Refer to attached assignment brief
Refer to Attached assignment brief. Company to be choose = Etsy.
international businessStrategic ManagementLeadership
SM9636 Assignment Brief
Programme: Various – this is a Core Level 6 Module.
Module Code: SM9636
Module Title: Strategic Management for Sustainable Leadership
Distributed on: TBD
Submission Time
and Date: To be submitted by TBD
Word Limit: 3000 words (+/- 10%) i.e. within the range 2700 – 3300 words
Weighting This coursework accounts for 100% of the total mark for this module
Submission of
Assessment
Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA): Please note your assignment is
submitted electronically. It will be submitted online (via Blackboard/TurnItIn) by the
given deadline. You will find a Submission Folder on the module’s eLP site.
It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that the assignment arrives before the
submission deadline stated above. See the University policy on late submission of
work.
The Assignment Task:
You MUST choose one company from the official list of companies provided on your eLP for this semester.
Explain how successful you think that company is, and discuss the strategic reasons behind that success.
Your explanation will include analysis of the contribution made by the leadership of the company, and will go
on to suggest strategies and/or actions for ensuring future success in a sustainable manner.
You should read the Guidance on pages 2-4 and the Marking Rubric on pages 7-8 of this brief to understand
how you should approach the assignment and how marks will be allocated.
Further guidance, including examples of marker feedback (shown in Lecture 8) and Revision Audio-Visual
Presentations will appear on the eLP.
Format for Submission:
• The assignment should be written in Arial, 11pt, left-justified, 1½ spacing.
• DO NOT put Your Name (or any Tutor’s Name) anywhere on your assignment.
Every page should be numbered (in header or footer) and show your student ID.
• DESIRABLE – Please leave approximately 5cm of ‘white space’ at the end of each section. This is the
space for your marker to write feedback comments about the preceding section. Please note that we
may not use all of the 5cm – it depends what type of feedback we think is needed for each answer. If
you do not leave space; we will be forced to leave a marker icon, and list the feedback comments at the
end of the document.
All academic and other sources must be cited and included ONCE in a single reference list at the end of
the document. Do not cite Northumbria Lectures, Seminars or Workshops.
• The VRIN Summary Table (Barney, 1991) is usually shown in journals and textbooks with ticks and
crosses. We require you to use the letter “Y” for “Yes” and the letter “N” for “No” (please do not use a font
that includes ticks or crosses as they are not visible in the marking software and just appear as location
boxes).
SM9636 Assessment Brief
SM9636 Assignment Brief
Assessment Guidance
Full Assessment Guidance will be given in Lecture L08 (please make sure that you attend).
The Module eLP will also provide a download link to “SM9636 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)”. This is
an evolving Word Document containing answers to the most common student questions regarding a Core
Level 6 Assessment in Business Strategy. Please consult this in the first instance. Only if the question is not
answered there, should you email the Module Tutor with your question. If your question is new it will be
answered and added to the document to benefit other students.
We will provide you with an official list of companies for your semester on this module (it will be released in
the fourth week of the semester). You must select one of the companies on the official list for your
assignment. No other companies will be allowed. Using any company that is not on the official list will result
in zero marks.
You will create a written strategic analysis (structure outlined below) that informs the reader about how the
company can create (or retain) sustained competitive advantage into the future. The majority of your
analysis will be based on the theory and techniques taught as part of this module. Your structured report will
contain expert opinions from authoritative sources (all referenced and cited in the APA style) that you will use
in your strategic analysis.
Your strategic recommendation will refer back (by page number) to your analysis and the collected expert
opinions. Your Strategic Recommendation will contain various suggestions and some consideration will be
given to ways in which future success can be achieved in a sustainable business environment.
Assignment Structure
Your assignment will contain the following sections (in the order shown). Mark range allocations are shown
in the marking scheme on pages 7-8 of this brief. To save words, you only have to use the numbered
section and title words shown in capitals (below); you do not have to use the prompting questions (shown in
italics).
1. INTRODUCTION
What is contained in the document? Why should someone read it?
This should be a brief (maximum 100 words) introduction to the company and highlighting your key
recommendations. Please note that the introduction is not given any marks. We restrict it to 100 words
so that you do not waste valuable words from your assignment word-limit on a protracted introduction.
