Anda di halaman 1dari 29

Cardiff Metropolitan University

MODULE TITLE: Strategic Management


PROGRAMME: MBA
SEMESTER: Semester Two
ACADEMIC YEAR PERIOD:

June-September 2014

LECTURER SETTING ASSESSMENT: - Mervyn Sookun (Module Leader)


Contact: mervyn.sookun@lsclondon.co.uk
DATE ASSESSMENT SET AND LOADED ON TO STUDENT PORTAL:DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED:

Table of Contents:
1. Assessment type
2. Indicative assessment requirements for the module
3. Maximum word limit and assessment weighting for each aspect within the
assessment
4. Description of assessment requirements (Tasks 1-4)
5. Group Report and PPT guidelines
6. Learning Outcomes
7. Summary of marking scheme (group report and PPT)
8. Grading Criteria
9. Individual supporting contributions to group report and PPT, and marking
scheme.
10. Notes on Plagiarism & Harvard Referencing
11. Module Descriptor
12. Group Assignment Feedback Sheet
13. Individual Supporting Contributions Feedback Sheet
14. Further Guidance Notes
15. Reading list
1 | Page

16.

2 | Page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 1
Assessment Type:

Group Report and a set of PowerPoint slides (50%)


Individual Supporting Contributions to Group Report and Power
Point slides (50%)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 2
Indicative Assessment Requirements for the Module:

Group Report and supporting Power Point slides. Supporting documentation


is required to be produced as an individual contribution to the assessment
(equivalent to an overall maximum of 3000 words in total)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECTION 3
Maximum Word Limit and Assessment weighting for each aspect within the
assessment:

Group Report: 6000 words and a maximum 15 Power Point Slides:


Assessment Weighting 50%

Individual assessment contribution (an individual set of supporting


documentation from each student equivalent to 3000 words absolute
maximum): Assessment Weighting 50%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 4
Description of Assessment Requirements
As strategy consultants, imagine that you have been approached by the Board of
Directors of a company of your choice to advise them on their future strategic
direction. You are required to present your opinion, fully grounded in researched
evidence, in the form of a report covering:
Task 1
3 | Page

An analysis of the company's vision, mission and internal capabilities drawing on


relevant models.
(15 marks)

Task 2
Using relevant tools, conduct a detailed analysis of the environment and industry in
which the company is operating. In particular, the Board want your team to analyse
the extent to which disruptive innovation will change its future competitive landscape.
(15 marks)
Task 3

Using strategic theory, critically discuss and evaluate the strategic options that the
Board could consider implementing in the light of your internal and external analysis.
Briefly, discuss the implementation issues associated with your proposed
recommendations.
(40 marks)
Task 4

One of the Board members has recently read a text by Jim Collins and
Morten Hansen (2011) entitled "Great by Choice" which identifies a selection
of companies with highly successful strategies.
The Board would like to know:
what lessons they could draw from this text and how to implement
them in their organisation
Whether or not these lessons might be consistent and compatible with
the strategy models proposed by leading authorities such as Porter,
Mintzberg, Ghoshal, Kim and Mauborgne and other commentators.
(20 marks)
Presentation (10 marks)
You may use appendices. These do not affect word count.
(Limit: 6000 words)

______________________________________________________
SECTION 5
Group Report Guidelines

4 | Page

a) Students are required to fully participate in and contribute to the


development of the Group
Report and PowerPoint slides. Nonparticipation and/or non-attendance will result in restriction of marks for
this aspect of the assessment.
b) The group size will be determined by the module leader and module teaching
team and will normally be 6 members (normal maximum). In specific
circumstances this may be varied.
c) Students are required to submit their formal Group Report (4000 words) via
Turnitin during the examination week ( a specific date will be communicated
to you during the semester). Only one report per group is required.
d) The Assessment Weighting for this aspect of the group assessment is 50%
(all students in the particular group are awarded the same percentage)
e) Marks will be allocated based on the guidelines specified in Section 7 below
(Also see the detailed feedback sheet in Section 12 and Guidance Notes in
Section 14)
___________________________________________________________

SECTION 6: Learning Outcomes


Learning outcomes tested:
Task 1
Demonstrate a critical awareness of research in the evolution of
strategic management
Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make
justified recommendations

Task 2
Identify and explain the importance of how the synthesise of knowledge
gained from other business modules may be brought together into a
comprehensive understanding of the concepts underpinning
competitive advantage.
Understand and be able to critically analyse the strategic position and
the interrelated functions of Production and Operations Management
(POM) in organisations
5 | Page

