Download cmet mba sm assignment june-sept 2014

Cardiff Metropolitan University
MODULE TITLE: Strategic Management
PROGRAMME: MBA
SEMESTER: Semester Two
ACADEMIC YEAR PERIOD:
June-September 2014
LECTURER SETTING ASSESSMENT: - Mervyn Sookun (Module Leader)
Contact: [email protected]
DATE ASSESSMENT SET AND LOADED ON TO STUDENT PORTAL:DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED:
Table of Contents:
1. Assessment type
2. Indicative assessment requirements for the module
3. Maximum word limit and assessment weighting for each aspect within the
assessment
4. Description of assessment requirements (Tasks 1-4)
5. Group Report and PPT guidelines
6. Learning Outcomes
7. Summary of marking scheme (group report and PPT)
8. Grading Criteria
9. Individual supporting contributions to group report and PPT, and marking
scheme.
10. Notes on Plagiarism & Harvard Referencing
11. Module Descriptor
12. Group Assignment Feedback Sheet
13. Individual Supporting Contributions Feedback Sheet
14. Further Guidance Notes
15. Reading list
1|Page
2|Page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 1
Assessment Type:


Group Report and a set of PowerPoint slides (50%)
Individual Supporting Contributions to Group Report and Power
Point slides (50%)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 2
Indicative Assessment Requirements for the Module:
Group Report and supporting Power Point slides. Supporting documentation
is required to be produced as an individual contribution to the assessment
(equivalent to an overall maximum of 3000 words in total)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 3
Maximum Word Limit and Assessment weighting for each aspect within the
assessment:
 Group Report: 6000 words and a maximum 15 Power Point Slides:
Assessment Weighting 50%
 Individual assessment contribution (an individual set of supporting
documentation from each student equivalent to 3000 words absolute
maximum): Assessment Weighting 50%
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION 4
Description of Assessment Requirements
As strategy consultants, imagine that you have been approached by the Board of
Directors of a company of your choice to advise them on their future strategic
direction. You are required to present your opinion, fully grounded in researched
evidence, in the form of a report covering:
Task 1
An analysis of the company's vision, mission and internal capabilities drawing on
relevant models.
(15 marks)
3|Page
Task 2
Using relevant tools, conduct a detailed analysis of the environment and industry in
which the company is operating. In particular, the Board want your team to analyse
the extent to which disruptive innovation will change its future competitive
landscape.
(15 marks)
Task 3
Using strategic theory, critically discuss and evaluate the strategic options that the
Board could consider implementing in the light of your internal and external analysis.
Briefly, discuss the implementation issues associated with your proposed
recommendations.
(40 marks)
Task 4
One of the Board members has recently read a text by Jim Collins and
Morten Hansen (2011) entitled "Great by Choice" which identifies a selection
of companies with highly successful strategies.
The Board would like to know:
 what lessons they could draw from this text and how to implement
them in their organisation
 Whether or not these lessons might be consistent and compatible with
the strategy models proposed by leading authorities such as Porter,
Mintzberg, Ghoshal, Kim and Mauborgne and other commentators.
(20 marks)
Presentation (10 marks)
You may use appendices. These do not affect word count.
(Limit: 6000 words)
______________________________________________________
SECTION 5
Group Report Guidelines
a) Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the
development of the Group
Report and PowerPoint slides. Nonparticipation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for
this aspect of the assessment.
b) The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching
team and will normally be 6 members (normal maximum). In specific
circumstances this may be varied.
4|Page
c) Students are required to submit their formal Group Report (4000 words) via
Turnitin during the examination week ( a specific date will be communicated
to you during the semester). Only one report per group is required.
d) The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 50%
(all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage)
e) Marks will be allocated based on the guidelines specified in Section 7 below
(Also see the detailed feedback sheet in Section 12 and Guidance Notes in
Section 14)
___________________________________________________________
SECTION 6: Learning Outcomes
Learning outcomes tested:
Task 1
 Demonstrate a critical awareness of research in the evolution of
strategic management
 Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make
justified recommendations
Task 2
 Identify and explain the importance of how the synthesise of knowledge
gained from other business modules may be brought together into a
comprehensive understanding of the concepts underpinning
competitive advantage.
