HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2019
Unit Code HI6006
Unit Title Competitive Strategy
Assessment Type Individual Assignment
Assessment Title Essay – Key Strategy Development Tools
Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) Students are required to write a Comprehensive discussion of any four of the strategy models, with practical application to current business examples
Weight 20% of the total assessments
Total Marks 20
Word limit Not more than 1200 words
Due Date Week 5
Submission Guidelines • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
Page 2 of 3
Assignment 1 Specifications
Purpose:
This assignment aims at ensuring that students have familiarised themselves with the foundational strategy development models and are able to relate them to current practical business examples.
.
Details
Write an essay explaining what the main strategy development tools are and how they are used in business. Your essay must contain a comprehensive discussion of 4 of the following: PESTEL, Five Forces, Resource-Based View, PROFIT, Input/Output, SWOT Analysis (you may include Cross Impact Analysis), Generic Strategies, Ansoff, Ghemawat, with reference to academic journals and practical examples from industry.
In this essay, sub-headings are permitted.
Be sure to use paragraphing.
Be sure to reference your sources in-text and provide a list of references at the end in Harvard style.
Your final submission is due Friday of week 5 at midnight.
Assignment Structure
One page for your explanation of each model, including the example.
Thus 4 pages for 4 models.
Add a cover page at the front.
Add a Reference List at the end.
Page 3 of 3
Marking Rubric
Excellent 4 Very Good
3.5 Good
3 Satisfactory 2 Unsatisfactory
1 or 0
Strategy Model 1
4 marks The model is well-understood and
comprehensively explained The model is understood and wellexplained The model is understood and explained The model is somewhat
understood and an
attempt has
been made to explain it The model appears to be mis-
understood and
the attempt to explain it is incorrect
Strategy Model 2
4 marks
The model is well-understood and
comprehensively explained The model is understood and wellexplained The model is understood and explained The model is somewhat understood and an attempt has been made to
explain it The model appears to be mis- understood and the attempt to explain it is incorrect
Strategy Model 3
4 marks The model is well-understood and
comprehensively explained The model is understood and wellexplained The model is understood and explained The model is somewhat understood and an attempt has been made to
explain it The model appears to be mis- understood and the attempt to explain it is incorrect
Strategy Model 4
4 marks The model is well-understood and
comprehensively explained The model is understood and wellexplained The model is understood and explained The model is somewhat understood and an attempt has been made to
explain it The model appears to be mis- understood and the attempt to explain it is incorrect
Academic
Referencing and
Practical Examples
4 marks Referencing is correct and
complete in all respects.
Examples are current, relevant, well-applied. Referencing is correct and complete.
Examples are current,
relevant, applied Referencing is mostly correct and complete.
Examples are mostly
current,
relevant, applied Referencing is somewhat
correct though possibly
incomplete.
Examples are somewhat current,
relevant, applied Referencing is not correct, somewhat incomplete.
Examples are not current, or not
relevant, or
incorrectly applied
Total
20 marks
Comments Mark Awarded