It is best practice to write the introduction last.
2. MEASURES OF SUCCESS
What measures should be used to assess the relative success of your chosen company?
Financial and non-financial metrics should be suggested (with a preference for any data that are
‘benchmarked’ against direct competitors). Show example data for the company in question (in tabular
or graphical form) that ideally spans four or five financial years to the present day.
Include in this section a brief discussion concerning the difficulties in determining and measuring
business success (cite some of the key authors that have written about this subject).
3. REASONS FOR SUCCESS
What do experts suggest as the reasons for this company’s relative business success?
An outline of 6 to 10 business reasons behind the success stated in a simple, straightforward way with a
brief (4 or 5 sentence) explanation of each reason. Each reason should be sub-titled in this section (i.e.
3.1, 3.2, 3.3 etc.). Cite the expert source(s) that have the opinion that you are listing. Do not speculate
yourself in this section; just collect and sort the opinions of third-party experts. Do not rely solely upon
the company’s own website or its publications. All company “jargon” and “acronyms” must have a brief
explanation in brackets at the point of their first usage; thereafter they can be used without explanation.
SM9636 Assessment Brief
SM9636 Assignment Brief
4. STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (AVC+VRIN)
What are the possible internal success factors and where might they be located in the
company’s activities?
This will be a detailed dual analysis of the company’s strategic capabilities starting with an Adapted
Value Chain (AVC) and followed by a VRIN evaluation. This section carries the most marks. To score
well in Section 4, you must also synthesise the AVC with the VRIN. This is achieved by demonstrating
clear linkages between the two so that you can answer the two questions “What internal factors are
contributing to future success?” (using VRIN); combined with, “Where are they happening within the
activities of the company?” (using the AVC to show location, or locations).
The synthesis of AVC and VRIN is an iterative process (multi-pass), so we only need you to show the
end result. To save words, only use additional textual description to make key points to which you refer
in your Section 7 Recommendations, or where something is not obvious in the diagram or table of the
AVC+VRIN synthesis.
5. LEADERSHIP CONTRIBUTION
How is the current leadership guiding towards success? Is there a leadership legacy from a
predecessor?
An evaluation of the contribution of leadership to the company’s success, basing this on appropriate
leadership theory (as taught on this module). A wide range of topics will be acceptable including (but
not limited to):
o Leadership Attributes or Styles
o Organisational Culture
o Decision-making Theory
6. STRATEGY FOCUS
Which particular strategic factor of this company deserves closer scrutiny?
A detailed analysis and interpretation based on one additional topic area from the following list:
o Business Strategy (consistent with strategic capabilities)
o International Strategy
o Innovation Strategy
o Collaboration Strategy (alliances, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions)
o Sustainability (can the company gain competitive advantage this way)
Choose just one of the above to demonstrate your ability to conduct more in-depth research on one
aspect of the company’s future.
7. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATION
With page referencing to your previous sections, can explain your strategic recommendation for
this company?
In this section, you make your strategic recommendation (which might encompass more than one
particular suggestion to the company). Using the SAFe criteria (from your textbook); consider how
Suitable your suggestions are to achieve the desired outcome of Sustained Competitive Advantage.
Further estimate how Acceptable your suggestions might be to key stakeholders, and finally comment
on the Feasibility of your suggestions.
Your recommendation must also demonstrate an awareness of future Sustainability issues.
SM9636 Assessment Brief
SM9636 Assignment Brief
Notes on the Assignment Structure:
ALL sections should cite sources of research data and theories/concepts on which your analysis is based.
The only exception to this are the suggestions contained in your strategic recommendation that you make
in Section 7; these should be YOUR original ideas and therefore citations are not expected. However, we
do expect you to refer to elements of your previous analysis (by page number) to support your
arguments.
All cited sources should be listed in APA format in the References section at the end of your assignment.
Cutting and pasting material directly from sources without citation is Plagiarism.
Cutting and pasting material directly from sources with citation is Poor Scholarship.
• Short quoted extracts from cited sources are permissible – use double quotation marks”” and citation that
includes the page number of the cited document.
The vast majority of your assignment word count should use your own words or paraphrase reputable
sources. Large and frequent amounts of direct quotation text will be included in the word count.
