Module Title: Leadership, Strategy, and Change 23/24 Module Code: BAE 6 LSC

Assignment Brief

Module Title: Leadership, Strategy, and Change 23/24 Module Code: BAE 6 LSC

Assignment No/Title: Coursework 1 Assessment Weighting: 100%

Submission Date: 11/01/24 Feedback Target Date: 10/02/24

Module Lead

Tutors: Sergey Portyanko

Miriam Morris Natalie Palmer

Andrew Woon Sy Jeen Uros Delevic Word count

4000 words (+/-10%) MS Word document

Submission Instructions:

This assignment is to be submitted electronically

This assignment must be submitted electronically by 16:00 on the submission dateTo submit electronically you must upload your work to the e-submission area within the respective module on Moodle.

Multiple drafts can be submitted up to the submission date.

Please remember you must leave at least 24 hours between submissions if you make changes to your work. Each submission will overwrite the previous one until the due date and time has passed.

You are reminded of the Universitys regulations on cheating and plagiarism. In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations.

You are reminded that it is your responsibility to keep an electronic copy of your assignment for future reference.

Your citation needs to follow the Harvard style referencing.

Assignment Details

Type: Individual academic management report

Resources: Refer to the Module guide, the required reading, the sessions content, and the VLE module content

Word Count: 4000 (+/-10%) words.The title page, page of contents, and the list of references (bibliography) or appendices will not count towards the word total.

Presentation: Work must be referenced, and a bibliography providedWork must be submitted as a Word document (.doc/docx)

Course work must be submitted using Arial font size 11 (or larger if you need to), with a minimum of 1.5 line spacingYour student numbers must appear at the title page of the coursework. Your name must not be on your coursework.

Referencing: Harvard Referencing should be used, see your Library Subject Guide for guides and tips on referencing.

Regulations: Make sure you understand the University Regulations on expected academic practice and academic misconduct. Note in particular:

Your work must be your own. Markers will be attentive to both the plausibility of the sources provided as well as the consistency and approach to writing of the work. Simply, if you do the research and reading, and then write it up on your own, giving the reference to sources, you will approach the work in the appropriate way and will cause not give markers reason to question the authenticity of the work.

All quotations must be credited and properly referenced. Paraphrasing is still regarded as plagiarism if you fail to acknowledge the source for the ideas being expressed.

TURNITIN: When you upload your work to the Moodle site it will be checked by anti-plagiarism software.

The Assignment Tasks

This module is assessed entirely by Individual Coursework prepared by students independently (unsupervised).

This coursework is designed to test the following module learning outcomes as set out in section 3 of the Module Guide:

Assess the relationship and the need for compatibility between strategic management and functional management policiesExplain and critically analyse the concepts of leadership and management and their application in an organisational, social, environmental and multicultural context

Critically evaluate the need for flexibility in strategic management and the practical limits of quantifying corporate strategy

Identify and analyse the internal and external influences on organisational objectives and strategy, and the relevance of creativity and innovation in businessDemonstrate self-awareness of change management strategies to support the business in gaining competitive advantageYou will write a 4,000-word (+/- 10%) management report in which you use theory from the module to review an organisations strategic change initiative and reflect on the leadership practices in the company. You should select a diversified firm from the FTSE100 LIST or a substantial public/third sector organisation as the focus for your strategic change review. You should choose an organisation for which there is sufficient, current factual information available, relating both to the organisation itself and the main industries or areas of activity in which it operates. You are encouraged to discuss your choice of organisation with the seminar tutor.

This is an academic management report, not an essay. The theory must be applied, not described or explained in this report. There are no marks for describing theories, discussing their origins or development, or critiquing them.

We want to know what you think and why you think it.

You are expected to produce your own analysis and draw your own conclusions. If your conclusions are extracted entirely from what you have read from secondary sources, then you cannot expect more than 30% of the available marks, however thorough and well-referenced those sources may be.

You should focus on recent material from reputable sources such as newspapers, business magazines and academic journals. Use of the organisations official website, official corporate materials e.g. Annual Report and Accounts and publications are also recommended. The use of the Universitys databases is strongly encouraged. If you do not know how to use them, then please seek guidance from the library staff. For good-quality research, you should aim to reference around 20 separate factual articles. As a general rule, you are expected to show mature judgment in choosing your data sources, just as you would if your own or your employers money was at stake.

Your mark will be lower if you use:

Outdated information. The strategic environment moves fast, and anything that is more than 3 years old is unlikely to be current. We would expect the majority of your factual references to be from 2020-23, and to be drawn from newspapers and magazines. The publication cycle for refereed journals means that any factual data that they contain is often several years old. Note, if the strategic change within the organisation has occurred in the last decade, older information may be relevant.

Unreliable sources (e.g. collections of generic templates and essays on particular disciplines) can undermine the credibility of your document. Avoid these unreliable sources of information or inspiration.

All factual sources should be properly referenced using the Harvard referencing system. The references for theory taught on the module or for theory drawn from textbooks on the module reading list are also invited, but cannot replace the references to the secondary data sources.

Please ensure that the sources you cite actually say what you claim that they say. We check, and we shall disregard any factual material for which the cited source is not accurate even if the facts are correct!

The upper word count limit for this assessment is 4,400 words. The following are excluded when computing the number of words:

Cover and contents pages

Executive Summary

Headings

Footnotes

References

Tables and appendices.

Anything after the 4,400th word will be ignored when assessing your mark.

You are expected to use theory from the module, to analyse the business context in which the organisational strategic change was initiated, assess the impact of emerging trends from the macro-environment, and draw out the examples of leadership practices as factors for the success in the change initiative. If you can find and use relevant theory from sources other than the module textbooks this will enhance your grade but the theory base here is mature, so new theoretical insights are likely to be hard to find.