Demonstrate, understand and critically explain the importance of


integrational thinking in their understanding of strategy and its
formation and development in complex organisations
Task 3
Evaluate and develop the ability to identify strategic issues and design
appropriate courses of action

_____________________________________________________________
Section 7: Marking Scheme: Group Report and PowerPoint Slides (Also see
the Feedback Sheet for further guidance in Section 12)
Task 1
Use of strategic capabilities concept
Relationship between culture and strategy
Use of relevant models to make recommendations
(15 marks)
Task 2
Competitive analysis and impact of disruptive innovation
(15 marks)
Task 3
Discussion and application of strategic choice models
Resource implications of the selected strategy
Use of academic concepts and models to demonstrate
relationship among key resource areas: HR,
operations, finance, technology
(40 marks)
Task 4
Critical discussion of Collin's thesis
(20 marks)
Quality, creativity and coherence of PowerPoint slides
Evidence of teamwork
Overall Presentation, referencing,
visual aids, professionalism,
6 | Page

(10 marks)

evidence of teamwork
Total:

(100 marks)/value=50%

Section 8: Grading Criteria


MARK

29 or less

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

60 - 69

70 +

CONTENT:
Has the question been
answered?

Vague,
random,
unrelated
material

Some
mention
of
the
issue,
but
a
collection of
disparate
points

Some
looseness/
digressions

Well focused

Highly focused

No
evidence
of reading.
No use of
theory

not
even
hinted
at
implicitly.
No theory
included.

No evidence
of reading.
An
implicit
hint at some
knowledge
of
theory,
etc.

Barely
answers the
question

just
reproduces
what knows
about
the
topic
No evidence
of
reading.
Very
basic
theories
mentioned
but
not
developed or
well used.
Long winded
descriptions
of theory.

Some reading
evident,
but
confined
to
core texts.

Good reading.
Good range of
theories
included.

Excellent
reading.
Well
chosen
theories.

Some
long
winded
sections.
Some
quotations,
but
stand
alone.
Some
interconnections.

Good
summary
of
theory.
Good use of
quotations
that flow with
narrative.
Good
interconnections.

Succinct,
effective
summaries
of
theory.
Excellent choice
and threading of
quotations into
argument.
Good
counterpoising
of a range of
perspectives.

No
example
s

No/limited
/
inappropri
ate
examples

Few
examples

Uneven
examples

Good
examples

Excellent
range
of
examples.

Vague
assertions
about
issues.

Largely
descriptive
with
no
identification
and analysis
of
central
issues.
Uncritical
acceptance
of material.

Limited
insight into
issues.

Some
good
observations.

Good, detailed
analysis.

Comprehensive
range of issues
identified
and
discussed fully.

Some
evaluation
but
weak.
Little insight.

Good
interpretation.
Some
but
limited
sophistication
in argument.

Good
critical
assessment.
Independent
thought
displayed.

Full
critical
assessment and
substantial
individual
insight.

No
referencing

Limited/poor
referencing

Some
inconsistencie
s
in
referencing

Appropriate
referencing

Appropriate
referencing

Is there evidence of
having read widely
and use of appropriate
and up to date material
to make a case?
UNDERSTANDING
&
SYNTHESIS
Are ideas summarized
rather
than
being
reproduced, and are
they inter-related with
other ideas?

APPLICATION
Does
it
show
appropriate use of
theory in a
practical situation?
ANALYSIS
Does it identify the key
issues, etc in a given
scenario, proposal or
argument?

EVALUATION
&
CONCLUSION
Does it critically assess
material?
Are there a workable
and
imaginative
solutions?
REFERENCING
Thorough and accurate
citation and referencing

7 | Page

No
evaluation.

No
referencing

Vague
assertions/p
oor
explanations
.

PRESENTATION
Logical and coherent
structure to argument
and
effective
presentation

No
structure
apparent.
Poor
presentatio
n.

Poor
structure.
Poor
presentation
.

Acceptable,
but uneven
structure.
Reasonable
presentation
.

Reasonable
structure.
Good
presentation.

Good
argument.
Well presented
material.

Excellent
argument.
Very
effective
presentation
format.

___________________________________________________________________________

SECTION 9 :Individual Supporting Contributions to Group Report and Slides


Learning outcome assessed:
Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make
justified recommendations.

