ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT501 – Business Environment
Assessment Internal and External Stakeholder Analysis
Individual/Group Individual
Length Up to 2,500 words
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
c. Analyse and synthesise the fundamentals of business practices in the contemporary environment.
d. Construct and justify a professional value proposition as a business practitioner.
Submission 12 Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT, Sunday end of Module 5.2 (Week 10)
6 Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT, Sunday, end of Module 5.2 (Week 5)
Weighting 50%
Total Marks 100
Assessment Task
Critically analyse stakeholder theory in a real-life business or a project setting, with specific emphasis on relevant internal and external environment factors. In doing so, you are required to employ a stakeholder matrix and mapping techniques to determine the extent of stakeholder influence and interest.
Context
Stakeholder analysis is a technique for identifying stakeholders and analysing their roles in a given business or project scenario. The aim of the analysis is to map out and manage the stakeholders’ level of influence and degree of interest. Stakeholder analysis can also be used to assess the relationships between different stakeholders, as well as the issues they care about in the internal and external business environments.
Internal stakeholders are individuals or groups who are directly involved in a business/project and includes owners, board members, managers, employees, and investors. External stakeholders, such as customers, suppliers, competitors, society and government are stakeholders who are indirectly impacted and influenced by the business or project activities. Understanding both internal and external stakeholders of a business/project is important as it helps to:
• engage and enhance communication with relevant stakeholders
• reduce/prevent/manage risks, and identify opportunities
• improve internal stakeholder commitment, and
• improve business reputation amongst external stakeholders.
Instructions
1. Selection of the business or a project scenario
You are required to select a verifiable real-life business organisation or a specific business project in an industry related to your course of study/area of specialisation (e.g., MGPM, MEM, MBA, MBIS, GCBA).
The chosen business/project can be one that you have worked for or would like to work for in the future. Please note that the chosen business/project MUST be approved by your Learning Facilitator before it can be used in your Assessment 2 Discussion Forum activities, and Assessment 2 Report.
2. Assessment 2 Discussion Forum activity
• As a crucial aspect of Assessment 2 report, you are REQUIRED to complete the following discussion forum learning activities in Modules 3.1, 3.2, 4.1 and 4.2:
o Module 3.1 Learning Activity 1 Assessment 2 Discussion Forum Topic 1 o Module 3.2 Learning Activity 1 Assessment 2 Discussion Forum Topic 2 o Module 4.1 Learning Activity 1 Assessment 2 Discussion Forum Topic 3 o Module 4.2 Learning Activity 1 Assessment 2 Discussion Forum Topic 4
• Each of these learning activities requires you to address a given topic as it relates to your chosen business organisation or project, and subsequently post your responses in relevant discussion forums. In addition, on each Discussion Forum topic, you are also required to comment on the response posted by one of your peers in a dissimilar industry and business/project.
• It is very important to NOTE that completion of these four discussion forum activities will help you to build up information and resources required for your Assessment 2 Report (stakeholder analysis).
• Please refer to Modules 3.1, 3.2, 4.1 and 4.2 Learning Activities sections for more information about completing these learning activities. Please NOTE that your contributions to the Assessment 2 Discussion Forum learning activities will be graded as part of your Assessment 2 Report (see assessment 2 rubric for more details).
3. Based on the selected business organisation or project, you are required to write an up to 2500-word report on its internal and external stakeholder analysis.
Please note that the business or the project selected for Assessment 2 Discussion Forum Topics (1-4) must be the same as the business/project selected for the stakeholder analysis report. Failure to adhere to this requirement may result to a zero grade in Assessment 2.
4. The stakeholder analysis report should address the following points:
• Identify and analyse the functional areas of the business/project.
• Scan the macroeconomy for recent developments and comment on the future economic outlook of the business. Based on verifiable evidence, discussion MUST include the current macroeconomic environment, industry outlook and competition landscape.
• Identify the important internal and external stakeholders, and comment on their interests and level of engagement in the business/project.
• Create a stakeholder matrix, and corresponding stakeholder mappings.
• From the discussion forums, choose a peer’s contribution, which MUST be in an unrelated industry and business/project to yours. Then, compare your industry and business/project against that of your chosen peer’s.
NOTE: if your assessment is on a project, it MUST be compared against another project in an unrelated industry.
• You are required to support your observations, statements and claims with relevant theoretical and conceptual frameworks, including evidence from credible sources.
• Note: PESTEL and Porter’s 5 Forces are good tools to help you identify most of the external stakeholders.