 Understand and be able to critically analyse the strategic position and
the interrelated functions of Production and Operations Management
(POM) in organisations
 Demonstrate, understand and critically explain the importance of
integrational thinking in their understanding of strategy and its
formation and development in complex organisations
Task 3
5|Page
 Evaluate and develop the ability to identify strategic issues and design
appropriate courses of action
_____________________________________________________________
Section 7: Marking Scheme: Group Report and PowerPoint Slides (Also see
the Feedback Sheet for further guidance in Section 12)
Task 1
Use of strategic capabilities concept
Relationship between culture and strategy
Use of relevant models to make recommendations
(15 marks)
Task 2
Competitive analysis and impact of disruptive innovation
(15 marks)
Task 3
Discussion and application of strategic choice models
Resource implications of the selected strategy
Use of academic concepts and models to demonstrate
relationship among key resource areas: HR,
operations, finance, technology
(40 marks)
Task 4
Critical discussion of Collin's thesis
(20 marks)
Quality, creativity and coherence of PowerPoint slides
Evidence of teamwork
Overall Presentation, referencing,
visual aids, professionalism,
evidence of teamwork
(10 marks)
Total:
(100 marks)/value=50%
6|Page
Section 8: Grading Criteria
MARK
CONTENT:
Has the question
answered?
been
TOPIC
KNOWLEDGE
Is there evidence of having
read widely
and use of appropriate and
up to date material to make a
case?
UNDERSTANDING
&
SYNTHESIS
Are ideas summarized rather
than being reproduced, and
are they inter-related with
other ideas?
APPLICATION
Does
it
show
appropriate use of
theory in a
practical situation?
ANALYSIS
Does it identify the key issues,
etc in a given scenario,
proposal or argument?
EVALUATION
&
CONCLUSION
Does it critically assess
material?
Are there a workable and
imaginative solutions?
REFERENCING
Thorough
and
accurate
citation and referencing
PRESENTATION
Logical
and
coherent
structure to argument and
effective presentation
29 or less
30 - 39
40 - 49
50 - 59
60 - 69
70 +
Vague,
random,
unrelated
material
Some mention
of the issue, but
a collection of
disparate points
Some looseness/
digressions
Well focused
Highly focused
No evidence
of reading.
No use of
theory – not
even hinted
at implicitly.
No evidence of
reading.
An implicit hint
at
some
knowledge of
theory, etc.
Barely answers
the question –
just reproduces
what
knows
about the topic
No evidence of
reading. Very
basic theories
mentioned but
not developed
or well used.
Some
reading
evident,
but
confined to core
texts.
Good reading.
Good range of
theories included.
Excellent reading.
Well
chosen
theories.
No
theory
included.
Vague
assertions/poor
explanations.
Long
winded
descriptions of
theory.
Some
long
winded sections.
Some quotations,
but stand alone.
Some
interconnections.
Good summary of
theory.
Good
use
of
quotations that
flow
with
narrative.
Good
interconnections.
Succinct, effective
summaries
of
theory.
Excellent
choice
and
threading
of
quotations
into
argument.
Good
counterpoising of a
range
of
perspectives.
No
examples
No/limited/
inappropriat
e examples
Few
examples
Uneven
examples
Good
examples
Excellent range
of examples.
Vague
assertions
about issues.
Largely
descriptive with
no
identification
and analysis of
central issues.
Uncritical
acceptance of
material.
Limited insight
into issues.
Some
good
observations.
Good,
detailed
analysis.
Comprehensive
range of issues
identified
and
discussed fully.
Some
evaluation but
weak.
Little
insight.
Good
interpretation.
Some but limited
sophistication in
argument.
Good
critical
assessment.
Independent
thought
displayed.
Full
critical
assessment
and
substantial
individual insight.
No
referencing
No referencing
Limited/poor
referencing
Some
inconsistencies in
referencing
Appropriate
referencing
Appropriate
referencing
No structure
apparent.
Poor
presentation.
Poor structure.
Poor
presentation.
Acceptable, but
uneven
structure.
Reasonable
presentation.
Reasonable
structure.
Good
presentation.
Good argument.
Well
presented
material.
Excellent argument.
Very
effective
presentation
format.
No
evaluation.
___________________________________________________________________________
SECTION 9 :Individual Supporting Contributions to Group Report and Slides
Learning outcome assessed:
7|Page
Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make
justified recommendations.
Each student is required to provide supporting documentation within a
stipulated allowed maximum of 2000 words .