Each student is required to provide supporting documentation within a


stipulated allowed maximum of 2000 words .
The required content of the supporting documentation produced by each
student should cover the specific categories listed:
(a) Provide an executive summary for their personal and individual research
and work undertaken for the topic set-required in Executive Report
standard format: (10 marks)
(b) Indicate and identify the key areas of research and sources which the
student has had to identify and undertake to contribute to the presentation
and their key sources of research/references/literature search sources
related to each to the task above. Research Skills (Use of free web-based
resources such as company reports, trade association statistics and some
government or supra-governmental (EU, UN) reports and statistics, the
business press and journals available through BusinessSource Premier,
Factiva or Proquest, and reports from organisations such as Euromonitor,
Key Notes and Mintel ) (10 marks)
(c) A critical discussion of strategic models from the evidence identified by
the individual student related to the topic set. (40 marks)
(d) An indication of the individual key conclusions and findings related to
strategic theories and models and the practical implications for the
corporate parent/board of directors. (20 marks)
(e) Identification of the key issues and conclusions which the student has
learned as a result of undertaking the group assignment on the topic set
and an identification of the success or failure of their group-team
endeavours. (10 marks)
(f) An indication of the way in which their individual contribution impacted on
Group Assignment by listing the action points included in the Group
Report. (10 marks)
8 | Page

Total: 100 marks/ 50%


(Max 2000 words 50% weighting)

Each student will receive an individual mark for their submission of their
individual supporting contributions and documentation. It is emphasised that
this aspect of the assignment is to be the work of the individual student and
should reflect individual researches; comprehension of the tasks involved;
views; critical awareness; use of theory; interpretation and judgements; use of
evidence; evaluation and a systematic approach to the use of research

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------SECTION 10:Notes on Plagiarism & Harvard Referencing


Plagiarism
Plagiarism is passing off the work of others as your own. This constitutes academic
theft and is a serious matter which is penalized in assignment marking.
Plagiarism is the submission of an item of assessment containing elements of work
produced by another person(s) in such a way that it could be assumed to be the
students own work. Examples of plagiarism are :

the verbatim copying of another persons work without


acknowledgement
the close paraphrasing of another persons work by simply changing a
few
words or altering the order of presentation without
acknowledgement
the unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another persons work
and/or the presentation of another persons idea(s) as ones own.

Copying or close paraphrasing with occasional acknowledgement of the source may


also be deemed to be plagiarism is the absence of quotation marks implies that the
phraseology is the students own.
Plagiarised work may belong to another student or be from a published source such
as a book, report, journal or material available on the internet.
Harvard Referencing
The structure of a citation under the Harvard referencing system is the authors
surname, year of publication, and page number or range, in parentheses, as
illustrated in the Smith example near the top of this article.

The page number or page range is omitted if the entire work is cited.
The authors surname is omitted if it appears in the text. Thus we may
say : Jones (2001) revolutionized the field of trauma surgery.

Two or three authors are cited using and or & : (Deane, Smith, and

9 | Page

Jones, 1991) or (Deane, Smith & Jones, 1991). More than three authors
are cited using et al. (Deane et al. 1992).

An unknown date is cited as no date (Deane n.d.). A reference to a


reprint is cited with the original publication date in square brackets (Marx
[1867] 1967, p. 90).

If an author published two books in 2005, the year of the first (in the
alphabetic order of the references) is cited and referenced as 2005a, the
second as 2005b.

A citation is placed wherever appropriate in or after the sentence. If it is


at the end of a sentence, it is placed before the period, but a citation for
an entire block quote immediately follows the period at the end of the
block since the citation is not an actual part of the quotation itself.

Complete citations are provided in alphabetical order in a section


following the text, usually designated as Works cited or References.
The difference between a works cited or references list and a
bibliography is that a bibliography may include works not directly cited in
the text.

All citations are in the same font as the main text.

Examples
Examples of book references are :

Smith, J. (2005a). Dutch Citing Practices. The Hague: Holland


Research Foundation.

Smith, J. (2005b). Harvard Referencing. London: Jolly Good


Publishing.

In giving the city of publication, an internationally well-known city (such as London,


The Hague, or New York) is referenced as the city alone. If the city is not
internationally well known, the country (or state and country if in the U.S.) are given.
An example of a journal reference :

Smith, John Maynard. The origin of altruism, Nature 393, 1998, pp.
639-40.

An example of a journal reference :

10 | P a g e

Bowcott, Owen. Street Protest, The Guardian, October 18, 2005,

accessed February 7, 2006.

