strategic management

Page 1 of 6 MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief

ASSESSMENT 2 Part B BRIEF

Subject Code and Title MGT604/MGMT6011 Strategic Management

Assessment Stakeholder Meeting Simulation and White Paper

PART B: Final Submission

Individual/Group Individual

Length Up to 2,000 words

Learning Outcomes b) Critically evaluate different strategy formulation processes utilised by organisations and evaluate their relevance to particular organisational contexts

c) Develop and plan the implementation of a selected strategy for different organisational levels including for change management processes

Submission By 11.55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 4.2 (Week 8)

Weighting 30%

Total Marks 30 marks

Context:

The assessment of this subject supports students in developing their skills and knowledge in

topics that include environmental assessment, problem diagnosis, strategy development,

and cultural and ethical contexts. Stakeholder meetings are a critical element in strategic

management. This assessment task provides experience and immersive understanding of

the complex interactions involved in the development of strategic choices, and the need to

take an integrative approach to problem solving. The increasing pace of technological

change and the increased impact of social media provides many challenges for businesses

attempting to navigate towards growth and increased profitability. Rapid cycle times for

new products can lead to decisions being made that are not always in the best interests of

the long-term survival of the firm. Disruptions to the everyday course of business come

from anywhere and need to be responded to often in short time frames.

Introduction

Assessment 2 Part B continues from scenario in Part A. In Part B, a disruption is introduced

which necessitates re-consideration of the white paper done in Part A of the Assessment.

Here is a recap of the scenario.

Scenario Recap

Page 2 of 6 MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief

Pro-Go Pty Ltd is a privately-owned manufacturer of small, high-quality action cameras based in Geelong, Victoria. Founded in 2004 it has enjoyed continuous year-on-year growth until the last financial year. Pro-Go has a track record of innovation, and technology that provides excellent quality results in a small package able to operate with small batteries for extended periods of time. The video files these cameras produce are known for having superior colour, and operate effectively in lower lighting conditions than competitor’s cameras. They are also marketed on the basis of their extreme ruggedness, and reliability. Much of the technology used in its devices has been patented by Pro-Go and is not currently available to other manufacturers.

The Pro-Go management team has recognised that the ability to capture videos is now a feature of

most phones. It suggests to them that the future of the stand-alone camera may be limited. Pro-Go’s

CEO has requested the executive team meet independently to develop a strategy to guide the

company over the next five years.

Instructions:

Please watch the below video Announcement from the CEO of Pro-Go Pty Ltd.

DISRUPTION

A number of Pro-Go cameras have burst into flames without an explanation being found. In addition,

the company’s largest customer – a major retail chain throughout China – exercised their right, under

our sales agreement, to cancel their contract with us. Sales have halved in the last 24 hours and

immediate action must be taken.

Re-convene the (emergency) stakeholder meetings to address these concerns raised in this video.

The stakeholder meetings must discuss this disruption and develop a modified strategic plan/white

paper. Please return to your groups immediately to discuss these events and adjust your strategic

approach accordingly.

Suggested format

Your 2000 word, individual, White paper should be structured as follows:

• Executive Summary - Summarise the entire report – for example, don’t tell the reader that

the report discusses the external/internal environment, summarise the points the report

makes about the external/internal environment.

• Table of Contents - Make it look good. Include page numbers and ensure the layout looks

balanced on the page.

• Introduction - Provide background and context to the report. Tell the reader what has

happened in the past that has led to this report being needed.

• Aim - State in a single sentence what this report is seeking to achieve.

• Discussion - Cover the content you wish to address.

• Conclusion - Restate the aim and sum up the discussion to demonstrate to the reader that

the aim has been satisfied. There should be no new content in the conclusion.

• Recommendations - What are the next steps? What is required to progress into the future?

Evaluate/justify your recommendations?

• References - Please ensure you use the correct APA referencing style throughout.

Remember EVERY factual statement requires a reference.

Page 3 of 6 MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief

• Appendices - Additional material to substantiate or add greater depth to the material

presented in the report, and your Teamwork log.

The white paper is to be completed individually by each member of the team reflecting the impact

of the proposed strategy on their particular part of the business after the disruption and should be

completed to the professional standard that would be required if the below scenario were real.

Below is a recap of the scenario and the requirements of the Five-year strategy white Paper which

was outlined in Assessment 2 Part A.

Deliverables

The stakeholder meeting will discuss and agree on three strategy options for Pro-Go.

In doing so, the Stakeholder meeting may consider strategy options that exist in

adjacent markets or with related but different products or technologies. Remember to

apply strategy concepts in your stakeholder meeting discussions to identify strategy

options (strategy planning).

