Business: Strategic Management and Harvard Referencing Method

Strategic Management (Queensgate) Individual Assignment (2012 -13) Learning outcomes    Evaluate case studies in strategy direction, strategy implementation and strategic management. Discuss the strategic directions that can be chosen by organisations through the application of relevant theoretical concepts. State the need for strategic alternatives and their selection.

Coursework: Case Study based on key reading – CRH plc: successful corporate – level strategy in a challenging environment. Case written by Mike Moroni Task: Drawing on a range of analytical models, conduct a comprehensive strategic analysis of CRH and recommend a strategy for the organisation. In your analysis it is also important to highlight limitations of using analytical models in strategic analysis. Examples of analytical models are shown below. Please note that the list is not exhaustive .You may utilise any other analytical models that you consider as relevant.

Environmental analysis – PESTEL and Porter’s 5 Forces Strategic capability analysis – Value Chain, VRIN, VRIO , Organisational culture analysis – Cultural web, McKinsey’s 7-S Framework Strategic options – Ansoff’s matrix Competitive strategies – Porter’s Generic Strategies, Strategy Clock etc

Approximate weighting of marks: Part 1: Selection, critical evaluation and justification of the choice of the models (20%) Part 2: Critical analysis with application of the chosen models (60%) Part 3: Conclusion (20%) Word count: 2,500 words +/- 10% (tables of content, lists of tables and figures, appendices, list of references, tables and diagrams are not included in the word count). Appendices should be used for essential information only and should be clearly referenced in the text. Total word count should be clearly indicated on the front sheet of the assignment. Penalties will apply for exceeding word count. Essential: the work should demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation, Harvard referencing method should be used where appropriate.

There should be an evidence of a wider reading (not only textbooks and the company websites but also academic journals). Submission date: Monday 18 February 2013 Time: 10.m. Please note you are required to submit two copies; (i) Electronically via Turnitinuk on Unilearn and (ii) A hard copy should be submitted into the Assignment Drop- in Box situated at the Business School reception on level. Please note that submission of the assignment after the deadline without an approved extension or extenuating circumstances will result in the mark being capped at 40%. Please refer to the student regulations and your student handbook

Notes:  Your coursework must be word-processed. Harvard referencing method should be used where appropriate.  You must include a front sheet to your assignment that contains your name, student number, course, Module code (BHS0027) and your word count.  Attention is drawn to the rules on academic misconduct (including unattributed citations from textbooks etc), refer to your Student Handbook for the penalties for non-compliance.

Marking Scheme (generic)

Criteria Generic communication

100%

70+ The answer is excellent in structure, clarity and presentation Excellent research skills demonstrated in a clear understanding of relevant theories/concepts All relevant theoretical concepts applied effectively Shows ability to integrate theory and practice. Conclusions and recommendations based on sound evaluation and logic. Comprehensive range of references used to support arguments

5%

60-69 The answer is well structured. The content is clear and well presented. Good research skills used to show knowledge and understanding of relevant concepts

Knowledge and understanding

30%

Analysis

30%

A good selection of frameworks applied competently

50-59 The answer is of an acceptable standard in clarity, structure and presentation. An acceptable level of understanding of the concepts of strategy selection and implementation shown An acceptable level of theoretical frameworks used, but not always applied well. An acceptable level of evaluation in evidence. Satisfactory conclusions and recommendations An acceptable range of references used to support arguments

40-49 The answer has fallen below expectations in clarity, structure and presentation.

Below 40 (Fail) Poor answer in terms of structure and presentation.

The level of research and knowledge/understanding has fallen below expectations

Lack of evidence of research on lacks knowledge of relevant concepts