SECTION 11: MODULE DESCRIPTOR


.
Module
Number
tbc

Module Title
Strategic Management
Level (4-6 u/g;
Credits
7
p/g;
8
doctorate)
7
20

Module Value

ECTS
Credit

Mervyn Sookun

% Taught in Welsh

Module Type

10

Teaching Period
One trimester
Module Leader

JACS
Subject
Code(s) and % of ASC Category(ies)
each subject

Pre-requisites
None
School(s)

Campus
London School of Commerce
London

Assessment Methods
Assessment Type

Duration/Length
Assessment Type

Group Presentation PP 4000 words


Paper,
and
individual equivalent
assignment
based
on
developing strategy for
business resilience and
sustainability

of Weighting
Assessment

maximum 100%

of Approximate Date of
Submission
Week 12

Aim(s)
The module aims to:

Provide students with a detailed integrative framework for understanding the role and functions of Strategic
Management within contemporary business organisations.
Enable students to comprehend how organisations formulate, implement, and evaluate strategies and how
they consider the strategic alternatives available to them.
Develop in students and provide them with a comprehensive understanding of strategic management
concepts and the techniques which are used in the development and formation of strategies.
Provide a framework and context within which knowledge acquired across the programme may be coupled
11 | P a g e

with new strategic-management techniques and how this may be synthesised to chart the future potential
direction of different organisations.
Enhance understanding of how, in the formulation of strategy for an organisation, the different functional
areas of business (e.g. accounting, finance, human resources, information systems, marketing, operations
management, etc.) are required to be considered as part of an integrative approach.
Consider how management tools (e.g. SWOT/PESTEL analysis) may be used to formulate strategy and
position the organisation internally and in the external environment
Examine the contribution which business organisation, operations and circumstances make to strategic
development and their relationship and significance to customer service; the supply chain; provision of
goods and services; total systems approaches; value chains and value concepts; client and customer
perceptions; the manufacturing and operations plan, and global environments,

Learning Outcomes
Upon successful completion of this module the students will be able to:
Demonstrate, understand and critically explain the importance of integrational
thinking in their understanding of strategy and its formation and development in
complex organisations
Identify and explain the importance of how the synthesise of knowledge gained from
other business modules may be brought together into a comprehensive
understanding of the concepts underpinning competitive advantage.
Critically analyse a case situation in terms of strategic issues and make justified
recommendations.
Evaluate and develop the ability to identify strategic issues and design appropriate
courses of action.
Understand and be able to critically analyse the strategic position and the
interrelated functions of Production and Operations Management (POM) in
organisations
Demonstrate a critical awareness of research in the evolution of strategic
management

Learning and Teaching Delivery Methods


A variety of teaching approaches is used, including lectures, seminars, case analysis, teamwork and extensive use
of electronic resources for guided research.
STUDY
HOURS
Lectures/ seminars
Directed learning
Independent learning
Total study hours
12 | P a g e

24
48
128
200

Indicative Content
The strategy concept; corporate strategy.
Models of how organisations formulate strategy.
Environmental analysis.
Strategy formulation.
Forms of organisational structure; organisational analysis
Setting strategic direction
Process by which strategy is formulated and formed in particular situations.
Strategic changes; leadership requirements for strategic change.
Implementing strategic change.
Strategic Management: Manufacturing
Inventory Control
Facilities location planning
Control of processes, operations and operations management

Recommended Reading & Required Reading


Core Text:
Johnson G. and Scholes K. (2012) Exploring Corporate Strategy, (8th Edn) Prentice
Hall, UK
Greasley, A (2009) Operations Management (2nd edn).Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
Recommended reading
Core text: Mintzberg H, Quinn J. and Ghoshal S (2004) The Strategy Process
(European Edition), Prentice Hall, UK, 4th edn
De Wit and Mayer (2010) Strategy CENGAGE Learning Business Press; 4 th Revised
edition
Lynch R. (2006) Corporate Strategy, (4th edn) Pitman Publishing, London
Rosen R (2006) Strategic Management: An Introduction, Pitman, UK
Stacey R. (2007) Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics, (5th edn)
Pitman, UK
Christopher.M., (2005), Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Strategies for
Reducing Cost and Improving Service, (3rd edn). London: Pearson Education.
Bozarth, C and Handfield, R (2008). Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain
Management. (2nd edn.). London: Pearson Education.
Access to Specialist Requirements
13 | P a g e

None

SECTION 12: Feedback Sheet for Group Report and PPT slides

CMET/LSC MBA Strategic Management Group


Assignment Feedback Sheet Feb-June 2014
Group number:
Mark Allocation
Score/Comments
Members:
Assessor(s)
Task 1
Use of strategic
capabilities concepts: is
the analysis grounded in key
models( VRIN, Value chain,
benchmarking, 7S, Analytical
SWOT profile and others)?

