| Module Code: | SM0495 September 2012 Cohort | ||
| Module Title: | Business Environment and Strategic Management | ||
| Distributed on: | w/c |
Hand in Date: |
TBC |
Part A (75% weighting)
Write a management report on Honda Motors. The case study “Reconciling managerial dichotomies at Honda Motors”, in your core textbook De Wit & Meyer (2010) “Strategy: Process, Content, Context”, 4th edition, pp.657-672 acts as an initial starting point to introduce you to the case study organisation. Please note that you are expected to carry out your own, additional research. The report should not exceed 3,000 words (excluding references and appendices) and should have the following structure with each section numbered exactly as shown below:
| Section/Title | Details/Guidance |
| Cover Page | Include module code, student name, ID and word count for the main text. Do not add pictures – keep the page clear and simple. |
| Contents | Include page numbers. |
| 1. Introduction
(10 marks) |
Company background. As a minimum, this should include its main products/services, the industry is in, its main markets, main competitors and recent financial data. Avoid cutting and pasting from the company’s website. Explicitly select the SBU unit of analysis. |
| 2. Analysis of the current business environment affecting the industry
(35 marks) |
Focus on the industry that is relevant to the company’s core business and respective geographical focus. Look at the macro-environment and micro-environment (including customers and competitors). Identify important market trends. Use analytical tools such as PESTLE and Five Forces as appropriate and additional frameworks/theory where they add value to your analysis. This section MUST conclude with the main opportunities and threats affecting the industry derived from the above analysis. |
| 3. Analysis of the company’s strategic capabilities
(35 marks) |
You need to look at things such as value-adding activities, resources (tangible, intangible, threshold and unique). Use tools from the RBV and apply them correctly. Does the company currently have any competitive advantages? Discuss capability building required for competitive survival. In the future? This section MUST conclude with the main strengths and weaknesses of the company derived from the above analysis. |
| 4. Evaluation of possible future strategies for the company
(20 marks) |
What are the key strategic issues deriving from your analysis?
Identify potential future strategies (options). Which one would you recommend and why? Justify your recommendations and show how they address the key issues and could assist the company to achieve competitive survival. |
| 5. Conclusion | Maximum 100 words. Would you recommend a friend to invest in this company? Why? |
| References | All sources must be cited and referenced in Harvard style. |
| Appendices | Maximum five pages – use for supporting data. Only include relevant data that add value and are relevant to the report. |
Note 1: There are limits to the data you can reasonably be expected to collect about the company and its environment so your analysis will inevitably have gaps. Don’t worry about this – do the best you can with the data that you can find.
Note 2: Marks will be deducted for work that is presented poorly and does not follow the above structure.
Submission of Assignment:
The assignment should be word-processed in Times Roman 12pt, 1½ spacing, stapled at the top-left corner and in a clear plastic folder (the type that has a set of holes down one side). Pages should be numbered.
The assignment must be submitted to the Postgraduate Programme Office. Each assignment must be accompanied by an Assessed Work Form which must be completed in full. The assignment will not be accepted by the Postgraduate Programme Office unless the form is completed correctly.
***An electronic version of your assignment should be uploaded to Blackboard***
The marked assignments will be returned to you and your mark will be returned on the Assessed Work Form via the Postgraduate Programme Office.
Referencing in your work:
The Harvard method of referring to publications and of arranging references uses the author’s name and the date of the publication. References are listed at the end of the text in alphabetical order by author’s name. The general format of a journal reference is shown below:
Smith, J. (1999) How to succeed! Journal of Entrepreneurs, 1(2), p. 34-56
Author/s name and initials are listed first, followed by year of publication in brackets. Then there is the title of article and the journal where article appears, which is underlined or in italics. Finally, state the volume and issue Number (in brackets) along with the pages where article can be located.
For further information, including advice on how to cite information from the web, access the following website which addresses frequently asked questions in relation to the Harvard referencing system.