The required content of the supporting documentation produced by each
student should cover the specific categories listed:
(a) Provide an executive summary for their personal and individual research
and work undertaken for the topic set-required in Executive Report
standard format: (10 marks)
(b) Indicate and identify the key areas of research and sources which the
student has had to identify and undertake to contribute to the presentation
and their key sources of research/references/literature search sources
related to each to the task above. Research Skills (Use of free web-based
resources such as company reports, trade association statistics and some
government or supra-governmental (EU, UN) reports and statistics, the
business press and journals available through BusinessSource Premier,
Factiva or Proquest, and reports from organisations such as Euromonitor,
Key Notes and Mintel ) (10 marks)
(c) A critical discussion of strategic models from the evidence identified by
the individual student related to the topic set. (40 marks)
(d) An indication of the individual key conclusions and findings related to
strategic theories and models and the practical implications for the
corporate parent/board of directors. (20 marks)
(e) Identification of the key issues and conclusions which the student has
learned as a result of undertaking the group assignment on the topic set
and an identification of the success or failure of their group-team
endeavours. (10 marks)
(f) An indication of the way in which their individual contribution impacted on
Group Assignment by listing the action points included in the Group
Report. (10 marks)
Total: 100 marks/ 50%
(Max 2000 words 50% weighting)

Each student will receive an individual mark for their submission of their
individual supporting contributions and documentation. It is emphasised that
this aspect of the assignment is to be the work of the individual student and
should reflect individual researches; comprehension of the tasks involved;
views; critical awareness; use of theory; interpretation and judgements; use of
evidence; evaluation and a systematic approach to the use of research
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 10:Notes on Plagiarism & Harvard Referencing
Plagiarism
8|Page
Plagiarism is passing off the work of others as your own. This constitutes academic
theft and is a serious matter which is penalized in assignment marking.
Plagiarism is the submission of an item of assessment containing elements of work
produced by another person(s) in such a way that it could be assumed to be the
student’s own work. Examples of plagiarism are :



the verbatim copying of another person’s work without
acknowledgement
the close paraphrasing of another person’s work by simply changing a
few
words or altering the order of presentation without
acknowledgement
the unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another person’s work
and/or the presentation of another person’s idea(s) as one’s own.
Copying or close paraphrasing with occasional acknowledgement of the source may
also be deemed to be plagiarism is the absence of quotation marks implies that the
phraseology is the student’s own.
Plagiarised work may belong to another student or be from a published source such
as a book, report, journal or material available on the internet.
Harvard Referencing
The structure of a citation under the Harvard referencing system is the author’s
surname, year of publication, and page number or range, in parentheses, as
illustrated in the Smith example near the top of this article.
9|Page

The page number or page range is omitted if the entire work is cited.
The author’s surname is omitted if it appears in the text. Thus we may
say : “Jones (2001) revolutionized the field of trauma surgery.”

Two or three authors are cited using “and” or “&” : (Deane, Smith, and
Jones, 1991) or (Deane, Smith & Jones, 1991). More than three
authors are cited using et al. (Deane et al. 1992).

An unknown date is cited as no date (Deane n.d.). A reference to a
reprint is cited with the original publication date in square brackets
(Marx [1867] 1967, p. 90).

If an author published two books in 2005, the year of the first (in the
alphabetic order of the references) is cited and referenced as 2005a,
the second as 2005b.

A citation is placed wherever appropriate in or after the sentence. If it
is at the end of a sentence, it is placed before the period, but a citation
for an entire block quote immediately follows the period at the end of
the block since the citation is not an actual part of the quotation itself.

Complete citations are provided in alphabetical order in a section
following the text, usually designated as “Works cited” or
“References”. The difference between a “works cited” or “references”
list and a bibliography is that a bibliography may include works not
directly cited in the text.

All citations are in the same font as the main text.
Examples
Examples of book references are :
 Smith, J. (2005a). Dutch Citing Practices. The Hague: Holland
Research Foundation.
 Smith, J. (2005b). Harvard Referencing. London: Jolly Good
Publishing.
In giving the city of publication, an internationally well-known city (such as London,
The Hague, or New York) is referenced as the city alone. If the city is not
internationally well known, the country (or state and country if in the U.S.) are given.
An example of a journal reference :
 Smith, John Maynard. “The origin of altruism,” Nature 393, 1998,
pp. 639-40.
An example of a journal reference :

Bowcott, Owen. “Street Protest”, The Guardian, October 18, 2005,
accessed February 7, 2006.
SECTION 11: MODULE DESCRIPTOR
.
