a. A critical introduction discussing the meaning and importance of strategy, sustainable (triple bottom line) value, and stakeholders (analysing 3-5 key stakeholders) in relation to your chosen organisation. Topic 1-3 1 What is strategy? 2 Who is sustainable strategy for? 3 What is sustaina

Programme: BA Business Leadership and Management Practice
Module Code: SM9659
Module Title: Strategy
Distributed on: 9 November 2021
Submission Time and Date: To be submitted by 10:00 am on Thu 17 February 2022
Word Limit: 3000 words +/- 10%
Weighting This coursework accounts for 100% of the total mark for this module
Submission of Assessment All assignments must be submitted via Turnitin
It is your responsibility to ensure that your assignment arrives before the submission deadline stated above. See the University policy on late submission of work (the relevant extract is set out below).
Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA): Please note if your assignment is submitted electronically it will be submitted online via Turnitin by the given deadline. You will find a Turnitin link on the module’s eLP site.
Instructions on Assessment:
How can your chosen organisation maintain and enhance the sustainable (triple bottom line) value it delivers to its stakeholders?
You are required to produce a report based on the following four tasks:
a. A critical introduction discussing the meaning and importance of strategy, sustainable (triple bottom line) value, and stakeholders (analysing 3-5 key stakeholders) in relation to your chosen organisation. Topic 1-3
1 What is strategy?
2 Who is sustainable strategy for?
3 What is sustainable stakeholder strategy?
(25 marks)
b. Critically evaluate the external environment of your organisation or strategic business unit (SBU), using a suitable strategic analysis framework(s) (e.g. PESTEL and/or Porter’s 5 Forces). (This may involve a brief evaluation of the framework itself, as well as an analysis of your organisation.) Summarise your findings by drawing attention to the key drivers for change.
Note: It is understood that the first year Global Business Environment and Functions module contains an assessment based on an external analysis using PESTEL. In this capstone third module we do not expect to see a simple re-hash, but a more thorough, deeper, well-evidenced analysis, with a far more critical discussion, which leads logically on to your recommendations.
Topic 4-5
4 What are the external opportunities and threats in the macro-environment?
5 What are the external opportunities and threats in the micro-environment?
(25 marks)
c. Critically evaluate the internal environment of your organisation or SBU, using a suitable strategic analysis framework(s) (i.e. Resources and Capabilities and/or Value Chain). (This may involve a brief evaluation of the framework itself, as well as an analysis of your organisation.) Summarise your findings by drawing attention to the key drivers of competitive advantage in your organisation. Topic 6-7
6 What are the internal strengths and weaknesses based on resources/capabilities?
7 What are the internal strengths and weaknesses based on where create sustainable value is created?
(25 marks)
d. Recommend and justify how sustainable value creation in your organisation or SBU may be sustained and enhanced for its stakeholders
Topic 8-12
8 How is sustainable purpose expressed?
9 How to differentiate sustainably?
10 How to grow (consolidate) sustainably?
11 How to prioritise amongst different areas of activity sustainably?
12 What does the strategy process look like?
(25 marks)
This is an individual assignment report that includes an analysis of strategic options and recommended actions. The report should have a length of 3,000 words +/- 10% (excluding appendices).
As a guide to your choice of organisation, it is expected that you will be able to draw upon and cite credible sources of information and literature both internal and external to the organisation- e.g. journal papers and quality newspapers as well as industry reports, company publications and website materials. The judicious use of supporting data and analysis in the assignment will be rewarded.
The theoretical strategic analysis frameworks should be used to assist you in the analysis and preparation of the report rather than a dominant feature of it or a focus of theory-based discussion. However, they should be used explicitly enough to demonstrate your ability to apply them, a ‘story’ is not enough! You need to show evidence of wider reading on the subject of strategic management by critically evaluating the advantages and limitations of the diagnostic tools you have used.
Appendices must only be used in support of the main text discussion and must be referenced properly.
Overall, assume that the assessors know very little about the organisation/SBU. You should write the assignment with the assumption that the reader is very new to your industry and situation. Describe the relevant background clearly but ensure you use the word limit wisely (if necessary, provide the business background in the appendices).
Late submission of work
Where coursework is submitted without approval, after the published hand-in deadline, the following penalties will apply.
For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment (i.e.100%) shall be deducted from the assessment mark.
For clarity: a late piece of work that would have scored 65%, 55% or 45% had it been handed in on time will be awarded 55%, 45% or 35% respectively as 10% of the total available marks will have been deducted.
The Penalty does not apply to Pass/Fail Modules, i.e. there will be no penalty for late submission if assessments on Pass/Fail are submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline.
Coursework submitted more than 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval will be regarded as not having been completed. A mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment and the module will be failed, irrespective of the overall module mark.
For clarity: if the original hand-in time on working day A is 12noon the 24 hour late submission allowance will end at 12noon on working day B.
These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis.
Word limits and penalties
If the assignment is within +10% of the stated word limit no penalty will apply.
The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment and the assignment cover sheet. The word count does not include:
• Title and Contents page • Reference list • Appendices • Appropriate tables, figures and illustrations
• Glossary • Bibliography • Quotes from interviews and focus groups.
Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARNA page 30 Section 3.4 this will be regarded as academic misconduct.
If the word limit of the full assignment exceeds the +10% limit, 10% of the mark provisionally awarded to the assignment will be deducted. For example: if the assignment is worth 70 marks but is above the word limit by more than 10%, a penalty of 7 marks will be imposed, giving a final mark of 63.
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices) and it must be made available within 24hours of them requesting it be submitted.
Note: For those assessments or partial assessments based on calculation, multiple choice etc., marks will be gained on an accumulative basis. In these cases, marks allocated to each section will be made clear.
Academic Misconduct
The Assessment Regulations for Northumbria Awards (ARNA) contain the Regulations and procedures applying to cheating, plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct.
The full policy is available at: http://www.northumbria.ac.uk/sd/central/ar/qualitysupport/asspolicies/
You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion and other forms of academic misconduct as referred to in the Academic Misconduct procedure of the assessment regulations are taken very seriously by Newcastle Business School. Assignments in which evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct is found may receive a mark of zero.
Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives
Knowledge & Understanding:
By the end of the module, you will be able to:
Critically analyse concepts and theories relating to the study of managing people in organisations at organisational, group and individual contexts (MLO 1)
Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:
By the end of the module, you will be able to:
Identify and propose interventions /solutions to resolve people management problems at individual, group and/or organisational levels (MLO2)
Assess a the relevance of theory for HR practice and apply it where appropriate to improve practice (MLO3)
Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity):
By the end of the module, you will be able to:
Demonstrate appreciation of suitable and ethical practice for inclusive approaches to managing diverse and resourceful humans in organisations (MLO4)

Module Specific Assessment Criteria
Grade 0-29%
Standard
Not Met 1 30-39%
Standard
Not Met 2 40 -49%
Meets Standard 1 50-59%
Meets Standard 2 60-69%
Meets Standard 3 70-79%
Exceeds Standard 1 80-89%
Exceeds Standard 2 Exemplary
90-100%
Strategy, sustainable value and stakeholders
(MLOs: 2, 3, 4) Very weak description of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Very little use of theory. Weak description of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Weak use of theory. Adequate analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. OK use of theory. Good analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Good use of theory. Very good analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Very good use of theory. Excellent critical analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Excellent, integrated use of theory. Outstanding critical analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Outstanding, integrated use of theory. Exemplary critical analysis and discussion of the meaning of strategy, the nature of sustainable strategy and the significant stakeholders in your chosen organisation. Outstanding, integrated use of theory.
Marks 0-7 8-9 10-12 13-14 15-17 18-19 20-22 23-25
External Analysis
(MLOs: 1, 2, 3) You have identified very few external factors, linked to a very weak discussion and very little use of theory. You have identified some external factors although these could have been discussed in significantly more detail. Brief theoretical discussion. You have identified adequate external factors, with appropriate discussion, drawing sensibly on theory. Good, thorough discussion of external factors, drawing well on theory. Very good, thorough discussion of external factors, drawing very well on theory. Excellent discussion of external factors supported by pertinent theoretical discussion and critical review Outstanding discussion of external factors supported by very pertinent theoretical discussion and very critical review Exemplary discussion of external factors supported by very pertinent theoretical discussion and very critical review
Marks 0-7 8-9 10-12 13-14 15-17 18-19 20-22 23-25
Internal Analysis
(MLOs: 1, 2, 3) You have identified very few internal factors, linked to a very weak discussion and very little use of theory. You have identified some internal factors although these could have been discussed in significantly more detail. Brief theoretical discussion. You have identified adequate internal factors, with appropriate discussion, drawing sensibly on theory. Good, thorough discussion of internal factors, drawing well on theory. Very good, thorough discussion of internal factors, drawing very well on theory. Excellent discussion of internal factors supported by pertinent theoretical discussion and critical review Outstanding discussion of internal factors supported by very pertinent theoretical discussion and very critical review Exemplary discussion of internal factors supported by very pertinent theoretical discussion and very critical review
Marks 0-7 8-9 10-12 13-14 15-17 18-19 20-22 23-25
Recommendations for adding sustainable value
(MLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4) You have identified very few recommendations, which are very brief and under-developed, very poorly grounded in the internal and external analysis, and not clearly linked to stakeholder needs. You have identified few recommendations, which are brief and under-developed, poorly grounded in the internal and external analysis, and only weakly linked to stakeholder needs. You have identified adequate recommendations, which are grounded in the internal and external analysis, linked to stakeholder needs and are supported by theory. A good set of recommendations, which are well grounded in the internal and external analysis, clearly linked to stakeholder needs and are well supported by theory. A very good set of recommendations, which are very well grounded in the internal and external analysis, very clearly linked to stakeholder needs and are very well supported by theory. A thorough set of recommendations that emerge seamlessly from your findings and are well supported by previous theory. A thought-provoking set of recommendations that emerge seamlessly from your findings and are critically discussed in relation to previous literature. A very thought-provoking set of recommendations that emerge seamlessly from your findings and are critically discussed in relation to previous literature.
Marks 0-7 8-9 10-12 13-14 15-17 18-19 20-22 23-25