Is there evidence of
14 | P a g e

15

sound application of
models (cultural web,
culture typologies,
national culture:
Hofstede,
Trompenaars, Adler
&Laurent,Hall,
Usinier)? Have clear
conclusions been
drawn in terms of
relationship between
culture and strategy?

Task 2
Competitive analysis:
Has the full range of
competitive tools been
applied (e.g. PESTLE, 5
forces, Value Net, CAGE,
Yip's drivers, Porter's
Diamond )? Discussion of
disruptive innovation?

15

Task 3
Use of relevant
models to make
recommendations:

Is there evidence of
appreciation and
application of business
strategy models,
corporate strategy,
entrepreneurial
strategy and
international strategy?
(i.e. Bowman's Clock,
Porter's Generic, Blue
Ocean, Bertrand's Best
Response, Game
theory, Cournot's
Quantity Dynamics,
Corporate Parenting
styles, BCG matrix,
Shell-GE, Ashridge,
Yip's drivers, Diamond,
CAGE, Gupta's model,
Entrepreneurial models
etc). Are the
recommendations fully
grounded in reliable
evidence?
15 | P a g e

40

Use
of
academic
concepts
and
models
to
demonstrate
Relationship among
key resource areas:
HR, operations,
finance, technology.
Have members
demonstrated an
appreciation of other
modules on the MBA
programme in relation
to this assignment?
Critical analysis and
application of change
management models
(Forcefield, culture
change models, Hope
and Balogun, Lewin,
Dyer, Gigliardi, etc

Task 4
Critical discussion
Great by Choice

of 20

PowerPoint slides:
Creativity, consistency
between Group Report
and PPTs, likely impact
on audience
Overall
Presentation,
referencing, visual
aids, professionalism,
evidence of teamwork
Overall comment:

10

Total

100

16 | P a g e

SECTION 13: Feedback Sheet for Individual Contribution


MBA STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT: FEEDBACK SHEET FOR INDIVIDUAL
SUPPORTING CONTRIBUTIONS TO GROUP REPORT AND SLIDES
Name
ID:
Date:
Assessor(s)
Provide an executive 10 marks
summary
for
their
personal and individual
research
and
work
undertaken for the topic
set-required in Executive
Report standard format:
is there a consistency
between
the
group
report and the executive
summary? Is the student
fully conversant with the
content of the Group
Report and PPT slides? Is
there
evidence
of
teamwork?
Indicate and identify the 10 marks
17 | P a g e

Allocated mark/comment

key areas of research


and sources which the
student has had to
identify and undertake to
contribute
to
the
presentation and their
key
sources
of
research/references/liter
ature search sources
related to each to the
task above. Research
Skills (Use of free webbased resources such as
company reports, trade
association statistics and
some government or
supra-governmental (EU,
UN)
reports
and
statistics, the business
press
and
journals
available
through
BusinessSource Premier,
Factiva or Proquest, and
reports
from
organisations such as
Euromonitor, Key Notes
and Mintel )
A critical discussion of 20 marks
strategic models from
the evidence identified
by the individual student
related to the topic set.
Has the student critically
explained and justified
his/her
part
of
the
contribution? Has the
student
demonstrated
an awareness of his/her
colleagues'
contributions? Is there
evidence of extensive
academic
research
beyond
the
core
textbooks?
An indication of the 40 marks
individual
key
conclusions and findings
related
to
strategic
theories and models and
the practical implications
18 | P a g e

for
the
corporate
parent/directors.
How
realistic
are
the
conclusions? Do they
reflect the content of the
group report? Is there a
consistency
between
their
individual
conclusions and those of
their colleagues?
Identification of the key 10 marks
issues and conclusions
which the student has
learned as a result of
undertaking the group
assignment on the topic
set and an identification
of the success or failure
of
their
group-team
endeavours. Has the
student drawn on the
other modules of the
MBA
programme
to
make
meaningful
conclusions?
Relevant
concepts include Belbin's
team roles, Tuckman's
group
development,
conformity, risky shift etc

An indication of the way


in which their individual
contribution impacted on
Group Assignment by
analysing the action
points included in the
report. Has the student
used a learning model
for this aspect of the
assessment?
Overall comment:

