Assessment Stakeholder Meeting Simulation and White Paper

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 1 of 7

ASSESSMENT 2 Part A BRIEF

Subject Code and Title MGT604 Strategic Management

Assessment Stakeholder Meeting Simulation and White Paper

PART A: Preliminary Outline (Hurdle)

Individual/Group Individual

Length Up to 500 word outline

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 End of Module 3.1

Weighting 10%

Total Marks 10 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.

Instructions

PLEASE NOTE: Part A is a Hurdle Assessment and must be submitted.

You are required to perform a simulated stakeholder meeting to discuss the scenario below.

Students will be assigned a role to play in the simulated stakeholder meeting. Roles will be assigned

to ensure each group has one of each of the stakeholders.

To do this assessment, it is necessary for you to know the responsibilities and interests of the

stakeholder that you are assigned to be. To assist you with this knowledge, each stakeholder’s

general scope of responsibilities is described below. It is suggested that you take some time to

research more about each stakeholder’s responsibilities so that you can contribute effectively to the

meetings and write your white paper.

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 2 of 7

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 and should be completed to the

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

Please Note: You will be placed in your group in Module 1, week 1 by your facilitator and are

expected to conduct at least one (1) stakeholders meeting per week. Times and location are to be

arranged by the group.

Stakeholders description and interests

a) General Manager (GM) of the company

The GM has the final accountability to the CEO. The GM takes responsibility of the of the company’s

successes and failures of the company. The GM brings together the different functions in the

company (HR, Finance, Operations, etc.) and the interests of all the stakeholders. A key issue for the

GM is to maximise shareholder value and the long-term sustainability of the company.

b) General Manager of key supplier

Obviously, the GM of the supplier has the same responsibilities in his company as the GM of the case

company below. The supplier is in the business of supplying goods and services which the case

company requires. The successes and failures of the supplier company are linked to the successes

and failures of the case company.

c) Union official

General responsibility of the Union official is to represent the interest of workers. It also includes

conflict resolution between the employer and the workers and bargaining of behalf of workers. It

goes without saying that the workers would want the company to be financially sustainable while

they receive appropriate remuneration.

d) Operations manager (OM)

The general responsibilities of the OM are to ensure that productions of goods and services is

running efficiently. Therefore, the role includes both planning and implementing

production/manufacturing schedules including material and energy inputs among other things. The

OM understands the feasibility of attaining certain production levels and quality of

products/services.

e) Senior finance manager (SFM)

The general responsibilities of the finance manager are to ensure that the company is financially

sound. Therefore, the finance manager plans the long and short-term allocation of resources as well

as produce financial reports. For example, the SFM would be interested in issues such as risk, capital

availability, likely timing and amount of returns, etc.

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 3 of 7

Pro-Go Pty Ltd Scenario

The scenario provides you with a brief overview of a hypothetical project for a real-life organisation.

Be aware that the scenario may not cover every detail that you will need to address in the White

Paper, in which case, you will need to conduct additional research, including further research into

the industry concerned.

[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.]

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.

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.

Suggested format

Your 500 word, individual, Preliminary Outline of your White paper should be structured as follows:

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 4 of 7

• 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. Be very brief.

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

• Discussion - Cover the key deliverables of the assessment described above.

Remember, you are providing an outline only. Adhere to the word limit and be thoughtful in your

response. The first attempt at an outline is rarely comprehensive or correct. Please recognise that

this will likely need to be revised through several iterations to arrive at an outline that is of impact.

Teamwork Log

Students should also keep a log of how they have worked together as 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 Teamwork log needs to be submitted with the assessment but is not a part of the overall word

count.

Submission Instructions:

Assessment 2 Part A Preliminary 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 of five (5) academic (books & peer-reviewed journal articles) & two (2)

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 - see ‘Teamwork Log’ above (but will not form part of your final word count).

3. Submit Assessment 2 Part A: Preliminary Submission (with references) via the Assessment

link in the main navigation menu in MGT604 Strategic Management on the Student Portal.

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 5 of 7

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

Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 6 of 7

Learning Rubric: MGT604 Assessment 2 Part A Stakeholder Meeting Simulation Preliminary 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

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

Basic intent covered; analysis and arguments could be more convincing with some evidence provided

Reader understands the arguments presented through focused analysis and evidence

Reader has a good sense of the analysis and evidence, which is well discussed in argument. Insights are drawn from synthesised information

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

Writing mechanics:

15%

Layout is confusing; logic, flow and use of language difficult to follow; numerous spelling and grammatical errors

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

Overall presentation is easy to digest; language succinct and well chosen; less than four spelling and grammatical errors

Good presentation content and language; easy to read and draw conclusions; no more than two spelling and grammatical errors

Overall style, use of language, figures and tables encourages comprehension; creative and engaging report

MGT604_Assessment 2A Brief Page 7 of 7

Reflection and

conclusions:

25%

Little reflection evident; unclear conclusions

Poor reflections and generic or somewhat irrelevant conclusions

Good reflections highlighting key aspects; relevant conclusions which are a mix of generic and specific conclusions

Rich reflections drawing from good research, analysis and synthesis. Relevant and specific conclusions

Insightful conclusions drawing well from the discussion and evidence; creative and insightful reflection with relevance to the topic