SM9636 Assessment Brief
SM9636 Assignment Brief
Module Level Objectives:
Knowledge & Understanding:
MLO-1: Know how leaders and various stakeholder groups measure and appreciate business
success.
MLO-2: Understand how to critically evaluate endogenous and exogenous strategy perspectives for
a sustainable business environment.
Intellectual / Professional Skills & Abilities:
MLO-3: Develop Desk Research skills in preparing and writing a thoroughly researched and
compelling strategic argument for a company.
MLO-4: Ability to critically analyse business strategies and present suitable, feasible, acceptable and
sustainable recommendations to business leaders in a succinct manner.
Programme (Level) Learning Outcomes that this module contributes to:
Knowledge and Understanding:
6.1.1 Assess knowledge of contemporary professional practice in business and management
informed by theory and research.
6.1.2 Critically apply knowledge of business and management to complex problems in or related to
professional practice in order to identify justifiable, sustainable and responsible solutions.
Intellectual / Professional Skills and Abilities:
6.3.2 Critique their personal skills and attitudes for progression to post-graduate contexts includin
g
professional work, entrepreneurship and higher level study.
Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity):
6.1.3 Appraise an awareness of the cultural and ethical contexts in which international business
operates.
6.2.2 Critique creative and critical thinking skills that involve independence, understanding,
justification and the ability to challenge the thinking of self and others
SM9636 Assessment Brief
SM9636 Assignment Brief
No print copy will be accepted for SM9636, it is on-line submission to TurnItIn ONLY.
• We strongly recommend that you do not leave submission to the final hour.
• This module requires only one submission to the eLP Assignment FINAL Submission Folder before the
Module Submission Deadline.
• You must submit an electronic copy of your assignment in PDF format.
• Check that all of your tables, diagrams, charts and images are represented correctly in PDF (using a PDF
file viewer before submitting).
• Do not submit in Word (or any other Word Processor file format).
You will not receive a TurnItIn Similarity Report for a Final Submission.
You must obtain (and safely retain) a receipt from TurnItIn with a timestamp showing that you submitted
before deadline.
If you encounter difficulty in getting the receipt with a valid timestamp, you must contact the Module Tutor
by email before the deadline expires; otherwise we have no evidence that you were prevented from
submitting.
• If you miss the deadline (and have no approval for an extension) you must submit to the “24 HOURS
LATE” Folder that opens after the deadline closes. See section on penalties for lateness.
Students with Approved Extensions will find that a special APPROVED EXTENSION submission folder
will be available after the normal deadline has expired.
SM9636 Assessment Brief RUBRIC SHEET 1 of 2
SM9636 Assignment Brief Page 7 of 9
Grade Bad Inadequate Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding Exemplary
Nominal %
Integer Range 0 – 29% 30 – 39% 40 – 49% 50 -59% 60 – 69% 70 – 79% 80 – 89% 90 -100%
A
pp
ro
pr
ia
te
M
ea
su
re
s
of
S
uc
ce
ss
10
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
Almost no relevant
measurement data of
business success.
Inadequate and very
little relevant
measurement data.
No attempt at
evaluation of
business success.
An adequate
statement of how
successful the
company is
consistent with only
one type of relevant
measurement data
A good statement of
how successful the
company is consistent
with two types of
appropriate
measurement data.
A very good
discussion of how
successful the company
is consistent with at
least two types of
appropriate
measurement data.
Recognises that
“success” can be
difficult to evaluate.
An excellent
discussion of what is
meant by “business
success” for this
particular company.
Argument demonstrated
by different data types.
Includes cited academic
discussion of how
success can be
measured in firms.
Some alignment with
strategic
recommendations.
An outstanding
discussion of what is
meant by “business
success” for this particular
company. Argument
demonstrated by a range
of data types. Includes
cited academic discussion
of how success can be
measured in firms. Mostly
aligned with strategic
recommendations.
An exemplary discussion
of what is meant by
“business success” for this
particular company.
Argument demonstrated by
a range of key data types.
Appropriate measures
nominated with data
samples shown. Includes
cited academic discussion of
how success can be
measured in firms. Closely
aligned with strategic
recommendations.