Plagiarism and other forms of cheating:
Your attention is drawn to the University’s stated position on plagiarism. THE WORK OF OTHERS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE ASSIGNMENT MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO ITS SOURCE (a full bibliography and a list of references must be submitted).
Although students may discuss the assignment with each other, the submitted assignments must be each student’s individual work. If the markers find assignments that are very similar (even single sections) the students may face an accusation of collusion.
Word limits and penalties for assignments
If the assignment is within +10% of the stated word limit no penalty will apply. However, if the word limit exceeds the +10% limit, 10% of the mark provisionally awarded to the assignment will be deducted. For example: if the assignment is worth 70% but is above the word limit by more than 10%, a penalty of 7% will be imposed, giving a final mark of 63%.
Instructions on Assessment:
(Some basic instruction if required here)
Important note about ARNA regulations
The regulations specify that students must complete every assessment component contributing to the modules on their programme. This applies to all forms of assessment as defined in the module descriptor. Please note that:
· if any assessment component is not completed, students will be failed in the module even if the module pass mark has been achieved;
· if the requirements for referral specified in section 5 of ARNA1 are met, a resit opportunity will be given;
· if unable to complete an assessment component because of extenuating circumstances, students should follow the procedure described in the Student Guide to Extenuating Circumstances1.
This change was approved by Academic Board on 12 October 2009 in consultation with the Students’ Union. Students should consult their Programme Leader or Guidance Tutor if they have any queries. Independent advice and support is also available from the Students’ Union Advice & Representation Centre ( [email protected] ) or from a student adviser in Student Services.
1ARNA and the Student Guide to Extenuating Circumstances Affecting Assessed Work are available from
Word limits and penalties for assignments
If the assignment is within +10% of the stated word limit no penalty will apply. However, if the word limit exceeds the +10% limit, 10% of the mark provisionally awarded to the assignment will be deducted. For example: if the assignment is worth 70% but is above the word limit by more than 10%, a penalty of 7% will be imposed, giving a final mark of 63%.
Time limits and penalties for presentations
The time allocated for the presentation must be adhered to. At the end of this time, the presentation will be stopped and will be marked based on what has been delivered within the time limit.
Submission of Assessment:
All assignments must be submitted via the Postgraduate Programme Office. Each assignment must be accompanied by an Assessed Work Form which must be completed in full. The assignment will not be accepted by the Postgraduate Programme Office unless the form is completed correctly.
Marked assignments will be returned to students. It is advisable to retain a copy of your assignment for you own records. Your mark will be returned on the Assessed Work Form via the Postgraduate Programme Office.
Referencing your work
The Harvard method of referring to publications and of arranging references uses the author’s name and the date of the publication. References are listed at the end of the text in alphabetical order by author’s name. The general format of a journal reference is shown below:
Smith, J. (1999) ‘How to succeed!’, Journal of Entrepreneurs, 1 (2),pp.34-56
Author/s name and initials are listed first, followed by year of publication in brackets. Then there is the title of article and the journal where article appears, which is in italics. Finally, state the volume and issue Number (in brackets) along with the pages where article can be located.
For further information, including advice on how to cite information from the web, access the Library website:
www.northumbria.ac.uk/helpguides
which addresses frequently asked questions in relation to the Harvard referencing system.
Plagiarism and Cheating
Your attention is drawn to the University’s stated position on plagiarism. THE WORK OF OTHERS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE ASSIGNMENT MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO ITS SOURCE (a full bibliography and a list of references must be submitted).
Please note that this is intended to be an individual piece of work. Action will be taken where a student is suspected of having cheated or engaged in any dishonest practice. Students are referred to the University regulations on plagiarism and other forms of academic irregularity. Students must not copy or collude with one another or present any information that they themselves have not generated.