10 marks

Total

100

19 | P a g e

SECTION 14: Further Guidance Notes


Students are advised to study the whole of this document very carefully
and in particular pay attention to the assignment brief (section 4) , the
learning outcomes ( section 6), the marking scheme ( section 8) and
the feedback sheets ( sections 12 and 13). The content of this
document will be discussed fully in class. Please note that according to
the module descriptor the total study hours for this module is 200 (see
section 11) . Therefore the six group members combined have to
demonstrate that they have conducted 1200 hours of learning. Below are
further guidance notes which cross-refer you to the study notes and slides
on the portal, based on Johnson, Scholes and Whittington, (2010), Exploring
Corporate Strategy, Prentice Hall . Ensure that you achieve the basic learning
outcomes of each set of slides before you attempt to write up your Group
Report, prepare PPT slides, and do your Individual Report.

Task 1
.

A. Cross-reference: See Portal for PP01

Summarise the strategy of an organisation in a strategy statement.

Identify key issues for an organisations strategy according to the


Exploring Strategy model.

Distinguish between corporate, business and operational strategies.

Understand how different people contribute to strategy at work.

Appreciate the contributions of different academic disciplines and


theoretical lenses to practical strategy analysis
B. Strategic Capabilities and Purpose of organisation: PP03 and

PP 04

Identify what comprises strategic capabilities in terms of


organisational resources and competences and how these
relate to the strategies of organisations.

20 | P a g e

Analyse how strategic capabilities might provide sustainable competitive


advantage on the basis of their value, rarity, inimitability and nonsubstitutability (VRIN).

Diagnose strategic capability by means of benchmarking, value chain


analysis, activity mapping and SWOT analysis.

Consider how managers can develop strategic capabilities for their


organisations

C. Portal: PP 012 for the types of strategy

Explain what is meant by intended and emergent strategy


development.
Identify intended processes of strategy development in
organisations including: the role of strategic leadership, strategic
planning systems and externally imposed strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development
such as: logical incrementalism, political processes, the influence of
prior decisions and organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy
development including: managing multiple strategy processes,
strategy development in different contexts and managing intended
and emergent strategy.

Task 2

D. Competitive Analysis : PP 02

Task 3

D. Business Strategy PP 06

How organisations relate


competitive business strategies.

How broad and diverse organisations should be in terms of their


corporate portfolios.
How far organisations should extend themselves internationally.
How organisations are creative and innovative.
How organisations pursue strategies through organic development,
acquisitions or strategic alliances.

to

competitors

in

terms

of

their

E. Corporate Strategy PP 07

Explain what is meant by


development.

21 | P a g e

intended and emergent strategy

Identify intended processes of strategy development in


organisations including: the role of strategic leadership, strategic
planning systems and externally imposed strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development
such as: logical incrementalism, political processes, the influence of
prior decisions and organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy
development including: managing multiple strategy processes,
strategy development in different contexts and managing intended
and emergent strategy.
F International Strategy PP08

Assess the internationalisation potential of different markets.


Identify sources of competitive advantage in international
strategy, through both global sourcing and exploitation of local
factors.
Distinguish between four main types of international strategy.
Rank markets for entry or expansion, taking into account
attractiveness, cultural and other forms of distance and competitor
retaliation threats.
Assess the relative merits of different market entry modes,
including joint ventures, licensing and foreign direct investment.

Feedback Sheet: Evaluation and resource implications of strategy, Is

there a realistic understanding of the resources required to support the


strategy? Have evaluation tools been applied (SAF) to assess strategic
options? Is the group fully conversant with quantitative and qualitative
models drawn from this module and other modules to appreciate the
integrative nature of strategic management?

A. Evaluation of Strategies: PP 011


Employ three success criteria for evaluating strategic options:
Suitability: whether a strategy addresses the key issues relating to

the
opportunities
and constraints an organisation faces.
Acceptability: whether a strategy meets the expectations of
stakeholders.
Feasibility: whether a strategy could work in practice.
For each of these use a range of different techniques for evaluating
strategic options, both financial and non-financial.
B. Resourcing the Implementation Process PP 012, PP013
22 | P a g e

Explain what is meant by intended and emergent strategy


development.
Identify intended processes of strategy development in
organisations including: the role of strategic leadership, strategic
planning systems and externally imposed strategy.
Identify processes that give rise to emergent strategy development
such as: logical incrementalism, political processes, the influence of
prior decisions and organisational systems.
Explain some of the challenges managers face in strategy
development including: managing multiple strategy processes,
strategy development in different contexts and managing intended
and emergent strategy.
Identify key challenges in organising for success, including ensuring
control, managing knowledge, coping with change and responding
to internationalisation.
Analyse main organisation structural types in terms of strengths and
weaknesses.
Recognise key issues in designing organisational control systems
(such as planning and performance targeting systems).
Recognise how the three strands of strategy, structure and systems
should reinforce each other in organisational configurations and the
managerial dilemmas involved

A. Management of Change: PP 014

Identify types of required strategic change.