0 – 2.5 marks 3 – 3.5 4 – 4.5 5 – 5.5 6 – 6.5 7 – 7.5 8 – 8.5 9 – 10
B
us
in
es
s
R
ea
so
ns
fo
r
Su
cc
es
s
ci
te
d
by
e
xp
er
ts
10
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
No understanding of
the reasons
underpinning success.
Very poor research.
Fails to demonstrate
any significant
business knowledge.
Inadequate set of
reasons. Either
rather limited or else a
scattergun list with
weak explanations
that are mostly
uncited. Research
very limited – does
not demonstrate
adequate business
knowledge.
Adequate set of
reasons but either
too few or too many
to be considered a
set of key reasons.
Basic explanation,
basic research,
adequate business
knowledge.
A good set of reasons,
some less than key, but
good explanations.
Reasonable research
and demonstration of
business knowledge.
A very good set of
reasons with good
explanations. Very
good research and
demonstration of
business knowledge.
An excellent set of key
reasons with clear
explanations. Excellent
research conducted into
authoritative sources.
An excellent
demonstration of
business knowledge.
An outstanding set of
ranked key reasons with
very clear explanations
and reasons for ranking.
Outstanding research
conducted into
authoritative sources and
expert opinion. An
outstanding
demonstration of business
knowledge.
An exemplary set of ranked
key reasons with very clear
explanations and coherent
reasons for ranking.
Exemplary research
conducted into the best of
authoritative sources and
expert opinion. An
exemplary demonstration of
business knowledge.
0 – 2.5 marks 3 – 3.5 4 – 4.5 5 – 5.5 6 – 6.5 7 – 7.5 8 – 8.5 9 – 10
En
do
ge
no
us
St
ra
te
gi
c
A
na
ly
si
s
(A
VC
+
V
R
IN
)
30
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
No evidence that the
student understands
endogenous strategy.
Attempted use of
incorrect exogenous
tools. Analysis is of
very poor quality.
Inadequate analysis
with poor use of
endogenous strategy
tools. Poor quality,
partial analysis that
does not support any
further discussion.
Adequate analysis
use of individual
endogenous
strategy tools.
Analysis that is
competent, but no
more. No apparent
attempt made to
synthesise the AVC
with VRIN.
Good analysis using
endogenous strategy
tools, but has an
occasional gaps or
minor errors. Some
AVC and VRIN
synthesis attempted in
words but rather difficult
to understand.
Very Good analysis
using endogenous
strategy tools, with no
occasional gaps or
minor errors. Some
AVC and VRIN
synthesis attempted in
words which can be
mostly understood.
Excellent analysis
using endogenous
strategy tools. The AVC
and VRIN synthesis is
demonstrated in a clear
manner to the reader.
Outstanding analysis
with extended use of
endogenous strategy
tools. The AVC and VRIN
synthesis is demonstrated
in an easily assimilated
manner. Results ranked in
terms of importance to the
strategic suggestions.
Near professional
consultancy quality.
Exemplary analysis with
innovative use of
endogenous strategy tools.
The AVC and VRIN
synthesis is demonstrated in
a concise and compelling
manner. Results ranked in
terms of importance to the
strategic recommendations
to come. Professional
consultancy quality.
0 – 8.5 9 – 11.5 12 – 14.5 15 – 17.5 18 – 20.5 21 – 23.5 24 – 26.5 27 – 30
Goal 1 Obj 3 not met Goal 1 Obj 3 not met Goal 1 Obj 3 met Goal 1 Obj 3 met Goal 1 Obj 3 met Goal 1 Obj 3 exceeded Goal 1 Obj 3 exceeded Goal 1 Obj 3 exceeded
* “Goal / Objectives” relate to Assurance of Learning (AoL) data collected for our Degree Accreditation Bodies.
SM9636 Assignment Brief Page 8 of 9
SM9636 Assessment Brief RUBRIC SHEET 2 of 2
Grade Bad Inadequate Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding Exemplary
Nominal %
Integer Range 0 – 29% 30 – 39% 40 – 49% 50 -59% 60 – 69% 70 – 79% 80 – 89% 90 -100%
Le
ad
er
sh
ip
c
on
tr
ib
ut
io
n
to
S
uc
ce
ss
15
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
No evidence the
student understands
any relevant theory.