(Some basic instruction if required here)
Assessment Criteria (NBS)
The first column indicates the general assessment criteria used within NBS the second column indicates the specific criteria used when marking your assessment.
| Mark Range | Grade | Generic Assessment Criteria | Module Assessment Criteria |
| 70-100
|
Distinction | Excellent work providing evidence to a very high level of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. All learning outcomes met, many at high level. Marks at the high end of this range indicate outstanding work where all learning outcomes are met at a high level. Excellent in all or most of: use of primary sources of literature from a range of perspectives; development of analysis and structure of argument; critical evaluation and creative use of theory, research methods and findings; presentation of information to the intended audience. | An excellent report which is easy to read and well-laid out. A wide range of appropriate data has been presented. The student has demonstrated mastery of the analytical tools and understanding of relevant theory and its limitations. The level of critical thinking is very good and the student has drawn well-supported conclusions. The report is as good as or better than a professional consultant’s report on the company. The student has made transparent recommendations that address the key issues derived from the strategic analysis and present a feasible solution. |
| 60-69
|
Commendation | Commendable work providing evidence to a high level of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. All learning outcomes met, many are more than satisfied. Good in all or most of: use of up-to-date material from a variety of sources; development of analysis and structure of argument; critical evaluation of relevant theory, research methods and findings to the problem in question; presentation of information to the intended audience. | The report is very good and easy to read. All the key points are there with a good level of discussion. A good range of data has been presented. There is clear ability to use appropriate tools to produce a clear analysis of selected data; good critical thinking to evaluate the business and its leadership. |
| 55-59 | Pass | Satisfactory work providing evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. All learning outcomes are met. Satisfactory in all or most of: use of relevant material from a variety of sources; development of analysis and structure of argument; evaluation of theory; application of relevant theory, research methods and findings to the problem in question; presentation of information to the intended audience. | The quality of presentation is reasonable and fairly easy to follow. The student has been selective in choosing key data to discuss. The student shows sound understanding of how to analyse data and draw useful conclusions through evaluation and critical thinking. In parts, the report may lack analytical depth and rigour. |
| 50-54 | Pass
|
Adequate work providing evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7 but only at a bare pass level. All learning outcomes are met (or nearly met and balanced by strengths elsewhere). Adequate in all of (or most of, with balancing strength elsewhere): use of relevant material; development of analysis and structure of argument; evaluation of theory; application of relevant theory, research methods and findings to the problem in question; presentation of information to the intended audience. | The report is adequate, but there are likely to be weaknesses in presentation and writing. A basic amount of data has been gathered and some appropriate analysis has been carried out. However, the depth of the discussion is somewhat limited and there is very little critical thinking. Little evidence of further reading beyond core textbooks and insufficient discussion and application of theory. |
| 40-49 | Fail | Work is not acceptable in providing evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. However a majority of the learning outcomes are met and others are nearly satisfied. Adequate in most but not all of the following aspects : use of relevant material; development of analysis and structure of argument; evaluation of theory; application of relevant theory, research methods and findings to the problem in question; presentation of information to the intended audience. | Although reasonable understanding is shown, there are errors and the analysis is superficial. Very few useful conclusions are drawn from the report. The standard of presentation and writing is likely to be less than would be expected for a professional piece of work. |
| 1-39 | Fail | Work is not acceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. Few of the learning outcomes are met. Inadequate in some of the following aspects or seriously inadequate in at least one: use of relevant material; development of analysis and structure of argument; evaluation of theory; application of relevant theory, research methods and findings to the problem in question; presentation of information to the intended audience. | The report has serious weaknesses. The student has failed to demonstrate that he/she is able to gather appropriate data and analyse it in a useful way. The student has also failed to demonstrate independent study as required for the module. |
| 0 | Fail | Work not submitted OR Work giving evidence of serious academic misconduct (subject to regulations in ARNA Appendix 1) OR Work showing no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to level 7. None of the learning outcomes are met. |
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.
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment and it must be made available within 24 hours of them requesting it be submitted.