Module
Number
tbc
Module Title
Strategic Management
Level (4-6 u/g;
Credits
7
p/g;
8
doctorate)
10 | P a g e
ECTS Credit
JACS
Subject
Code(s) and % of ASC Category(ies)
each subject
Module Value
% Taught in Welsh
Module Type
7
20
10
Teaching Period
One trimester
Pre-requisites
None
Module Leader
School(s)
Mervyn Sookun
London School of Commerce
Campus
London
Assessment Methods
Assessment Type
Duration/Length
Assessment Type
Group Presentation PP 4000 words
Paper,
and
individual equivalent
assignment
based
on
developing strategy for
business resilience and
sustainability
of Weighting
Assessment
maximum 100%
of Approximate Date of
Submission
Week 12
Aim(s)
The module aims to:






Provide students with a detailed integrative framework for understanding the role and functions of Strategic
Management within contemporary business organisations.
Enable students to comprehend how organisations formulate, implement, and evaluate strategies and how
they consider the strategic alternatives available to them.
Develop in students and provide them with a comprehensive understanding of strategic management
concepts and the techniques which are used in the development and formation of strategies.
Provide a framework and context within which knowledge acquired across the programme may be coupled
with new strategic-management techniques and how this may be synthesised to chart the future potential
direction of different organisations.
Enhance understanding of how, in the formulation of strategy for an organisation, the different functional
areas of business (e.g. accounting, finance, human resources, information systems, marketing, operations
management, etc.) are required to be considered as part of an integrative approach.
Consider how management tools (e.g. SWOT/PESTEL analysis) may be used to formulate strategy and
position the organisation internally and in the external environment
Examine the contribution which business organisation, operations and circumstances make to strategic
development and their relationship and significance to customer service; the supply chain; provision of
goods and services; total systems approaches; value chains and value concepts; client and customer
perceptions; the manufacturing and operations plan, and global environments,
Learning Outcomes
11 | P a g e
Upon successful completion of this module the students will be able to:
 Demonstrate, understand and critically explain the importance of integrational thinking in their
understanding of strategy and its formation and development in complex organisations
 Identify and explain the importance of how the synthesise of knowledge gained from other business
modules may be brought together into a comprehensive understanding of the concepts underpinning
competitive advantage.
 Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make justified recommendations.
 Evaluate and develop the ability to identify strategic issues and design appropriate courses of action.
 Understand and be able to critically analyse the strategic position and the interrelated functions of
Production and Operations Management (POM) in organisations
 Demonstrate a critical awareness of research in the evolution of strategic management
Learning and Teaching Delivery Methods
A variety of teaching approaches is used, including lectures, seminars, case analysis, teamwork and extensive use
of electronic resources for guided research.
STUDY
HOURS
Lectures/ seminars
Directed learning
Independent learning
Total study hours
24
48
128
200
Indicative Content
 The strategy concept; corporate strategy.
 Models of how organisations formulate strategy.
 Environmental analysis.
 Strategy formulation.
 Forms of organisational structure; organisational analysis
 Setting strategic direction
 Process by which strategy is formulated and formed in particular situations.
 Strategic changes; leadership requirements for strategic change.
 Implementing strategic change.
 Strategic Management: Manufacturing
 Inventory Control
 Facilities location planning
 Control of processes, operations and operations management
12 | P a g e
Recommended Reading & Required Reading
Core Text:
 Johnson G. and Scholes K. (2012) Exploring Corporate Strategy, (8th Edn) Prentice Hall, UK
 Greasley, A (2009) Operations Management (2nd edn).Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
Recommended reading
 Core text: Mintzberg H, Quinn J. and Ghoshal S (2004) The Strategy Process (European Edition), Prentice
Hall, UK, 4th edn
 De Wit and Mayer (2010) Strategy CENGAGE Learning Business Press; 4th Revised edition
 Lynch R. (2006) Corporate Strategy, (4th edn) Pitman Publishing, London
 Rosen R (2006) Strategic Management: An Introduction, Pitman, UK
 Stacey R. (2007) Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics, (5th edn) Pitman, UK
 Christopher.M., (2005), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Strategies for Reducing Cost and
Improving Service, (3rd edn). London: Pearson Education.
 Bozarth, C and Handfield, R (2008). Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain Management. (2nd edn.).
London: Pearson Education.