No evaluation.
Inadequate
evaluation – either
the theory is not
relevant or the
analysis is of poor
quality.
Adequate
evaluation based
on relevant theory.
Analysis competent
but no more.
Good evaluation based
on relevant theory with
good data.
Very good evaluation
with careful analysis
based on relevant
theory with well-
researched data
An excellent
evaluation supported
by rigorous analysis
based on relevant
theory. The data has
been collected from a
wide range of sources.
An outstanding
evaluation supported by
rigorous analysis based
on relevant theory. The
data has been collected
from a wide range of
sources.
An exemplary evaluation
supported by rigorous
analysis based on relevant
theory. The data has been
collected from a wide range
of sources.
0 – 4 marks 4.5 – 5.5 6 – 7 7.5 – 8.5 9 – 10 10.5 – 11.5 12 – 13 13.5 – 15
St
ra
te
gi
c
Fo
cu
s
C
ho
ic
e
15
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
No evidence the
student understands
any relevant topic
areas. Analysis of
very poor quality.
Either the topic area
is not relevant or the
analysis is of poor
quality.
Basic discussion
based on analysis
that is competent
but no more.
Good discussion based
on analysis that is
generally good but has
gaps or small errors.
Very good discussion
based on accurate
analysis.
An excellent focused
evaluation of a
strategically important
factor supported by
rigorous and detailed
analysis.
An outstanding focused
evaluation of a
strategically important
factor supported by
rigorous and detailed
analysis.
An exemplary focused
evaluation of a strategically
important factor supported
by rigorous and detailed
analysis.
0 – 4 4.5 – 5.5 6 – 7 7.5 – 8.5 9 – 10 10.5 – 11.5 12 – 13 13.5 – 15
St
ra
te
gi
c
Re
co
m
m
en
da
tio
n(
s)
20
%
w
ei
gh
tin
g
Bad strategic
recommendation
that lacks any suitable
suggestions for the
company.
Inadequate strategic
recommendation.
Suggestions lack
relevance and are not
supported by
evidence from
previous sections.
Adequate
strategic
recommendation
with one relevant
suggestion. A brief
rationale that is
insufficiently based
on evidence from
previous sections.
Good strategic
recommendation
containing one relevant
suggestion with good
rationale based on
identified factors OR
two relevant
suggestions with brief
rationales.
Very good strategic
recommendation
containing two good
suggestions appropriate
to the company. Very
good rationales based
on identified factors
from previous sections
(referred by page
number).
Excellent strategic
recommendation with
more than two good
suggestions. Excellent
rationales based on
identified factors from
previous sections
(referred by page
number).
Outstanding strategic
recommendation with
more than two good
suggestions. Outstanding
rationales based on
identified factors from
previous sections
(referred by page
number).
Exemplary strategic
recommendation with more
than two good suggestions.
Exemplary rationales
based on identified factors
from previous sections
(referred by page number).
0 – 5.5 6 – 7.5 8 – 9.5 10 – 11.5 12 – 13.5 14 – 15.5 16 – 17.5 18 – 20
Goal 2 Obj 4 not met Goal 2 Obj 4 not met Goal 2 Obj 4 met Goal 2 Obj 4 met Goal 2 Obj 4 met Goal 2 Obj 4 exceeded Goal 2 Obj 4 exceeded Goal 2 Obj 4 exceeded
* “Goal / Objectives” relate to Assurance of Learning (AoL) data collected for our Degree Accreditation Bodies.
SM9636 Assignment Brief Page 9 of 9
SM9636 Assessment Brief
ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS
You are advised to read the guidance for students regarding assessment policies. They are available
online here.
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. 10 marks) shall be deducted
from the assessment mark.
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.
These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis.
The full policy can be found here.
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:
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, Contents and Glossary of Terms
• Cited Quotations
• Tables, Figures, Diagrams, Charts and Illustrations
• Reference List
• Bibliography
• Headers or Footnotes (with Student ID number on each page).
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.
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices) and it
must be made available within 24 hours of them being requested by the Module Tutor or an
Administrator.
The full Word Limit Policy is available here.
