Strategic managment

BANGOR UNIVERSITY

AND

MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE

Course : Bachelor of Science (Hons) in Business Studies & Finance

(BSFD1 1709A, BSFD2 1709A)

Module Code and Title : ASB 3109 Strategic Management

Module Tutor : Mr Francis Soh

Assessment : Individual Assignment

Due Date : 17 December 2018

Word Length : 2,500 words

Weighting within Module : 40% (100 marks)

Assignment Question:

Select a business organization of your choice and conduct a strategic analysis of the impact of

external environmental forces and internal company activities influencing the business

organization’s differential & competitive advantage. Critically discuss the elements of your

framework of analysis.

Note: Please use theoretical concepts selectively to support your arguments. You may also

quote from industry/company/financial press sources. Ensure that your referencing of all

sources is to an established convention and standard. If in doubt, use “Harvard” referencing.

You need to consult with at least ten (10) academic references to develop your argument.

Learning Outcomes:

On completion of this module the student should be able to:

Use the terminology of strategic management in an organizational context.

Analyze the internal and external environment of an organization.

Identify and cite key strategic management theories and concepts.

Understand the dynamics of strategic decision making.

BSFD11709A, BSFD21709A _ASB 3109 Strategic Management, Individual Assignment: 17 December 2018 Page 2 of 3

Marking criteria:

Marks Awarded Description of Performance

80 – 100 marks 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 unequivocal evidence showing that all the learning

outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are

fully satisfied. At this Level, the work demonstrates a

particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance

of argument, interpretation or discourse.

70 -79 marks The work examined is excellent 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 excellent in

demonstrating evaluation and elegance of argument,

interpretation or discourse and there may be some evidence of

originality.

60 to 69 marks The work examined is of a sufficiently high standard and

there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding

and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There

is also clearly articulated evidence demonstrating that all the

learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that

Level are satisfied. At this level the standard of the work will

be high in demonstrating evaluation and elegance of

argument, interpretation or discourse.

50 – 59 marks The work examined demonstrates adequate knowledge of a

fair range of relevant material, with intermittent evidence of

an appreciation of its significance. Some analytical treatment,

but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks

clear analytical purpose. At this level the standard of the work

adequately demonstrates some evaluation of argument,

interpretation or discourse.

40 – 49 marks The work examined basic understanding of the subject but

addressing a limited range of material. Largely descriptive or

narrative, with little evidence of analysis. A basic argument is

evident, but mainly supported by assertion and there may be

little clarity and coherence. At this level the standard of the

work marginally demonstrates some evaluation and

interpretation.

Below 40 marks A limited understanding of a narrow range of material with

heavy dependence on description and/or paraphrase. Little

evidence of coherent argument: lacks development and may

be repetitive or thin. Numerous deficiencies in expression and

presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by

using a simplistic or repetitious style. At this level the

standard of the work does not demonstrate effort in evaluation

and interpretation.

BSFD11709A, BSFD21709A _ASB 3109 Strategic Management, Individual Assignment: 17 December 2018 Page 3 of 3

END OF ASSIGNMENT