Strategic Management Analysis MGT301
- Subject Code :
MGT301
- University :
others Exam Question Bank is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university.
- Country :
New Caledonia
Individual Essay Guidelines
Overview
This assessment is worth 25% of your final grade and is an individual assessment. It will consist of a 2,000 word essay and will demonstrate and apply knowledge of management concepts taught in the course so far. It will contribute to achieving learning outcomes 1, 2, & 4:
- Critically analyse the qualities of organisations and their competitive environments using a range of academic and industry-based literature.
- Develop an understanding of management processes, frameworks, and concepts as they relate to managing oneself, others, and organisation in Aotearoa New Zealand and
- Demonstrate an awareness of contemporary issues in management and organisational theory and practice and how managers are responding to these.
Expectation
You will choose a real organisation based in Australia or New Zealand to investigate (must be registered as a business and researchable personal experience, personal interviews and insider knowledge is not permitted unless publicly accessible information is used).
Your chosen organisation must not overlap with cases discussed/to be discussed in this paper: This includes: Fisher & Paykel, The Warehouse Group, Trade me, Rocket Lab, Les Mills, Xero, VetEnt, or Yealands. Other excluded companies include Spark, Air New Zealand, Allbirds, MacPac, My Food Bag, Fonterra, and Zespri.
Conceptual Mastery and Practical Application.
- You are free to explore any of the management concepts discussed in week 3 lectures and tutorials.
- Additional research linked to theory/concepts/process from academic or scholarly sources required
- An analysis of the organisations use of the first step of the strategic management process(500 words*):
- A clear mission statement and explanation for its development
- A clear vision statement and explanation for its development
- Clearly identified growth, stability, or retrenchment strategy
- Clearly identified Porters generic strategy
- If organisations have existing ones, please use If not, create your own with rationale.
- Additional research linked to theory/concepts/process
- Outline the remaining steps in the strategic management process (500 words*):
- Briefly explain the other four steps in the strategic management process with relation to the organisation:
- A brief overview of each step
- Examples of how the organisation uses each step effectively
- Additional research linked to theory/concepts/process is
- Briefly explain the other four steps in the strategic management process with relation to the organisation:
- Investigate the organisations team dynamics and how they have utilised this successfully (600 words)
- Select two main sub-concepts to focus on
Structure
- Conclusion (200 words*)
- Close your overall case being made in the introduction
- Restate/summaries the greatest findings from your essay
- Have an effective closing statement/sentence.
- Do NOT restate your introduction
- Do NOT introduce new ideas or anything you have not discussed
- Introduction (200 words*)
- States the purpose of the
- Introduces your chosen
- Brief overview of concepts to be
- Body Paragraphs (1,600 words*)
- Each paragraph describes one main
- Arrange your paragraphs in the order seen above
* Please note: All word counts listed above are indicative of the expected level of detail you should provide and are there to help with structuring your essay.
Word Limit
- The word limit is 2,000 words (+/- 10%)
- This excludes the WMS cover sheet and references
Style and Layout
- WMS cover page
- Black font colour, size 12, Times New
- Justified paragraph
- 5 cm line spacing.
- NO headings, diagrams, or
- NO footnotes of any kind APA referencing required, see
- References on the final page is the only place for a
- Add page numbers except on the WMS cover
Referencing
- Use APA referencing
- Research both your chosen organisation and associated management theories/concepts.
- A minimum of five academic or scholarly references with three of those coming from peer reviewed journal articles referenced. These are to be cited correctly and related to theory. (Using more, or using the five effectively will see you awarded high marks on the rubric)
- Additional research on your organisation might come directly from websites, magazine and newspaper articles (opinion pieces not peer reviewed), books, videos, public bulletins
- In-text citations need to be correctly See Waikato Uni APA referencing guide here.
- The end list should also be in correct APA format
- Alphabetical
- Hanging
- All the same font, colour, and
- One return between each
- Lines are NOT to be justified on the reference page due to formatting
- Preference is on indirect quotations/paraphrasing/summarising of sources ideas as opposed to direct quotations.
Student Support
We provide a range of student support services for both our Hamilton and Tauranga based students. Service providers include Accessibility Services staff, who are committed to supporting students with impairments in order for them to be successful in their studies, and the Student Learning team, who help students acquire the skills, knowledge and attributes they need to be successful, independent, and self-directed learners. The Student Discipline Regulations are found in the online Calendar. The Library and Student Learning are valuable resources to assist you with your studies at the University. There is also a Moodle-based course on Academic Integrity, which is highly recommended.
Extensions
All requests must be completed on the approved form, which can be found on the STMGT101 Moodle page. Unless it is a medical reason or an emergency, this form must be submitted 72 hours before the due date of the assessment.
Plagiarism & Cheating
Plagiarism means presenting as ones own work the work of another, and includes the copying or paraphrasing of another persons work in an assessment item without acknowledging it as the other persons work through full and accurate referencing; it applies to assessment (as defined in the Assessment Regulations) presented through a written, spoken, electronic, broadcasting, visual, performance or other medium.