If your target organisation is in the public or third sectors, you may undertake a comprehensive stakeholder analysis as a substitute for the external business environment analysis.

You should move beyond basic techniques such as PEST(EL) and 5 Forces. While PEST(EL) and 5 Forces are acceptable tools, they can serve only as the beginning of your analysis. If that are the only theoretical frameworks you use in this section, you should not expect to pass.

You are expected to use theory from the module to analyse the strategic change initiative of the business whose environment you examined. You may also introduce an analysis of how the business structure and culture and how it was reshaped during the change.

Avoid dated and superficial techniques such as SWOT. SWOT is not a substitute for a deeper and more detailed analysis.

You are expected to reflect on the strategic challenges that the organisation is/was facing. Make sure your assumptions on the potential challenges are clearly rooted in the previous analysis. You need to provide factual information on a strategic change initiative that is to respond to the challenge introduced by the shifts in the organisations strategic positioning.

You will get credit for identifying which strategic issues are being addressed in the implemented or ongoing change initiative and for demonstrating why those issues should be given priority. You may also discuss alternative ways of addressing those issues; you will get credit for showing creativity in the solutions that you consider.

You should use relevant theory connected to the organisational leadership, corporate culture, and stakeholder analysis, to identify potential obstacles to the implementation of the strategic change project and suggest how those obstacles could be efficiently overcome.

You are expected to submit work that follows a clear and logical structure, is written in a manner that is easy for the reader to follow and is professionally laid out, with page numbers and numbered sections. Appropriate and (better still) imaginative use of tables and figures will enhance your mark.

General marking criteria:

In marking your work, we shall be looking for:

Accuracy in your choice and use of theory. You should not use theory developed for, say, the analysis of an industry to analyse the behaviour of an individual firm. You should also be careful and accurate in your use of the individual elements of a model or framework; this may mean checking the textbook or lecture to make sure you know what terms mean in that specific context; Rigour. Your arguments must make sense. You must use the theory to structure the facts you have researched, and then draw conclusions that follow logically even if they show the company in a poor light;

Insight. You should look beyond describing what is happening in the organisation or industry, and strive to identify the root causes; the theory is there to help you; Creativity and originality. In both your diagnosis and your proposals, you should look beyond what is obvious. You should also feel empowered to go against common wisdom. The articles you read may have views about the industry or organisation you are analysing you do not have to agree with them, or with the views of the organisations managers.

Assessment Criteria and Weighting:

LSBU marking criteria have been developed to help tutors give you clear and helpful feedback on your work. They will be applied to your work to help you understand what you have accomplished, how any mark given was arrived at, and how you can improve your work in future.

Each task is being marked according to the following rubric:

Criteria Feedforward comments

100-80% 79-70% 69-60% 59-50% 49-40% 39-30% 29-0%

25% 1. Research

Systematic identification and use of academic and relevant resources Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Ability to draw on own research and that of others. Extensive independent relevant research evidenced by quality and quantity used. Some autonomous research. Wide range of relevant sources identified and used. Very little guidance needed. A range of sources identified and used. Limited guidance needed. Limited research identified and used. Some guidance needed to complete research tasks. Some evidence of research but insufficient amount. Needs support to develop research skills. Little or no research presented. Needs significant support to develop research skills.

25% 2. Subject Knowledge

Understanding and application of subject knowledge. Contributing to subject debate. Shows sustained breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge. Shows breadth, accuracy and detail in understanding key aspects of subject. Contributes to subject debate. Some awareness of ambiguities and limitations of knowledge. Accurate and extensive understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge. Accurate understanding of key aspects of subject. Evidence of coherent knowledge. Understanding of key aspects of subject. Some evidence of coherent knowledge. Some evidence of superficial understanding of subject. Inaccuracies. Little or no evidence of understanding of subject. Inaccuracies.

30% 3. Critical Analysis

Analysis and interpretation of sources, literature and/or results. Structuring of issues/debates. Very high-quality analysis developed independently.

Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Sustained evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Thoroughly identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Identifies trends, inconsistency, congruence, and states the implications. Evaluation and synthesis of resources. Use of evidence-based arguments. Some attempt at evaluation and synthesis of resources. Some use of evidence-based arguments. Limited evaluation of resources. Limited use of evidence-based arguments Little or no evaluation of resources. Very little use of evidence-based arguments.

10% 4. Communication and Presentation

Clear intention in communication. Audience needs are predicted and met. Presentation format is used skilfully. Work is well structured. Communication is entirely clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, persuasive and compelling with very skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses fully the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, mostly persuasive and compelling with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation addresses the needs of the audience. Communication is clear, with skilful use of the presentation format. Presentation takes into account the needs of the audience. Communication is mostly clear and presentation format is adequate. Presentation may sometimes not take into account the needs of the audience. Communication is unclear because presentation format is not used adequately and/or the needs of the audience are not taken into account. Communication is very unclear because presentation format is not used adequately, and the needs of the audience are not taken into account.

10% 3. Academic Integrity

Acknowledges and gives credit to the work of others follows the conventions and practices of the discipline including appropriate use of referencing standards for discipline. Consistent, error free application of relevant referencing conventions with great attention to detail. Consistent, error free application of relevant referencing conventions. Consistent application of relevant referencing conventions with few errors. Application of relevant referencing conventions, with some errors and / or inconsistencies. Generally correct application of relevant referencing conventions, with some errors and / or inconsistencies. Limited application of referencing conventions and / or errors. Very limited or no application of referencing conventions, and/or multiple errors.