Global Branding Globalising the value chain

You can choose any topic from among the given topics  but need to fulfill the requirements.

FACULTY OF HIGHER

EDUCATION

Group Assignment

HI6006 Competitive Strategy

Trimester 3 2017

HOLMES

INSTITUTE

FACULTY OF

HIGHER

EDUCATION

HI6006 Competitive Strategy – Trimester 3 2017

1

Group Assignment Requirements

Assessment Criteria

Group Report

Suggested report word limit: 2000 words (±10%)

Component Weighting: 20%

Due Date: 5pm Friday Week 11

Submission format: Soft copy of a Word x to be uploaded
on Blackboard through ‘Assignments and
due dates’ menu

Group Presentation

Component Weighting: 10%

Due Date: Weeks 10-12 in-class presentation

Note: all students must have their
presentations ready to present if
required by the first week of the
presentation schedule

Submission format: Soft copy of powerpoint.pptx plus in-class
presentation to be scheduled by the
lecturer during weeks 10-12

Important
Please note:

1. Any assignments where plagiarism or collusion is detected will be awarded a mark

of zero. You will need to contact your tutor if you wish to discuss this.

2. Failure to upload the correct document to the assessment link will result in late

penalties being applied to documents which are later submitted for marking of that

assignment.

3. SafeAssign takes at least 24 hours to return a report. If you wish to check your

assignment prior to submission, please allow plenty of time to use the self-check

before the final submission deadline arrives; SafeAssign not returning a self-check

report WILL NOT be considered a valid reason for an extension.

HI6006 Competitive Strategy – Trimester 3 2017

2

Assessment Description

Choose 2 of the topics that have been covered in lectures 4-9 from the
following list:

• Lecture 4 – global strategy as business model change

• Lecture 5 – target markets and modes of entry

• Lecture 6 – globalising the value proposition

• Lecture 7 – global branding

• Lecture 8 – globalising the value chain infrastructure

• Lecture 9 – Globalising the supply chain

Select 2 organisations from any 2 service industries (4 organisations in
total). For each organisation explain how they have applied your chosen
theory(ies) and critically evaluate their approach and the reasons behind their
successes/failures with respect to the theory.

Your evaluation should include counter arguments where available, which
consider alternative views on the theory topic or address situations in which
an organisation has been successful or unsuccessful, contrary to the theory’s
recommendations and why this has been the case.

YOU SHOULD CHOOSE DIFFERENT ORGANISATIONS TO THOSE
COVERED IN THE LECTURES/LEARNING ACTIVITIES or MINI CASE
STUDIES

This is a group assignment. Every member of the group is expected to be able
to discuss all areas of the report and be a fully active participant in the
presentation. You should meet many times and discuss the issues identified in
the report.

Recommended Structure

Group Report:
Your assessment should be submitted in formal report format with an Executive
Summary, Main Body, Conclusion and Bibliography. You are recommended to
use, at the very least, a Word (or similar) report template to give your report a
professional look and feel.

You do not need to define the concepts in detail. Descriptive material has
negligible value and should be avoided. The report should focus on analysis,
discussion and recommendation, enriched by ideas found in journal articles.

In business you will be expected to produce short well-argued reports. This is
where you demonstrate that skill.

Group Presentation:
Your group will be required to do an in-class presentation during the tutorials.
The presentation will last no more than 10 mins and all members are
required to present.

HI6006 Competitive Strategy – Trimester 3 2017

3

Assessment Criteria

Students should consult the marking rubric (see below) to see exactly what is
required and how your assignment will be marked.

You should enrich this assignment with ideas from other materials such as
journal articles. This additional research will be necessary to obtain the best
marks.

All ideas in the report must be referenced using Harvard Referencing (in-text
citations and full references at the back).

This assignment will include an element of peer assessment.

Group Report
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction

Application of selected
theory to organisations
of your choice and
evidence of synthesis
(8 marks)

No evidence of any
synthesis between
argument, theory and/or
examples

Limited evidence of
synthesis between
argument, theory
and/or
examples

Some evidence of
synthesis between
argument, theory
and/or
examples within
defined
context

Clear evidence of
synthesis between
argument, theory
and/or
examples within
context.
Contextual issues have
been identified and
discussed

Clear evidence of
synthesis between
argument, theory and/or
examples within context.
Contextual issues have
been identified, discussed
and critically evaluated

Quality of argument /
Use
of theory with examples
(6 marks)

No justification of
opinions or position
taken. Unsupported by
theory and/or
examples.

