Assignment Requirements
The portfolio is a combination of mini projects and exercises. Your entire portfolio should be contained in a single file. The Harvard referencing system must be used and a bibliography attached.
YOU HAVE TO READ CEARFULLY ALL THE FILLS WHICH I ATTACHED AND SEE THE EXAMPLE AND DO ACCORDINGLY
REMMBER IT IS PORTFLIO
Module Assessment Briefing for Students
Assessment Brief/ Task
Item 1
Managers within a strategic business unit or small organisations can make use of a variety of strategic techniques ideas and tools as part of the business planning process .Critically review the value of the main tools that exist to determine the most appropriate bases of competitive advantage including Porter’s thinking on generic strategies. (Indicative word limit: no more than 1,500 words. Harvard referencing convention must be applied).
Item 2
Produce a meaningful wiki contribution to Risk analysis and (contingency planning)
no more than the equivalent of half a page of A4 paper.. Your contribution should be helpful, easy to read and contain appropriate web links to other sources. Make a hard copy of your contribution to the wiki and include this as your second portfolio item. (Indicative word limit: no more than the equivalent of half a page of A4 paper. Harvard referencing convention must be applied.)
Item 3
Throughout your study of this module you will be required to develop a robust checklist of review issues that would be helpful in conducting an evaluation of a business plan. (Indicative word limit: no more than the equivalent of three pages of A4 paper). All published sources used in developing your checklist should be properly included in a set of references and other sources.
Item 4
Follow the link below and you will find several complete business plans. In the classroom briefing you will be allocated one plan to concentrate on. Critically evaluate this document using the checklist you have developed. Comment in particular on the strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience. Indicative word limit: no more than 3,000 words excluding appendices.
http://www.businessplans.org/businessplans.html
In THIS ITEM YOU HAVE TO WRITE ABOUT :
Internet Services:
.Important requirements
| Presentation Format: | Individual portfolio. (The portfolio is a combination of mini projects and exercises) Your entire portfolio should be contained in a single file. The Harvard referencing system must be used and a bibliography attached. |
| Assessment limits | The assessment for this module is subject to a word limit to ensure consistency of approach across all modules. Your work must not exceed 6,000 words (excluding appendices). Rather than slavishly adhere to this word indication concentrate instead on satisfying the stated learning outcomes which are articulated through the assessment criteria (see next page). (this a maximum figure not a guide figure to be achieved) |
|
|
|
| Learning Outcomes Tested
|
LO1 Interpret the role of a business manager in the development of strategy (tested through item 1)
LO2 Synthesise functional thinking such as marketing practices within the context of a cohesive business plan for action that recognises external environments and issues (tested through item 2)
LO3 Evaluate the value of business plans and their associated processes (tested through items 3 and 4)
|
| Assessment Criteria & Performance descriptors (by grade)
|
(Note that in all cases F grade is unacceptable and not even to the E standard identified)
A Articulate, comprehensive yet concise. Demonstrates an excellent capacity to express views based upon realistic argument. A purposeful description of the manager’s role in the business planning process. Excellent critical review of the value of all the main tools that exist and their value in determining the most appropriate bases of competitive advantage. Complete accurate referencing using the Harvard standard. B, C,D A fulsome effort. An expression of well-argued views. Some description of the manager’s role in the business planning process. Critical review of the value of relevant tools that exist and their value in determining the most appropriate bases of competitive advantage. Referencing using the Harvard standard. B The above to a very good standard. References beyond those identified in classroom sources. Clear evidence of independent thought. C The above to a sound standard. Limited degree of independent thought. D The above to a satisfactory standard, albeit some weaknesses evident. Some evidence of independent thought. E An overly descriptive or limited effort with superficial interpretation and little analysis or evaluation. Possibly shows some understanding insight into the subject area but fails to address the question in hand. Possible superficial discussion and/or narrow or dated sources used. Possible Faulty referencing and or spelling and grammatical errors. Item 2 A Excellent style. Very clear, comprehensive yet concise with helpful weblinks. B,C,D Clear concise and appropriate wiki contribution. B The above fully addressed to a very good standard based on clear independent thought. C The above addressed to a sound standard. Limited degree of independent thought. D The above to a satisfactory standard, albeit some weaknesses evident. Possible confusion. Some evidence of independent thought. E Confused, unbalanced, or superficial. Either overly wordy or failing to contain meaningful weblinks.