5. Structure and format of the report
Your individual stakeholder analysis should follow standard report structure and include the following:
• Cover page: You MUST use the formal Torrens University coversheet.
• Executive Summary: Provide a concise summary of the report in bullet points.
• Introduction: The aim of the report, and background information about the selected business/project.
• Main body: o Identify the functional areas of the business/project. o Present the macroeconomic scenario and outlook. o Identify internal and external stakeholders, and their roles. o Identify the nature and degree of main stakeholders’ interests, and implications of conflicting interests.
o Identify the level of the main stakeholders’ influence. o Create a stakeholder matrix, and corresponding stakeholder mappings.
o From the discussion forums, choose a peer’s contribution, which MUST be in a dissimilar industry and business/project to yours. Against your peer’s:
- Compare your industry and business/project operations; analyse the competition landscape, and
- Identify the main points of stakeholder dissimilarities, and analyse the differences in their interests and influences.
• Conclusion: summarise the aim and findings of the report. There should not be any new information that was not captured in the introduction and main body in the conclusion
• References
• Appendices
You are REQUIRED to include the responses of the Discussion Forum activities (i.e., your responses, and critique of your peer’s responses) as Appendix. (Note: You can copy/screenshot and paste your Discussion Forum activities in the appendices).
Referencing
Please review and provide a minimum of 15 reference sources — ten (10) academic (textbooks and peer-reviewed journal articles) and five (5) other (newspaper articles, business/trade publications, and substantiated website publications) sources.
Please note that references to ‘Wikipedia’ or similar unsubstantiated sources are not acceptable.
Use APA (7th ed.) referencing style for both in-text citations and reference listing. Please see more information on referencing in the Academic Skills webpage.
Submission Instructions
Submit your Internal and External Stakeholder Analysis report via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu in MGT501 Business Environment. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity Declaration
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students MUST also keep a copy of all submitted materials and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Rubric
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard)
0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Knowledge and understanding
Understands theories and concepts relevant to the stakeholder analysis
Percentage for this criterion – 30% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge.
Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Knowledge or understanding of the concepts and theory. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the concepts and theory. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Highly developed understanding of the concepts and theory. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
A sophisticated understanding of the theory. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Contribution to the discussion forum
Provides thoughtful and relevant contributions to discussion topics and activities.
Percentage for this
criterion – 20%
Never posted any messages or rarely posts with occasional activity.
Demonstrates little/limited understanding of the topics. Entries are simple/short and are mostly irrelevant to the events.
Lacks insight, depth, or is superficial. Does not express opinion clearly.
Demonstrates a basic understanding of the topics. Entries are typically short, provide some insight/depth, and are connected to the events, topic, or activity.
May contain some irrelevant material.
Some personal opinion is expressed and is generally relevant to the task.
Demonstrates a good understanding of the discussion topics. Insightful entries with depth are connected to the events, topic, or activity, and related to the task.
Personal opinion is expressed in an appropriate style.
Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the discussion topics. Insightful entries connected to the events, topic, or activity. Relates events, learning activities, and processes to the purpose of the activity and outcomes.
Personal opinion is expressed in an appropriate style and is clearly related to the topic, activity, or process. Provides links to
supporting material.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
Demonstrates a clear understanding of the practical applications and implications of relevant theories and concepts.
Percentage for this
criterion – 30%
Limited synthesis and analysis. Limited application based upon analysis. Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application. Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and/or independently developed models and justified recommendations
linked to analysis/synthesis. Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and/or independently developed models.
Recommendations are
clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis, applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Use of academic and
discipline conventions
Meets the requirements outlined in the assignment brief.
Well-structured report
with clear flow of ideas
Appropriate use of credible resources. Correct citation of key resources using APA referencing
Percentage for this criterion – 20% Poorly written. Does not adhere to the assignment brief.
Difficult to understand for audience; no logical/clear structure; poor flow of ideas. Argument lacks supporting evidence. Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Inconsistent and inadequate use of good quality, credible, and relevant resources to support and develop Written according to the academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Little use of in-text referencing, or inadequate Written according to the academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are well presented, with a mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Good use of in-text referencing and appropriate number of references used and listed in the reference list.
Minor errors in using the APA style.
Well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are very well presented. The presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
Very good use of in-text referencing. All in-text references match with references listed.
No mistakes in using the APA style.
Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Engages and sustains the audience’s interest in the topic.
Excellent and meticulous use of in-text referencing. All intext references match the references listed in the
ideas.
No use of in-text references, or no reference list. Many mistakes in using the APA style. references consulted and added to references. Some mistakes in using APA style.
reference list.
No mistakes in using the APA style.