Strategic managment
kineyevarman222
ASB3109Assignment17Dec2018DAY.pptASB3109 Strategic Management
Your Individual Assignment
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
Things To Do?
- Select a business organization of your choice
- 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
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
Things To Do?
- 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 arguments
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
REMEMBER?
- May use of references to textbooks, journal articles & media reports and information from reputable websites (references in Harvard format)
- Critically evaluate as you write your answers and avoid being descriptive
- Do NOT just gather information in the topic!
- Submission Date: Monday 17 Dec 2018
- Word Limitation: 2,500
- Weightage of assessment: 40%
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
Learning Outcomes
- 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
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
Marking Criteria
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
| Marks Awarded | Description of Performance |
| 80 to 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 to 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. |
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
Marking Criteria
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
*
| Marks Awarded | Description of Performance |
| 50 to 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 to 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. |
Copyright © 2018 MDIS. All rights reserved.