Item 3A Comprehensive, robust and meaningful review checklist drawn from multiple sources and independent thinking. B,C,D Worthwhile, extensive and meaningful review checklist drawn from several sources and containing some degree of independent thinking. B The above to a very good standard. Clear evidence of independent thought. C The above to a sound standard. Limited degree of independent thought. D The above to a satisfactory standard, albeit some weaknesses and omissions of certain aspects evident. Some evidence of independent thought. E A confused effort with a partial or inappropriate checklist. Inappropriate and/or lacking in breadth, value and independent thinking. Item 4 A Excellent balanced evaluation of allocated business plan based systematic analysis and review. Excellent commentary on the strengths and limitations of the plan and well-argued analysis of the degree of appropriateness to the target audience. B,C,D Worthwhile evaluation of business plan based upon thoughtful analysis and review. Commentary on the strengths and limitations of the plan and analysis of the degree of appropriateness to the target audience. B The above to a very good standard. Clear evidence of independent thought. C The above to a sound standard. Limited degree of independent thought. D The above to a satisfactory standard, albeit some weaknesses evident. Some evidence of independent thought. E An inappropriate or partially worked effort. Possibly lacking in critical evaluation or confused. Failure to present argument clearly. Possible failure to review allocated business plan. |
| Recommended reading and other sources (Where different from module guide listing) | Reference to standard strategic management texts is helpful in this respect e.g. Chapter 6 of Johnson, Scholes and Whittington (2009) Fundamentals of strategy. F/Prentice Hall
There are numerous sources that support items 2 and 3a many on line. |
| Module code & title | 7BE001 | Strategic Business Planning | |||
| Module Learning outcomes: | Tick (Ö)
if tested here |
||||
| LO1 | Interpret the role of a business manager in the development of strategy (tested through portfolio item 1) | Ö
|
|||
| LO2 | Synthesise functional thinking such as marketing practices within the context of a cohesive business plan for action that recognises external environments and issues (tested through portfolio item 2) | Ö
|
|||
| LO3 | Evaluate the value of business plans and their associated processes (tested through portfolio items 3 and 4) | Ö
|
|||
| Assessment types | Weightings (%) | ||||
| Individual portfolio
|
100 | ||||
Important requirements (Delete where appropriate, if other please provide detail)
Mode of Working: individual
Presentation Format: portfolio, a collection of smaller items together
| Assessment limits
|
No more than: 6,000 words, excluding appendices |
Explanation of submission requirements and further guidance
- Assessments are subject to a word limit to ensure consistency of approach across all modules. Your work should not exceed the limit indicated (excluding references and appendices). Do not feel that you have to “achieve” this word count in your work. What is important is that the work satisfies the stated learning outcomes which are articulated through the assessment criteria (see following page).
- Care is taken to ensure that work has been marked correctly. Checks are conducted by both a second lecturer and an independent expert from outside the University on batches of work.
- Your work will not be returned to you but you will receive detailed feedback explaining how your mark has been arrived at and how your work could have been improved upon.
- Always use the Harvard style referencing system. The University’s Learning Information Services have produced a series of guides covering a range of topics to support your studies and develop your academic skills including a guide to Harvard referencing
- Expensive or elaborate bindings and covers for submissions are not required in most instances. (Refer to guidelines however in the case of dissertations).
- The Business School has a policy of anonymous marking of individual assessments which applies to most modules. You should not identify yourself directly in the work you submit and you may need to use phrases such as “the author of this assignment ….”in the detail of your submission.
Assessment Brief/ Task
The detailed requirements for this task are as follows:
The portfolio is a combination of mini projects and exercises. Your entire portfolio should be contained in a single file. The Harvard referencing system must be used and a bibliography attached.