Access to Specialist Requirements
None
13 | P a g e
SECTION 12: Feedback Sheet for Group Report and PPT slides
CMET/LSC MBA Strategic Management Group Assignment Feedback Sheet
Feb-June 2014
Group number:
Mark Allocation
Score/Comments
Members:
Assessor(s)
Task 1
Use of strategic
capabilities concepts: is
the analysis grounded in key
models( VRIN, Value chain,
15
benchmarking, 7S, Analytical
SWOT profile and others)?
Is there evidence of sound
application of models
(cultural web, culture
typologies, national culture:
Hofstede, Trompenaars,
Adler &Laurent,Hall,
Usinier)? Have clear
conclusions been drawn in
terms of relationship
between culture and
strategy?
Task 2
Competitive analysis:
Has the full range of
competitive tools been applied
(e.g. PESTLE, 5 forces, Value
Net, CAGE, Yip's drivers,
Porter's Diamond )? Discussion
of disruptive innovation?
15
Task 3
Use of relevant models to
make recommendations:
14 | P a g e
40
Is there evidence of
appreciation and application
of business strategy models,
corporate strategy,
entrepreneurial strategy and
international strategy? (i.e.
Bowman's Clock, Porter's
Generic, Blue Ocean,
Bertrand's Best Response,
Game theory, Cournot's
Quantity Dynamics,
Corporate Parenting styles,
BCG matrix, Shell-GE,
Ashridge, Yip's drivers,
Diamond, CAGE, Gupta's
model, Entrepreneurial
models etc). Are the
recommendations fully
grounded in reliable
evidence?
Use of academic concepts
and models to demonstrate
Relationship among key
resource areas: HR,
operations, finance,
technology. Have members
demonstrated an
appreciation of other
modules on the MBA
programme in relation to
this assignment?
Critical
analysis
and
application
of
change
management models
(Forcefield, culture change
models, Hope and Balogun,
Lewin, Dyer, Gigliardi, etc
Task 4
Critical discussion of Great 20
by Choice
PowerPoint slides:
Creativity, consistency
between Group Report and
PPTs, likely impact on
audience
15 | P a g e
10
Overall Presentation,
referencing, visual aids,
professionalism, evidence of
teamwork
Overall comment:
Total
100
SECTION 13: Feedback Sheet for Individual Contribution
MBA STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT: FEEDBACK SHEET FOR INDIVIDUAL
SUPPORTING CONTRIBUTIONS TO GROUP REPORT AND SLIDES
Name
ID:
16 | P a g e
Allocated mark/comment
Date:
Assessor(s)
Provide
an
executive 10 marks
summary for their personal
and individual research and
work undertaken for the topic
set-required in Executive
Report standard format: is
there a consistency between
the group report and the
executive summary? Is the
student fully conversant with
the content of the Group
Report and PPT slides? Is
there evidence of teamwork?
Indicate and identify the key 10 marks
areas of research and sources
which the student has had to
identify and undertake to
contribute to the presentation
and their key sources of
research/references/literature
search sources related to each
to the task above. Research
Skills (Use of free web-based
resources such as company
reports, trade association
statistics
and
some
government
or
supragovernmental
(EU,
UN)
reports and statistics, the
business press and journals
available
through
BusinessSource
Premier,
Factiva or Proquest, and
reports from organisations
such as Euromonitor, Key
Notes and Mintel )
A critical discussion of 20 marks
strategic models from the
evidence identified by the
individual student related to
the topic set. Has the student
critically
explained
and
justified his/her part of the
contribution? Has the student
demonstrated an awareness
of
his/her
colleagues'
17 | P a g e
contributions?
Is
there
evidence
of
extensive
academic research beyond
the core textbooks?
An indication of the individual 40 marks
key conclusions and findings
related to strategic theories
and models and the practical
implications for the corporate
parent/directors.
How
realistic are the conclusions?
Do they reflect the content of
the group report? Is there a
consistency between their
individual conclusions and
those of their colleagues?
Identification of the key issues 10 marks
and conclusions which the
student has learned as a result
of undertaking the group
assignment on the topic set
and an identification of the
success or failure of their
group-team endeavours. Has
the student drawn on the
other modules of the MBA
programme
to
make
meaningful
conclusions?
Relevant concepts include
Belbin's
team
roles,
Tuckman's
group
development, conformity, risky
shift etc
An indication of the way in
10 marks
which their individual
contribution impacted on
Group Assignment by
analysing the action points
included in the report. Has the
student used a learning model
for this aspect of the
assessment?