Cheating at the University includes and is not limited to the following items:
- Copying all or part of another students work (essay, report, code, test answers, etc) and submitting it as your own
- Using another persons work - from a reading (article, book), from course materials, from digital sources such as Wikipedia and not acknowledging the source of the work
- Buying an assignment, including from an internet service or a social messaging service (such as WeChat)
- Using sites such as but not limited to, com and chegg.com to source answers for assessment tasks, such as test questions
- Asking someone else to produce your assignment and submitting it as your own
- Using an AI tool, such as ChatGPT, to produce your assignment or test answer and submitting it as your own, unless the assignment instructions specifically require you to use an AI tool, such as ChatGPT
- Using an AI tool, such as ChatGPT, to rewrite your assignment or test answer and submitting it as your own, unless the assignment instructions specifically require you to use an AI tool, such as ChatGP
Individual Essay Marking Rubric
Excellent (A- to A+) |
Good (B- to B+) |
Average (C- to C+) |
Poor (below C-) |
|
Style, Layout and Structure (10%) |
Excellent essay layout. Introduces the organisation, theories, and essay structure in a comprehensive manner. Compelling conclusion. Clear and concise. Formatted correctly with no errors (font, size, spacing, alignment). Word count is accurate. A wide variety of sentence structure and length, showing superior control of word choice with a clear, concise style, with no grammatical errors |
Good essay layout. Good introduction of the organisation, theories, and essay structure. Appropriate conclusion with adequate coverage of content. Clear and mostly to-the-point. Mostly formatted correctly (font, size, spacing, alignment). Word count is acceptable. Variety in sentence structure, showing control of word choice with clear, easy to read, logical style, and few grammatical errors. |
Satisfactory essay layout. Introduction includes at least one relevant aspect (organisation, theory, essay structure). Conclusion lacks content and doesnt make sense. Unclear, wordy, and/or rambling. Some formatting errors (font, size, spacing, alignment). Word count is significantly above or below the recommended limit. A lack of sentence variety, showing imprecise use of word choice with inconsistent, rambling style, with some grammatical errors |
Poor essay layout. Poor/lack of introduction. Poor/lack of conclusion Confusing and irrelevant. A number of serious formatting errors (font, size, spacing, alignment). Word count is severely above/below the recommended limit. Serious and frequent problems with word choice and sentence structure, showing a lack of style, difficult to read and understand, many grammatical errors |
Conceptual Mastery (50%) |
Insightful discussion on mission, vision, and objectives, including effective research linked to theories to support argument. The steps in the strategic management process and associated theories are clearly explained with great depth and research. Excellent explanation of team dynamics concepts, well supported by relevant research on associated theories. |
The steps in the strategic management process and associated theories are explained with some depth and research. Good discussion on mission, vision, and objectives, including research linked to theories to support argument Good explanation of team dynamics concepts, supported by relevant research on associated theories. |
The steps in the strategic management process and associated theories are vaguely explained with little depth and research. Acceptable discussion on mission, vision, and objectives, including some research linked to theories to support argument. Acceptable explanation of team dynamics concepts, somewhat supported by relevant research on associated theories. |
The steps in the strategic management process and associated theories are poorly explained with little/no depth and research. Poor discussion on mission, vision, and objectives, with little/no research linked to theories to support argument. Poor explanation of team dynamics concepts, not supported by relevant research on associated theories. |
Application of practical examples (30%) |
Practical examples of all management concepts that are well integrated with theory and thoughtfully selected to support discussion with excellent depth. |
Practical examples of the management concepts are integrated with theory and selected to support discussion with some depth. |
Practical examples of the management concepts are somewhat integrated with theory and selected to somewhat support discussion with minimal depth. |
Practical examples of the management concepts process are not with theory and do not support discussions. |
Referencing (10%) |
Perfect APA style reference list and in-text citations all correct. More than 8 academic or scholarly references, with at least 5 from peer reviewed journal articles that are excellently used to articulate argument. Credible sources used to incorporate examples of the organisation effectively into the discussion. |
Good APA style reference list and in-text citations mostly correct. More than 6 academic or scholarly references, with at least 4 from peer reviewed journal articles that are well used to articulate argument. Credible sources used to incorporate examples of the organisation into discussion. |
Acceptable APA style reference list and the majority of in-text citations correct. More than 5 academic or scholarly references, with at least 3 from peer reviewed journal articles that are excellently used to articulate argument. Sources used to incorporate examples of the organisation into discussion are questionable but acceptable. |
Poor APA style reference list and the majority of in-text citations incorrect. Less than 4 academic or scholarly references, and under 3 peer reviewed journal articles used to form argument. Seriously questionable credibility of sources and poorly used to incorporate examples of the organisation into the discussion. |
Final grade: Comments: |