Analyse how organisational context might affect the design of
strategic change programmes.
Undertake a forcefield analysis to identify forces blocking and
facilitating change.
Identify and assess the different styles of leading and managing
strategic change.
Assess the value of different levers for strategic change.
Identify the pitfalls and problems of managing change programmes.

Note

23 | P a g e

[ Other sets of slides: ,09, 010 dealing with innovation and


entrepreneurship may also be useful depending on the issues you
aim to develop]

Task 4
Critical discussion of the
conventional frameworks?

text.

How

does

it

challenge

Evidence of the following will be sought in the assessment of your PPT slides.

Coherence between Group Report, Individual Report and PowerPoint Slides

Consistently clear, concise, well organized. Points are easy to follow because of the
organization. Transitions between sections are smooth and coordinated.

Display an excellent grasp of the material. Demonstrate excellent mastery of content,


application and implications. Excellent research depth.

Very creative and original. Imaginative design and use of materials. Visual aids, or
methods.

Simple, clear, easy to interpret, easy to read. Well coordinated with content, well
designed, used very effectively. Excellent example of how to prepare and use good
visual aids

Clear, concise, major points emphasised, clear recommendations, strong conclusion


or call for action

24 | P a g e

SECTION 15: Reading list


(Also see the portal for a list of recommended textbooks)
You may find some of the references below useful for your assignment
depending on the topic/type of company you wish to research into. The list is
by no means exhaustive. You are at liberty to use refereed sources and
compile your own list of references.
Ackermann, F. (2011). "How OR can contribute to strategy making."
The Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 921-923.
Andrews, K. (2004). The concept of corporate strategy. Strategy:
Process, content and context (third edition). B. de Wit and R. Meyer.
London, Thomson.
Benedict , J., Steenkamp, E. & Kumar, N., (2009). Don't be undersold.
Harvard Business review, pp. 91-95.
Boyne, G. & Meier, K., (2009). Environmental change , human
resources and organizational turnaround. Journal of management
studies , Volume 46, pp. 835-863.
Bradfield, R., G. Wright, et al. (2005). "The origins and evolution of
scenario techniques in long range business planning." Futures 37(8): 795812.
Bratt, I., Byron , E. & Zimmerman, A., 2009. US cut back on spice once
the spice of marketing. Wall street journal, pp. 16-17
Bryant, J., J. Darwin, et al. (2011). "Strategy making with the whole
organisation: OR and the art of the possible." The Journal of the
Operational Research Society 62(5): 840-854.
Bryant, J., M. Meadows, et al. (2007). Gone fishing: A case study.
Supporting strategy: Frameworks, methods and models. F. O' Brien and R.
G. Dyson. Chichester, Wiley.
Cable, V., 2009. The storm:the world economic crisis & what it means.
In: London: Atlantic books.
Chalmeta, R. and S. Palomero (2011). "Methodological proposal for
business sustainability management by means of the Balanced
Scorecard." The Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(7): 13441356.
Clemens, R. (2009). "Environmental Scanning and Scenario Planning:
A 12 month Perspective on Applying the Viable Systems Model to
Developing Public Sector Foresight." Systemic Practice and Action
Research 22(4): 249.
Cravens, D. W., Piercy, N. & Baldauf, A., 2009. Management frameword
guiding strategic thinking in rapidly changing markets. Journal of
marketing management, Volume 25, pp. 31-49.
25 | P a g e

Driouchi, T., M. Leseure, et al. (2009). "A robustness framework for


monitoring real options
Dyson, R. G., J. Bryant, et al. (2007). The strategic development process.
Supporting strategy:
Frameworks, methods and models. F. O' Brien and R. G. DYSON.
Chichester, Wiley. Dyson,