Overall comment:
18 | P a g e
Total
100
SECTION 14: Further Guidance Notes
Students are advised to study the whole of this document very carefully and in particular
pay attention to the assignment brief (section 4) , the learning outcomes ( section 6), the
marking scheme ( section 8) and the feedback sheets ( sections 12 and 13). The content of
this document will be discussed fully in class. Please note that according to the module
descriptor the total study hours for this module is 200 (see section 11) . Therefore the six
group members combined have to demonstrate that they have conducted 1200 hours of
learning. Below are further guidance notes which cross-refer you to the study notes and
slides on the portal, based on Johnson, Scholes and Whittington, (2010), Exploring Corporate
Strategy, Prentice Hall. Ensure that you achieve the basic learning outcomes of each set of
slides before you attempt to write up your Group Report, prepare PPT slides, and do your
Individual Report.
Task 1
.
A. Cross-reference: See Portal for PP01
•
Summarise the strategy of an organisation in a ‘strategy statement’.
•
Identify key issues for an organisation’s strategy according to the Exploring Strategy model.
•
Distinguish between corporate, business and operational strategies.
•
Understand how different people contribute to strategy at work.
•
Appreciate the contributions of different academic disciplines and theoretical lenses to
practical strategy analysis
B. Strategic Capabilities and Purpose of organisation: PP03 and PP 04
19 | P a g e
•
Identify what comprises strategic capabilities in terms of
organisational resources and competences and how these
relate to the strategies of organisations.
•
Analyse how strategic capabilities might provide sustainable competitive advantage on the
basis of their value, rarity, inimitability and non-substitutability (VRIN).
•
Diagnose strategic capability by means of benchmarking, value chain analysis, activity
mapping and SWOT analysis.
•
Consider how managers can develop strategic capabilities for their organisations
C. Portal: PP 012 for the types of strategy
•
•
•
•
Explain what is meant by intended and emergent strategy development.
Identify intended processes of strategy development in organisations including: the
role of strategic leadership, strategic planning systems and externally imposed
strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development such as: logical
incrementalism, political processes, the influence of prior decisions and
organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy development including:
managing multiple strategy processes, strategy development in different contexts
and managing intended and emergent strategy.
Task 2
D. Competitive Analysis : PP 02
Task 3
D. Business Strategy PP 06
•
How organisations relate to competitors in terms of their competitive business
strategies.
•
How broad and diverse organisations should be in terms of their corporate
portfolios.
How far organisations should extend themselves internationally.
How organisations are creative and innovative.
How organisations pursue strategies through organic development, acquisitions or
strategic alliances.
•
•
•
E. Corporate Strategy PP 07
•
Explain what is meant by intended and emergent strategy development.
20 | P a g e
•
•
•
Identify intended processes of strategy development in organisations including: the
role of strategic leadership, strategic planning systems and externally imposed
strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development such as: logical
incrementalism, political processes, the influence of prior decisions and
organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy development including:
managing multiple strategy processes, strategy development in different contexts
and managing intended and emergent strategy.
F International Strategy PP08
•
•
•
•
•
Assess the internationalisation potential of different markets.
Identify sources of competitive advantage in international strategy, through both
global sourcing and exploitation of local factors.
Distinguish between four main types of international strategy.
Rank markets for entry or expansion, taking into account attractiveness, cultural
and other forms of distance and competitor retaliation threats.
Assess the relative merits of different market entry modes, including joint ventures,
licensing and foreign direct investment.
Feedback Sheet: Evaluation and resource implications of strategy, Is there a realistic
understanding of the resources required to support the strategy? Have evaluation tools
been applied (SAF) to assess strategic options? Is the group fully conversant with
quantitative and qualitative models drawn from this module and other modules to
appreciate the integrative nature of strategic management?
A. Evaluation of Strategies: PP 011
• Employ three success criteria for evaluating strategic options:
– Suitability: whether a strategy addresses the key issues relating to the
opportunities
and constraints an organisation faces.
– Acceptability: whether a strategy meets the expectations of stakeholders.
– Feasibility: whether a strategy could work in practice.
• For each of these use a range of different techniques for evaluating strategic
options, both financial and non-financial.
B. Resourcing the Implementation Process PP 012, PP013
•
Explain what is meant by intended and emergent strategy development.