Limited argument
supported by seminal
theory and/or
examples

Clear argument
supported
by relevant theories.
Examples used to
support
and explore argument

Clear, balanced
argument
supported by a broad
range of relevant
theories.
Theories and examples
evaluated and
selection
justified

Clear, balanced
evaluative
argument supported by a
broad range of relevant
theories.
Theories and examples
critically evaluated and
selection justified

Quality and justification
of conclusions
(2 marks)

No conclusion or
conclusion unsupported
by argument

Safe and predictable
conclusions that
answer the question.

Some evidence of
original thought and
insight.

Good evidence of
original thought and
insight. Introduction of
innovative models
/theories

Good evidence of original
thought and insight.
Development and
evaluation of innovative
models /theories

Quantity and quality and
presentation of
references using
Harvard Referencing
throughout
(2 marks)

Only 0, 1 or 2 relevant
references given.
Referencing is unclear.

At least 3 relevant
references.
Referencing mostly
clear but inconsistent.

At least 5 relevant
references given,
mainly drawn from
provided sources e.g
lectures. Clear
systematic referencing
of all sources..

At least 7 relevant
references including at
least 5 from own
research including
page no’s for all
articles

Bibliography includes at
least 10 relevant
references from good
sources i.e. journals
rather than popular
computing press. Very
clearly presented.

Professional Report
Formatting, Structure
and approach
(2 marks)

Poorly presented, no
apparent structure
and/or confused writing
style

Limited attempt at
formatting, Well
structured, clear
writing style

Page numbering, front
cover, bibliography
with some attempt at
formatting. Well
structured, focus
explicit and clear, style
appropriate

Good attempt at report
formatting
incorporating all
elements at credits
level. Clear focus,
structure and style
used to emphasise
discussion

Excellent attempt at
formatting report. Focus
clear and justified,
structure and style used
to emphasise argument
and discussion

Group Presentation
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction

Introduction &
Conclusion
(1 mark)

No evidence of distinct
introduction/conclusion

Introduction or Conclusion
evident but don’t really add to
the presentation

Introduced and
concluded but don’t
really add value to
the presentation

Good introduction
and Conclusion
that adds to the
audience
experience

Excellent introduction &
conclusion, addressing
any queries the audience
have making the
presentation appear
polished

Eye/Contact/Not
Reading from notes/
Audience
engagement
(1 mark)

Minimal eye contact by more
than one member resulting in
lack of audience engagement.
Presenters spoke too quickly
or quietly making it difficult to
understand.
Inappropriate/disinterested
body language.

Sporadic eye contact by more
than one presenter.
The audience was distracted,
difficult to hear, body
language distracting.

Good eye contact by
members but
presentation lack
lustre

Most members
spoke to majority
of audience;
steady eye
contact.
The audience was
engaged by the
presentation.
Majority of
presenters spoke
at a suitable
volume.

Regular/constant eye
contact, The audience was
engaged, and presenters
held the audience’s
attention.
Appropriate speaking
volume & body language.

Visual aids (PP
slides)
(2 marks)

Many errors in
spelling/grammar/punctuation.
No attention to detail. Slides
inconsistent /difficult to read
with too much information.
Lacking visual appeal.

Some errors in
spelling/grammar/punctuation.
Too much information was
contained on many slides.

Slides contain few
errors or
inconsistencies but
more effort is
required to make
them look
professional/polished

Slides contain no
errors, good
formatting,
significant visual
appeal.

Excellent slides, no errors/
inconsistencies.
Information is clear &
concise on each
slide.Visually
appealing/engaging
adding to the audience
experience

Research/Content
(4 marks)

The presentation was a brief
look at the topic but many
questions were left
unanswered.
Majority of information
irrelevant and significant
points left out.

The presentation was
informative but several
elements went unanswered.
Much of the information
irrelevant; coverage of some
of major points.

The presentation
was a good
summary of the
topic.
Most important
information covered;
little irrelevant info.

The presentation
gave good insight
into the topic.
Most important
information
covered; little
irrelevant info.

The presentation was a
concise insightful overview
of the topic with all
questions answered.
Comprehensive and
complete coverage of
information.

Group organization
/Professionalism
(2 marks)

Late, disorganised, Multiple
group members not
participating /interrupting/
inattentive/chatting during
presentation. Evident lack of
preparation/rehearsal. Over
dependent on slides.

Significant controlling by
some members with one
minimally contributing.
Primarily prepared but with
some dependence on just
reading off slides.

Slight domination of
one presenter.
Members helped
each other.
Evidence of sound
preparation.

Well prepared,
organised, all
group members
attentive during
presentation.

All presenters knew the
information, participated
equally, and helped each
other as needed.
Extremely prepared and
rehearsed with no hitches