Favoro, K., Romberger, T. & Meer, D., (2009). Five rules for retailing in a
recession. Harvard Business Review, pp. 64-72.
Ferraro, C. & Sands, S., (2010), Retailers' strategic responses to economic
downturn:insights from down under. International Journal of retail and
distribution management , 38(8), pp. 567
Franco, L., F. OBrien, et al. (2011). "Supporting strategy: Contributions
from OR, The Journal of the Operational Research Society (editorial)."
Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 815-816.
Grant, R. M. (2006). Contemporary strategy analysis (Fifth edition). Oxford,
Blackwell. Grinyer, P.
Jarzabkowski, P. and A. P. Spee (2009). "Strategy-as-practice: A review
and future directions for the field." International Journal of Management
Reviews 11(1): 69-95.
Johnson, G., K. Scholes, et al. (2012). Exploring corporate strategy
(Seventh edition). London, Prentice Hall.
Jones, B. & Temperley, J., 2011. Waitrose :an emporium for the middle
classes broadens its appeal. International Journal of management cases,
pp. 341-346.
Kaplan, R. S. and D. P. Norton (1992). "The Balanced Scorecard Measures That Drive Performance." Harvard Business Review 70(1): 71 79.
Kowalski, K., S. Stagl, et al. (2009). "Sustainable energy futures:
Methodological challenges in combining scenarios and participatory multicriteria analysis." European Journal of Operational Research 197(3): 1063.
Moreau, R., 2010. Private label and discounters shaping grocery retailing
in Europe. Euromonitor International, pp. 86-89.
Morrow, J., Hitt, D. & Holcomb, T., 2007. Creating value in the face of
declining performance - firm strategies and organizational recovery.
strategic management journal, Volume 28, pp. 271-283.
McGee, J., H. Thomas, et al. (2010). Strategy: Analysis and practice (2nd
edition). London, McGraw
Hill.
Meadows, M. and F. O'Brien (2007). Visioning: A process for strategic
development Supporting Strategy: Frameworks, methods and models. F.
O' Brien and R. Dyson. Chichester, Wiley: 27-54.
Montibeller, G. and A. Franco (2011), "Raising the bar: strategic
multi-criteria decision analysis." Journal of the Operational Research
Society 62(5): 855-867.Piercy, N., Cravens, D. & Lane , N., 2010. Thinking
26 | P a g e

strategically about pricing decisions. Journal of Business strategy, pp. 3848.


Porter, M., 1980. Competitive strategy:Techniques for analysing Industries
and competitors. In: New York: Free press.
Porter, M.,( 2008). The five competitive forces that shape strategy.
Harvard Business review, pp. 79-93.
Porter, M. E., (1980,1998). Competitive strategy:Techniques for analysing
Industries and competitors. Free Press, a division of Simon and Schuster.
Price, T., 2009. Prospering in uncertain times. Indust. and Comm.Tr,
Volume 41, pp. 75-79.
Quelch, J. & Jocz, K.,( 2009). How to market in a downturn. Harvard
business review, Volume 4, pp. 52-62.
Raisch, S. & Birkinshaw, (2008). Organisational ambidextirity, antecedents ,
outcomes
and
moderators. Journal of management , Volume 34, pp. 375-409.
Reeves, M. & Deimler, M., (2009). Strategies for winning in the current and
post recession
environment. Strategy and leadership, 37(6), pp. 10-17.
Rouleau, L. and J. Balogun (2011). "Middle managers, strategic
sensemaking and discursive competence." Journal of Management
Studies 48(5): 953-983.
Rouwette, E. (2011). "Facilitated modelling in strategy development:
Measuring the impact on communication, consensus and commitment."
Journal of the Operational Research Society 62(5): 879-887.
Rumelt , R., 2009. Strategy in a structural break. McKinsey quarterly,
Volume 1, pp. 35-42.
Stenfors, S., L. Tanner, et al. (2007). "Executive views concerning
decision support tools." European Journal of Operational Research 181:
929 - 938.
Tapinos, E., R. G. Dyson, et al. (2011). "Does the Balanced Scorecard make
a difference to the strategy development process?" The Journal of the
Operational Research Society 62(5): 888-899.
Trutnevyte, E., M. Stauffacher, et al. (2012). "Linking stakeholder visions
with resource allocation scenarios and multi-criteria assessment."
European Journal of Operational Research 219(3): 762.
Whittington, R. (2006). "Completing the practice turn in strategy." Organization
Studies 27(5): 613-634.
Wright, G., G. Cairns, et al. (2009). "Teaching scenario planning: Lessons
from practice in
academe and business." European Journal of Opera
27 | P a g e

28 | P a g e

Page 29 of 29

Anda mungkin juga menyukai