21 | P a g e
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Identify intended processes of strategy development in organisations including: the
role of strategic leadership, strategic planning systems and externally imposed
strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development such as: logical
incrementalism, political processes, the influence of prior decisions and
organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy development including:
managing multiple strategy processes, strategy development in different contexts
and managing intended and emergent strategy.
Identify key challenges in organising for success, including ensuring control,
managing knowledge, coping with change and responding to internationalisation.
Analyse main organisation structural types in terms of strengths and weaknesses.
Recognise key issues in designing organisational control systems (such as planning
and performance targeting systems).
Recognise how the three strands of strategy, structure and systems should reinforce
each other in organisational configurations and the managerial dilemmas involved
A. Management of Change: PP 014
•
•
•
Identify types of required strategic change.
Analyse how organisational context might affect the design of strategic change
programmes.
Undertake a forcefield analysis to identify forces blocking and facilitating change.
•
•
•
Identify and assess the different styles of leading and managing strategic change.
Assess the value of different levers for strategic change.
Identify the pitfalls and problems of managing change programmes.
Note
[ Other sets of slides: ,09, 010 dealing with innovation and entrepreneurship may also be
useful depending on the issues you aim to develop]
Task 4
Critical discussion of the text. How does it challenge conventional frameworks?
22 | P a g e
Evidence of the following will be sought in the assessment of your PPT slides.
•
Coherence between Group Report, Individual Report and PowerPoint Slides
•
Consistently clear, concise, well organized. Points are easy to follow because of the
organization. Transitions between sections are smooth and coordinated.
•
Display an excellent grasp of the material. Demonstrate excellent mastery of content,
application and implications. Excellent research depth.
•
Very creative and original. Imaginative design and use of materials. Visual aids, or
methods.
•
Simple, clear, easy to interpret, easy to read. Well coordinated with content, well
designed, used very effectively. Excellent example of how to prepare and use good
visual aids
• Clear, concise, major points emphasised, clear recommendations, strong conclusion
or call for action
SECTION 15: Reading list
(Also see the portal for a list of recommended textbooks)
You may find some of the references below useful for your assignment depending on the
topic/type of company you wish to research into. The list is by no means exhaustive. You are at
liberty to use refereed sources and compile your own list of references.
23 | P a g e
Ackermann, F. (2011). "How OR can contribute to strategy making." The Journal of the
Operational Research Society 62(5): 921-923.
Andrews, K. (2004). The concept of corporate strategy. Strategy: Process, content and
context (third edition). B. de Wit and R. Meyer. London, Thomson.
Benedict , J., Steenkamp, E. & Kumar, N., (2009). Don't be undersold. Harvard Business
review, pp. 91-95.
Boyne, G. & Meier, K., (2009). Environmental change , human resources and organizational
turnaround. Journal of management studies , Volume 46, pp. 835-863.
Bradfield, R., G. Wright, et al. (2005). "The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in
long range business planning." Futures 37(8): 795-812.
Bratt, I., Byron , E. & Zimmerman, A., 2009. US cut back on spice once the spice of
marketing. Wall street journal, pp. 16-17
Bryant, J., J. Darwin, et al. (2011). "Strategy making with the whole organisation: OR and
the art of the possible." The Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 840-854.
Bryant, J., M. Meadows, et al. (2007). Gone fishing: A case study. Supporting strategy:
Frameworks, methods and models. F. O' Brien and R. G. Dyson. Chichester, Wiley.
Cable, V., 2009. The storm:the world economic crisis & what it means. In: London: Atlantic
books.
Chalmeta, R. and S. Palomero (2011). "Methodological proposal for business sustainability
management by means of the Balanced Scorecard." The Journal of the Operational
Research Society 62(7): 1344-1356.
Clemens, R. (2009). "Environmental Scanning and Scenario Planning: A 12 month
Perspective on Applying the Viable Systems Model to Developing Public Sector Foresight."
Systemic Practice and Action Research 22(4): 249.
Cravens, D. W., Piercy, N. & Baldauf, A., 2009. Management frameword guiding strategic
thinking in rapidly changing markets. Journal of marketing management, Volume 25, pp.
31-49.
Driouchi, T., M. Leseure, et al. (2009). "A robustness framework for monitoring real options
Dyson, R. G., J. Bryant, et al. (2007). The strategic development process. Supporting strategy:
Frameworks, methods and models. F. O' Brien and R. G. DYSON. Chichester, Wiley.
Dyson,
Favoro, K., Romberger, T. & Meer, D., (2009). Five rules for retailing in a recession. Harvard
Business Review, pp. 64-72.
