Business and Management Strategy Assignment Help

January 13, 2023 admin 0 Comments

Task Brief – Coursework 1

Module Title:	Business and Management Strategy
Assessment Title:	Strategic Plan
Individual/Group:	Group
Weighting:	50%
Submission Date:	15^th December 2022 to seminar tutor

Task Details

You are required, as a group of 4-6, to develop a national strategic plan in response to a given scenario. The scenario will be given to you in week 18, as the 5^th problem of this module. A structure template is available on Blackboard for your use.

Submission requirements

The submission will be by a group report of 4000 words. The report is to be professionally written, formatted and submitted directly to your tutor in your session on the 15^th December 2022. Your tutor will make specific arrangements with you.

In class on the 15^th December, you will formally summarise your report via a presentation (oral or poster) to your tutor. Your tutor will then give you immediate feedback to help you to complete assignment 2.

Group work rationale and management and process for recognising individual contribution

Team working skills is a key skills gap that has been identified by Skills Active, hence why this assessment is being delivered in a group format. To recognise that individuals may make different levels of contribution to the presentation there will be a peer group assessment form that will be completed by each student that reflects on the contribution made by each group member.

The tutor must be kept informed at all times in relation to ‘problems’ that the group encounters. If a member of the group is not making an equitable contribution then the tutor must be informed ASAP so as to take appropriate action.

Weighted Assessment Criteria:

Your task will be graded against the following weighted criteria;

Oral presentation of the report, demonstrating a logical summary of the strategic plan (10%)
Report presentation with the overall ability to communicate clearly and objectively within a business setting. (10%)
Analysis and application of relevant management theory to support a justified strategic plan. (25%)
Strategic plan answers to the overall scenario brief, with due consideration of market, CSR and financial implications. (25%)
Provision of supporting material to substantiate the decisions made. (20%)
Contribution to meetings, group discussions and presentation (10%)

Study Skills Support

Students will meet their tutors at every seminar session to receive formative feedback on their progress. Specialist lectures will be provided on set topics to inform the individual sections of the report.

Feedback & Feed-forward Strategy and how students can access their Feedback

Students will receive detailed feedback on their strategic plans in class via the formative presentation of the report. Good practice will be identified and explored, and future requirements will be identified.

Assessment Criteria – Task 1

Module Title:	Business and Management Strategy	Level	7
Assessment Title:	Group Strategic Plan	Weighted:	50%

Criteria & Weighting	90 – 100% Outstanding Work	80 – 89% Excellent Work	70 – 79% Good Quality Work	60 – 69% Acceptable Work with some good aspects	50 – 59% Satisfactory Work	0- 49% Work does not satisfy assessment criteria
Oral presentation of the report, demonstrating a logical summary of the strategic plan (10%)	Excellent presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Professional presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Clear, logical presentation and structure.	Reasonable presentation and structure. Fairly logical approach.	Limited presentation but demonstrating some understanding of logical structure.	No or poor structure, illogical approach,
Report presentation with the overall ability to communicate clearly and objectively within a business setting. (10%)	Excellent presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Professional presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Clear, logical presentation and structure.	Reasonable presentation and structure. Fairly logical approach.	Limited presentation but demonstrating some understanding of logical structure.	No or poor structure, illogical approach,
Analysis and application of relevant management theory to support a justified strategic plan. (25%)	Fundamental and strategic theories identified, critically evaluated and applied in a clear and concise, yet critically evaluative manner. Reading covers much more than the given reading list.	Fundamental and strategic theories identified, critically evaluated and applied in a concise yet evaluative manner. Reading covers more than the given reading list.	Key theories identified and applied in a evaluative nature	Some key theories identified and applied with a clear and logical approach	Some relevant theories identified with compatible application	Few theories identified with incompatible application
Strategic plan answers to the overall scenario brief, with due consideration of market, CSR and financial implications. (25%)	Innovative range of ideas demonstrated, that comprehensively meet and expand the scenario criteria.	Innovative range of ideas that widely meet the scenario criteria.	Realistic range of ideas that broadly meet the scenario criteria.	A range of ideas that mostly meet the scenario criteria.	A limited range of ideas that generally meet the scenario criteria..	Inadequate range of ideas that fail to meet the scenario criteria.
Provision of supporting material to substantiate the decisions made. (20%)	Comprehensive supporting information that completely substantiates the decisions made.	Excellent supporting information that amply substantiates the decisions made.	Very good supporting information that suitably substantiates the decisions made.	Reasonable supporting information that offers some justification for the decisions that are made.	Basic supporting information that offers some justification for the decisions that are made.	Basic supporting information that offers little justification for the decisions that are made.
Contribution to meetings, group discussions and presentation (10%)	Instrumental contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.	Valuable contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.	Effective contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.	Some contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.	Limited contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.	Little/no contribution to group meetings/discussions and presentation.

Oral Presentation Assessment Sheet

Names __________________________________________________________________________

Email Feedback to: ________________________________________________________________

Company Chosen: ________________________________________________________________

Very good

Poor

Presentation Structure

Introduction	Good outline of purpose	Unclear and confusing
	Interesting and inviting	Dry and dull
Sequencing	Logical	Inconsistent, difficult to follow
	Clear transition from one idea to another	Muddled progression
Conclusion	Effective summary of key points	Brief and unmemorable
	Ends on a high note	Is flat

Presentation Content

	Well researched, evidence provided					Poorly investigated
	Main points clearly explained					Long or confused explanations

Presentation Delivery

Voice	Clear, well projected	Muffled and quiet
Visual aids	Appropriate for the presentation	Aids are irrelevant
	Well prepared, clear and simple	Difficult to read, wordy
	Aids are presented effectively	Hurried, not explained
Timing	Keeps to time	Runs over/under time

Overall Presentation Comments

Tutor ___________________________________ Date ____________________

Strategic Plan Comments

Positive	Needs Improvement

Peer Group Assessment

For the group work element each member will submit a completed peer group assessment form reflecting on the contribution made by each group member.