The deliverables required of each student are to produce a white paper covering the following:

1. Nominate the preferred strategy option and apply a strategy framework(s) to analyse and justify why you believe it is the best strategy option; and

2. Discuss the implications specifically relating to your part of the business, and what

challenges these might represent. Separate the discussion into short-term and

long-term issues.

Students are to address the assessment task from the perspective of their own functional

area of responsibility. Integrate theory in your white paper.

Appendix – Teamwork Log:

Students should also keep a log of how they have worked together as part of a team in the delivery

of this project. This includes meeting dates and times, meeting minutes/notes, a detailed description

of how tasks were allocated and completed (and by whom), copies of emails and/or written

discussion regarding the project, and any other evidence of teamwork that students would like to

include. All students involved in the project need to check the log before submission. It is assumed

that the final submission has been agreed between students as being an accurate record of the work

that has taken place for the project.

The appendix log needs to be submitted with the assessment but is not a part of the overall word

count.

Submission Instructions:

Assessment 2 Part B Final White Paper is to be written according to academic writing guidelines and

must be submitted in compliance with the following;

1. You should make significant references to the subject material and substantial wider

reading. A minimum five (5) academic (books & peer-reviewed journal articles) & two (2)

Page 4 of 6 MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief

other sources (newspaper article, trade publications, websites, etc.) must be used. These

should be referenced in the APA style, both in-text and in a reference list. References to

‘Wikipedia’ or similar unsubstantiated sources will not be accepted. The assignment is to

include in-text citations and a reference list following the latest APA referencing style. The

APA referencing guide can be located in the Academic Writing Guide at

http://library.think.edu.au/ld.php?content_id=1882254

2. Students will also need to participate in the stakeholder meeting. Some class time (for class

based students) will be allocated to this discussion. Online students will need to participate

in pre organised forums/sessions. In addition, a summary of notes and ideas discussed

during group work sessions needs to be attached to your submission as an appendix (but will

not form part of your final word count).

3. Submit the Assessment 2 Part B: Final Submission (with references) via the Assessment link

in the main navigation menu in MGT604 Strategic management on the Student Portal. The

Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via Grade Centre in the Student Portal. Feedback

can be viewed in My Grades.

Students should use the brief to guide what to include in the assessment and the following rubric to

inform the standard required.

MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief Page 5 of 6

Learning Rubric: MGT604 Assessment 2 Part B Stakeholder Meeting Simulation Final Submission

Assessment Attributes

Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49%

Pass (Functional) 50-64%

Credit (Proficient) 65-74%

Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84%

High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%

Research and

comprehension:

30%

Content does not adequately demonstrate a postgraduate standard of detail and thought

Content somewhat superficial or with some gaps in understanding

Good coverage of the topic with clearly articulated explanation of the topic. Reasonable fit between theory and practice

Thorough coverage of the topic. Good application of theory. Good use of credible sources

Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding; insightful discussion; excellent and relevant application of theory. Multiple and credible references used

Analysis and

synthesis:

30%

Reader cannot understand the foundations of the topics from the information provided. Poor logic. No evidence provided to support arguments. Disruptive event not adequately considered

Basic intent covered; analysis and arguments could be more convincing with some evidence provided. Disruptive event considered but with little insight

Reader understands the arguments presented through focused analysis and evidence. Disruptive event considered with appropriate level of detail

Reader has a good sense of the analysis and evidence which is well discussed in argument. Insights are drawn from synthesised information. Disruptive event considered in considerable detail consistent with all internal interrelationships

Readers’ understanding of the analysis and arguments is clear; logical and well organised; detailed and insightful analysis; structured arguments; synthesis and understanding of links between issues. Disruptive event considered and integrated into revised strategy with elegance and insight

Writing mechanics:

15%

Layout is confusing; logic, flow and use of language difficult to

Layout is adequate with acceptable logic flow and use of language. Some

Overall presentation is easy to digest; language succinct and well chosen;

Good presentation content and language; easy to read and draw

Overall style, use of language, figures and tables encourages

MGT604_Assessment 2B Brief Page 6 of 6

follow; numerous spelling and grammatical errors

misspellings and grammatical errors

less than four spelling and grammatical errors

conclusions; no more than two spelling and grammatical errors

comprehension; creative and engaging report

Reflection and

conclusions:

25%

Little reflection evident; unclear conclusions. Little consideration of the disruptive event.

Poor reflections and generic or somewhat irrelevant conclusions. Some consideration of the disruptive event

Good reflections highlighting key aspects; relevant conclusions which are a mix of generic and specific conclusions. Appropriate consideration of the disruptive event

Rich reflections drawing from good research, analysis and synthesis. Relevant and specific conclusions. Well detailed consideration of the disruptive event

Insightful conclusions drawing well from the discussion and evidence; creative and insightful reflection with relevance to the topic. Excellent, insightful and detailed consideration of the disruptive event