Ferraro, C. & Sands, S., (2010), Retailers' strategic responses to economic downturn:insights
from down under. International Journal of retail and distribution management , 38(8), pp.
567
24 | P a g e
Franco, L., F. O’Brien, et al. (2011). "Supporting strategy: Contributions from OR, The
Journal of the Operational Research Society (editorial)." Journal of the Operational
Research Society 62(5): 815-816.
Grant, R. M. (2006). Contemporary strategy analysis (Fifth edition). Oxford, Blackwell. Grinyer,
P.
Jarzabkowski, P. and A. P. Spee (2009). "Strategy-as-practice: A review and future directions
for the field." International Journal of Management Reviews 11(1): 69-95.
Johnson, G., K. Scholes, et al. (2012). Exploring corporate strategy (Seventh edition).
London, Prentice Hall.
Jones, B. & Temperley, J., 2011. Waitrose :an emporium for the middle classes broadens its
appeal. International Journal of management cases, pp. 341-346.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (1992). "The Balanced Scorecard - Measures That Drive
Performance." Harvard Business Review 70(1): 71 - 79.
Kowalski, K., S. Stagl, et al. (2009). "Sustainable energy futures: Methodological challenges
in combining scenarios and participatory multi-criteria analysis." European Journal of
Operational Research 197(3): 1063.
Moreau, R., 2010. Private label and discounters shaping grocery retailing in Europe.
Euromonitor International, pp. 86-89.
Morrow, J., Hitt, D. & Holcomb, T., 2007. Creating value in the face of declining
performance - firm strategies and organizational recovery. strategic management journal,
Volume 28, pp. 271-283.
McGee, J., H. Thomas, et al. (2010). Strategy: Analysis and practice (2nd edition). London,
McGraw
Hill.
Meadows, M. and F. O'Brien (2007). Visioning: A process for strategic development
Supporting Strategy: Frameworks, methods and models. F. O' Brien and R. Dyson.
Chichester, Wiley: 27-54.
Montibeller, G. and A. Franco (2011), "Raising the bar: strategic multi-criteria decision
analysis." Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 855-867.Piercy, N., Cravens, D.
& Lane , N., 2010. Thinking strategically about pricing decisions. Journal of Business
strategy, pp. 38-48.
Porter, M., 1980. Competitive strategy:Techniques for analysing Industries and
competitors. In: New York: Free press.
Porter, M.,( 2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harvard Business
review, pp. 79-93.
Porter, M. E., (1980,1998). Competitive strategy:Techniques for analysing Industries and
competitors. Free Press, a division of Simon and Schuster.
Price, T., 2009. Prospering in uncertain times. Indust. and Comm.Tr, Volume 41, pp. 75-79.
Quelch, J. & Jocz, K.,( 2009). How to market in a downturn. Harvard business review,
Volume 4, pp. 52-62.
Raisch, S. & Birkinshaw, (2008). Organisational ambidextirity, antecedents , outcomes and
moderators. Journal of management , Volume 34, pp. 375-409.
25 | P a g e
Reeves, M. & Deimler, M., (2009). Strategies for winning in the current and post recession
environment. Strategy and leadership, 37(6), pp. 10-17.
Rouleau, L. and J. Balogun (2011). "Middle managers, strategic sensemaking and discursive
competence." Journal of Management Studies 48(5): 953-983.
Rouwette, E. (2011). "Facilitated modelling in strategy development: Measuring the impact on
communication, consensus and commitment." Journal of the Operational Research Society
62(5): 879-887.
Rumelt , R., 2009. Strategy in a structural break. McKinsey quarterly, Volume 1, pp. 35-42.
Stenfors, S., L. Tanner, et al. (2007). "Executive views concerning decision support tools."
European Journal of Operational Research 181: 929 - 938.
Tapinos, E., R. G. Dyson, et al. (2011). "Does the Balanced Scorecard make a difference to the
strategy development process?" The Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 888899.
Trutnevyte, E., M. Stauffacher, et al. (2012). "Linking stakeholder visions with resource
allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment." European Journal of Operational
Research 219(3): 762.
Whittington, R. (2006). "Completing the practice turn in strategy." Organization Studies 27(5):
613-634.
Wright, G., G. Cairns, et al. (2009). "Teaching scenario planning: Lessons from practice in
academe and business." European Journal of Opera
26 | P a g e
Page 27 of 27