This should not attempt to measure their colleagues’ level of academic ability but should assess their contribution in terms of commitment, involvement, attendance at group meetings, division of workload and co-operation.

Each team member’s individual score will be summed. Should one member’s total score fall significantly below the rest it will be compared with the average score for the rest of the group.

How it compares will result in modification to their mark as follows:

Score is more than 80% of group average No adjustment to mark

Score is between 60% & 80% of group average. Reduce mark by 5% points

Score is between 40% & 60% of group average. Reduce mark by 10% points

Score is less than 40% of group average Reduce mark by 20% points

Groups should make every attempt to resolve any internal difficulties. However, any major problems encountered should be brought to the attention of the seminar tutor as soon as they occur. Once the report and peer group assessment forms are submitted the assessment process will stand.

Any student giving a colleague a low score on the peer group assessment must clearly justify their actions with supporting comments. The unit leader will be the final arbiter.

The following examples show the total peer group scores achieved by each group member and how this would affect their mark on work assessed at 60%

Brown	152	White	112	Small	141	Dodds	147
Jones	151	Winsor	64	Johnson	115	Harris	120
Smith	145	Preston	97	Phillips	148	Finch	148
Grey	123	Holmes	108	Maitland	73	Leigh	48
Stokes	147			Aaker	150	Walsh	150

1 Anne Grey scores 83% of average of rest of group. No adjustment to her mark.

2 Carol Winsor scores 61% of average of rest of group. Her mark reduces by
5% points to 55%.

3 Tony Maitland scores 53% of average of rest of group. His mark reduces by 10% points to 50%.

4 Mike Leigh scores 34% of average of rest of group. His mark reduces by
20% points to 40%.

Peer Group Assessment Form

It is hoped that difficulties and differences are resolved as part of the process of working together in groups. In the event of a breakdown in any group the seminar tutor must be advised immediately. The module leader is the final arbiter.

Mark each team member out of ten for each factor listed below

Name of group member	(your name here)
Co-operation
Initiative
Attendance at group meetings
Reliability
TOTAL

Note: Should you wish to mark a colleague down significantly then you must clearly justify your actions with supporting comments.

Comments:

Task Brief – Coursework 2

Module Title:	Business and Management Strategy
Assessment Title:	Strategic Plan Review
Individual/Group:	Individual
Weighting:	50%
Submission Date:	12^th January 2023

Task Details

On an individual basis, you must develop your group strategic plan to now include an international strategic plan. The report should therefore include a comprehensive development of the national strategic plan to include an international market development strategy.

The submission should be in report format of 4000 words. A structure template is available on Blackboard for your use. You may decide to support your report by including appendixes of related documentation, for example, staff schedules, site plans, country evaluations, risk assessments plus others that may enhance this work.

Submission requirements

The work is to be handed electronically via BB by 3:00pm on 12^th January 2023.

Weighted Assessment Criteria:

Your task will be graded against the following weighted criteria:

Presentation and the overall ability to communicate clearly and objectively within a business setting. (10%)
Analysis and application of relevant management theory to support a justified international strategic plan. (35%)
Strategic plan answers to the overall scenario brief, with due consideration of the market, CSR and financial implications in an international context. (35%)
Provision of supporting material in the form of 3 country PESTLE analyses and an evaluation grid to substantiate the decisions made. (20%)

Assessment Criteria – Task 2

Module Title:	Business and Management Strategy	Level	7
Assessment Title:	Strategic Plan	Weighted:	50%

Criteria & Weighting	90 – 100% Outstanding Work	80 – 89% Excellent Work	70 – 79% Good Quality Work	60 – 69% Acceptable Work with some good aspects	50 – 59% Satisfactory Work	0- 49% Work does not satisfy assessment criteria
Presentation and the overall ability to communicate clearly and objectively within a business setting. (10%)	Excellent presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Professional presentation and structure, clear logical approach.	Clear, logical presentation and structure.	Reasonable presentation and structure. Fairly logical approach.	Limited presentation but demonstrating some understanding of logical structure.	No or poor structure, illogical approach,
Analysis and application of relevant management theory to support a justified strategic plan. (35%)	Fundamental and strategic theories identified, critically evaluated and applied in a clear and concise, yet critically evaluative manner. Reading covers much more than the given reading list.	Fundamental and strategic theories identified, critically evaluated and applied in a concise yet evaluative manner. Reading covers more than the given reading list.	Key theories identified and applied in a evaluative nature	Some key theories identified and applied with a clear and logical approach	Some relevant theories identified with compatible application	Few theories identified with incompatible application
Strategic plan answers to the overall scenario brief, with due consideration of the market, CSR and financial implications in an international context. (35%)	Innovative range of ideas demonstrated, that comprehensively meet and expand the scenario criteria.	Innovative range of ideas that widely meet the scenario criteria.	Realistic range of ideas that broadly meet the scenario criteria.	A range of ideas that mostly meet the scenario criteria.	A limited range of ideas that generally meet the scenario criteria..	Inadequate range of ideas that fail to meet the scenario criteria.
Provision of supporting material to substantiate the decisions made. (20%)	Comprehensive supporting information that completely substantiates the decisions made.	Excellent supporting information that amply substantiates the decisions made.	Very good supporting information that suitably substantiates the decisions made.	Reasonable supporting information that offers some justification for the decisions that are made.	Basic supporting information that offers some justification for the decisions that are made.	Basic supporting information that offers little justification for the decisions that are made.