|
Introduction (LO1) (10%)
This should include evidence of:
- Clear and critical aims and objectives
- Introduction of the chosen organisation relevant to the industry.
- Background information on the theory and process of strategy and its application.
|
No evidence of an aim and objectives.
No introduction to your chosen organisation. No background information on the theory and process of strategy and its application given.
|
Unclear and not critical aim and objectives.
Unclear introduction to your chosen organisation. Insufficient background information on the theory and process of strategy and its application is given.
|
Sufficient aim and objectives. Some clarity but not critical.
Basic introduction to your organisation which is relevant to the industry. Some background information on the theory and process of strategy and its application is given.
|
Good and clear aims and objectives. More criticality is needed.
Good introduction to your organisation which is relevant to the industry. Attempt of providing background information on the theory and process of strategy and its application given.
|
Very good, clear and critical aims and objectives.
A very good introduction to your organisation which shows its relevance to the industry. You show a very good understanding on the theory and process of strategy and its application and provide background information on these.
|
Excellent, very clear and critical aim and objectives.
A thorough and extremely well-thought-through introduction to your chosen organisation. Relevance to the industry is made very clear. An excellent understanding on the theory and process of strategy and its application and you present thorough background research.
|
Outstanding and extremely clear and critical aims and objectives.
An outstanding and extremely well thought through and researched introduction to your chosen organisation. Relevance to the industry is made very clear. You also show an in-depth and flawless understanding of the theory and process of strategy and its application. This is supported by very thorough background research.
|
|
Critical Internal and External Analysis (LO2) (30%)
This should include evidence of:
- proposing a mission and vision for the organisation (max. 35 words)
- collecting and applying strategic information to the chosen organisation (including PEST and NOISE Analysis, Scenario Planning, Competitor Analysis, etc.)
|
No attempt to state a mission and vision.
Unsuccessful collection and application of strategic information to the chosen organisation.
|
Insufficient attempt to state a mission and a vision.
The collection and application of strategic information to the chosen organisation are not clear or incorrect.
|
Satisfactory attempt to state a mission and a vision. Some collection and application of strategic information to the chosen organisation. However, this lacks depth and clarity.
|
Good attempt at stating a mission and a vision. Some good collection and application of the strategic information to the chosen organisation. You show an understanding of the different internal and external tools used.
|
A very good attempt to state a mission and vision within the given word limit. There is very good evidence of collecting and applying strategic information to the chosen organisation. You show a detailed understanding of the different internal and external tools used.
|
An excellent attempt to state a mission and a vision within the given word limit.
Excellent and in-depth collection and application of strategic information to the chosen organisation. This also shows a thorough and critical understanding of the different internal and external tools used.
|
An outstanding attempt to state a mission and a vision within the given word limit.
Exceptional and in-depth collection and critical application of strategic information to the chosen organisation. This also shows a full and critical understanding of the different internal and external tools used.
|
|
Critical Discussion of Alternative Strategic Options (LO3) (20%)
This should include evidence of:
- applying and critically analysing the Ansoff Matrix and an alternative strategic direction and choice
- analysing the challenges it faces.
|
No evidence of the discussion of alternative strategic options or the challenges faced by your chosen organisation.
|
An insufficient discussion of alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation faces. Ansoff Matrix and an alternative strategic direction only marginally considered.
|
Satisfactory discussion of alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation faces. Ansoff Matrix as well as an alternative strategic direction somewhat discussed but overall, the discussion lacks criticality.
|
Evidence of good discussion of alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation faces. Good and some critical discussion of the Ansoff Matrix and an alternative strategic direction. Even though some critical discussion is evident this could have been in more depth.
|
Thorough evidence of critical discussion of the alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation is facing. Ansoff Matrix and an alternative strategic direction were considered and discussed with very good criticality. Some areas could have been with more discussion.
|
An excellent and critical discussion of the alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation is facing. Excellent research is evident and the Ansoff Matrix and an alternative direction were thoroughly considered and discussed in great depth.
|
An outstanding and critical discussion of the alternative strategic options and the challenges the organisation is facing. Exceptional research is evident and the Ansoff Matrix and an alternative direction were thoroughly considered and discussed in great depth.
|
|
Critical Conclusion and Recommendations (10%)
This should include evidence of:
- restating the aim and objectives
- summarising the key findings
- critical recommendations that link to the three time periods (1, 3 and 5 years)
|
The report is lacking a critical conclusion that restates the aim and objectives and summarises the key points of the report.