Academic Misconduct
The Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards (ARTA) contain the Regulations and procedures
applying to cheating, plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct.
You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion, using a “ghost writer” and other forms of academic
misconduct (as referred to in the Academic Misconduct Procedure of the Assessment Regulations) are
taken very seriously. Assignments in which evidence of Academic Misconduct is found may receive a
mark of zero.
The full policy is available here.
https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/about-us/university-services/academic-registry/quality-and-teaching-excellence/assessment/guidance-for-students/
https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/late-submission-of-work-and-extension-requests-policy ?la=en&modified=20181005134740&hash=AF8200F74AF421F9F19E5332B8FD3F3D8E116292
https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/word-limits-policy ?la=en&modified=20181005134742&hash=D06E866BA9C788D7B1FD8EE3E7E3F34026CE9673
https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/corporate-website/new-sitecore-gallery/services/academic-registry/documents/qte/assessment/guidance-for-students/pl%2C-d-%2C005-v003-academic-misconduct-policy ?modified=20190605171211&la=en&hash=A55A56D5BAD5746FC530D31C6291B10F861275CE
- Instructions on Assessment:
The Assignment Task:
Format for Submission:
Assessment Guidance
Assignment Structure
1. INTRODUCTION
What is contained in the document? Why should someone read it?
What measures should be used to assess the relative success of your chosen company?
3. REASONS FOR SUCCESS
What do experts suggest as the reasons for this company’s relative business success?
4. STRATEGIC ANALYSIS (AVC+VRIN)
What are the possible internal success factors and where might they be located in the company’s activities?
5. LEADERSHIP CONTRIBUTION
How is the current leadership guiding towards success? Is there a leadership legacy from a predecessor?
6. STRATEGY FOCUS
Which particular strategic factor of this company deserves closer scrutiny?
7. STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATION
With page referencing to your previous sections, can explain your strategic recommendation for this company?
Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives
Module Level Objectives:
Knowledge & Understanding:
Intellectual / Professional Skills & Abilities:
Programme (Level) Learning Outcomes that this module contributes to:
Knowledge and Understanding:
Intellectual / Professional Skills and Abilities:
Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity):
Module Specific Assessment Criteria and Rubric
SM9636 Assessment Brief
ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS
Late submission of work
Word limits and penalties
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices) and it must be made available within 24 hours of them being requested by the Module Tutor or an Administrator.
Academic Misconduct
This checklist is NOT required as part of the assignment submission.
You MUST select one of these companies for your assignment.
K
Y:
= Business Strategy
B = International Strategy
= Innovation Strategy D = Collaboration, Mergers & Acquisition Strategy E =Sustainability Strategy
| SM9636 Company Checklist by Assignment Section We strongly suggest that you do some preliminary research on each company. Make sure that there are enough data and information sources available in each category (column) for the company that you finally select. You must work with public domain information only and under no circumstances contact any of these companies directly regarding this assignment. Best financial performer is not necessarily your best choice. Ensure that you are selecting the company that lets you demonstrate your analytical skills in Strategy. |
Two | Three | Four | Five | Six | Seven |
| 10% | 30% | 15% | 20% | |||
| Can I find enough high- quality financial data spanning 4 to 5 years to date? Are other measures available that offer a broader view? | Are there enough authoritative sources writing about apparent reasons for recent / future success (or failure)? | Can I find out enough about the business model of this company to create an Adapted Value Chain? | Is this company likely to have some interesting candidate Capabilities, Competences or Resources that I can VRIN test as reasons for CA or SCA? | Is there authoritative material available about the recent leaders of this company? Can you apply the taught theories of Leadership? | Is there enough data available to discuss only one of the five focus strategy topics? See the A-E Key below …. |
Which company is best for me to turn a set of suggestions into a compelling Strategic Recommendation (based upon my analysis in the other columns)? |
| HINT: Check out FAME Database in NORA but look for link to “INC.” parent company in OSIRIS. |
||||||
| HINT: Please investigate all columns before deciding … | ||||||
| HINT: Don’t analyse the UK subsidiary … |
This should be placed under measurement,
Stop at conclusion. Add another column…
Link the location to the AVC
There is no need to show a perfect company
Canvas-can placed under VRIN
Not very good