use of source material.
strategic theory Uses a range of sources
and/or practice.
Some attempt to address Adequate knowledge of a Some analytical Some attempt to construct a Sound work which expresses Competently written, with Uses a variety of literature which
50 – 59% the requirements of fair range of relevant treatment, but may be coherent argument, but may suffer a coherent position only in only minor lapses from includes some recent strategic
the assessment: strategy material, with prone to description, or loss of focus and consistency, broad terms and in uncritical standard grammar, with texts and/or appropriate literature,
may drift away intermittent evidence of to narrative, which with issues at stake stated only conformity to one or more acceptable format though not necessarily including a
from this in less an appreciation of its lacks clear analytical vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) standard views of strategy. substantive amount beyond library
focused passages significance purpose couched in simplistic terms texts. Competent use of source
material.
40 – 49% Some correlation with Basic understanding of Largely descriptive or A basic argument is evident, but Some evidence of a view A simple basic style but Some up-to-date and/or
the requirements of the the strategy but narrative, with little mainly supported by assertion starting to be formed but with significant appropriate literature used. Goes
assessment but there are addressing a limited evidence of analysis and there may be a lack of clarity mainly derivative. deficiencies in expression beyond the material tutor has
instances of irrelevance range of material 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 evidence of coherent Almost wholly derivative: Numerous deficiencies in Barely adequate use of literature.
requirements of the of a narrow range of description, and/or on argument: lacks development and the writer’s contribution expression and Over reliance on material
assessment may be very strategic material. paraphrase, is common may be repetitive or thin rarely goes beyond presentation; the writer provided by the tutor.
intermittent, and may be simplifying paraphrase may achieve clarity (if at
reduced to its vaguest all) only by using a
Fail

and least challenging simplistic or repetitious

terms style
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.

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 6 out of 5

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.

MDIST AY2019 | UOS Y3 | Strategic Management (SIM336) 7 out of 5