No evidence of recommendations that link to the three time periods.
|
Insufficient evidence of a critical conclusion and recommendations. You do not really restate your aim and objectives and your key points are very basic. No clear link to the three time periods in your recommendations.
|
Some basic evidence of a conclusion and recommendations but it should have been more critical. You somewhat restate your aim and objectives. Some key points of the report are summarised, and you present some basic links to the three time periods in your recommendations.
|
You present a good conclusion that restates your aim and objectives. A good summary of the key points made throughout your report. Overall, the conclusion could have been more critical. You consider the three time periods in your recommendations.
|
You present a very good conclusion that restates your aim and objectives and shows some criticality. Very good summary of the key points made throughout your report. Overall, the conclusion could have been slightly more critical. You consider the three time periods in your recommendations.
|
Your conclusion and recommendations are excellently written. The conclusion clearly restates your aim and objectives. You show critical considerations when summarising your key points. Excellent consideration of the three time periods in your recommendations.
|
You present an exceptional conclusion and set of recommendations. Critical discussion of the key points made and you show a deep understanding of the three time periods in your recommendations showing detailed considerations of them.
|
|
Use and application of relevant academic theory and literature. (20%)
This should include evidence of:
- the use of relevant and up-to-date sources (e.g., journal articles, books, annual reports, industry reports etc.) to back up arguments
- the use of a range of reliable sources
- the use of appropriate citations throughout the text in the Harvard Style
|
No application of relevant academic theory and literature to back up your arguments. You do not use reliable sources or use appropriate citations throughout your work.
|
Marginal use of some academic theory and literature to back up your arguments. Not all are relevant, reliable or up-to-date. Very few citations are evident within your work and you do not use the Harvard Style.
|
Use some academic theory and literature to back up your arguments. Some relevance is evident and some of the sources are reliable and up-to-date. Satisfactory citations within your work but not always correct.
|
Good use of academic theory and literature to back up your arguments. The majority is relevant and from reliable sources. Good use of up-to-date research. Good attempt to use in-text citations even though some of them need looking at for the correct referencing style.
|
Very good use of academic theory and literature to back up your arguments. The literature is relevant and mainly from reliable sources. Very good use of up-to-date research and your report shows extensive use of in-text citations. Some of them need checking for referencing style.
|
You show an excellent use of academic theory and the use of literature to back up your arguments thoroughly. The literature used is relevant and up-to-date research has been applied. Your work shows excellent in-text citations in the correct referencing style.
|
Outstanding use of academic theory and the use of literature to back up your arguments in great depth. The literature used is relevant and up-to-date research has been extremely well applied. Your work shows an outstanding use of in-text citations in the correct referencing style.
|
|
Overall Presentation (10%)
This should include evidence of:
- correct formatting according to the guidelines including an appropriate title and numbered headings and sub-headings
- a well-written assignment that has a logical flow and is within the word count (2000 words +/- 10%)
- a table of contents, reference list and if necessary, appendices
|
No use of the correct formatting according to the guidelines. No evidence of an appropriate title or numbered headings and sub-headings.
There is no flow to the work and proofreading is recommended.
Not within the word count and the work lacks a table of contents and correctly formatted reference list.
|
Some insufficient attempts to format the work. The title is not clear and there is a lack of numbered headings as needed for a report. The work does not have a clear flow and proofreading the work is recommended. Not within the word count and there is no clearly laid out table of contents or correct reference list.
|
You attempt to format your work according to the guidelines, but this could be much neater and more thorough. Basic attempt to present a title for the work. Headings evident.
There is a satisfactory flow to the work but it requires some proofreading. Within the word count a satisfactory attempt to present a table of contents and reference list is evident.
|
Your work is well formatted according to the guidelines. Some areas need to be tidied up. Good attempt to present a title for the work and you have clear headings. Your work shows a good flow with few spelling or grammatical mistakes. You are within the word count and there is evidence of a good attempt to present a table of contents and a reference list. A few stylistic issues are evident that can easily be rectified.
|
Your work is very well formatted according to the guidelines. Some areas need to be tidied up. Very good attempt to present a title for the work and you have clear and numbered headings. Your work shows a very good and logical flow with few spelling or grammatical mistakes. You are within the word count and there is evidence of a very good table of contents and a reference list. Some stylistic issues are evident that can easily be rectified.
|
This is an excellently formatted piece of work that adheres to the guidelines. A clear and fitting title was chosen for the work and the headings are numbered clearly. Your work has an excellent and logical flow, which shows no spelling or grammatical mistakes. You are within the word count. The work presents a tidy and extremely well laid out table of contents and an extensive reference list.
|
This is an outstandingly formatted piece of work that adheres to the guidelines. A clear and fitting title was chosen for the work and the headings are numbered clearly. There is an extremely well-developed and logical flow to your work, which shows no spelling errors or grammatical mistakes. You are within the word count. The work presents a tidy and outstanding table of contents and an extensive reference list.
|