Item 1Managers within a strategic business unit or small organisations can make use of a variety of strategic techniques ideas and tools as part of the business planning process. Critically review the value of the main tools that exist to determine the most appropriate bases of competitive advantage including Porter’s thinking on generic strategies. (Indicative word limit: no more than 1,500 words. Harvard referencing convention must be applied). Item 2Produce a meaningful wiki contribution to Risk analysis and (contingency planning)no more than the equivalent of half a page of A4 paper. Your contribution should be helpful, easy to read and contain appropriate web links to other sources. Make a hard copy of your contribution to the wiki and include this as your second portfolio item. (Indicative word limit: no more than the equivalent of half a page of A4 paper. Harvard referencing convention must be applied.)Item 3Throughout your study of this module you will be required to develop a robust checklist of review issues that would be helpful in conducting an analysis of a business plan. (Indicative word limit: no more than the equivalent of three pages of A4 paper). All published sources used in developing your checklist should be properly included in a set of references and other sources.Item 4Follow the link below and you will find several complete business plans. In the classroom briefing you will be allocated one plan to concentrate on. Critically analyse this document using the checklist you have developed. Comment in particular on the strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience. Indicative word limit: no more than 3,000 words excluding appendices. In THIS ITEM YOU HAVE TO WRITE ABOUT : Internet Services:
|
Assessment Criteria
The module Learning Outcomes tested by this assessment task are indicated on page 1. The precise criteria against which your work will be marked is as follows:
- Presentation and content through a mini-assignment
- Secondary research & review through a web-based activity
- Critical analysis: through the effective development and use of a checklist to analyse a given business plan
Performance descriptors
Performance descriptors indicate how marks will be arrived at against each of the above criteria. The descriptors indicate the likely characteristics of work that is marked within the percentage bands indicated.
| Criteria | 70-100% Work of an outstanding, excellent & v. good standard | 60-69% Work of a good standard. | Pass 50-59% Work of a pass standard. | 40-49% FAIL | 0-39% FAIL |
| Presentation and content
(Portfolio item 1) |
A balanced, well structured mini- assignment, generally coherent in approach. Demonstrates originality, innovation and depth in the content and theory. Well-written, well presented and largely or wholly free of spelling and/or typographical errors. Very good, possibly faultless application of Harvard referencing system. |
A balanced, well structured mini- assignment.
The work is insightful and has an appropriate selection of content and theory in key areas identified in the brief. Overall clear well-written, well presented. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar. Good application of Harvard referencing system. |
Mini- assignment is cohesive, but may be hindered by inappropriate balance, structure or writing style. Key theories and ideas are included in an appropriate manner. Argument possibly underdeveloped in places. Some small repeated errors in referencing or grammar. | Whilst some of the characteristics of a pass have been demonstrated, the work does not address the requirements overall. Appropriate selection of content/theory but some key aspects missed/misconstrued. Lack of range of theory. Possibly lacking in balance, structure or writing style. Some repeated errors in referencing and/or grammar. |
Does not address the assignment brief. Uses inaccurate or inappropriate content/theory. Significant failings in balance, structure or writing style. Repeated possibly significant errors in referencing and/or grammar. Possibly lacking in coherence. |
| Secondary research & review
(Portfolio item 2) |
Evidence of wider reading around the subject. Sources are synthesised to a very good standard or better and coherently and concisely expressed. A highly effective web based contribution. | Demonstrates the ability to appraise critically the theory and literature. Sources are synthesised to a good standard and coherently and expressed. An effective web based contribution. | Clear evidence of evaluation and application of relevant literature. Some synthesis of sources and effectively expressed. An appropriate web based contribution. | Some evaluation and application of relevant literature but possibly lacking in synthesis and/or ineffectively expressed. A web based contribution that needs further development. | Little or no evidence of research around the subject. Possible fundamental misunderstandings over subject matter. Ideas poorly expressed or expressed in an inappropriate form. Possible failure to post contribution on the web. |
| Critical Analysis
(Portfolio items 3&4) |
Demonstrates a clear capacity to develop and apply a fine checklist effectively as part of an appropriate (even insightful) critical analysis of the given business plan. A very high standard of work throughout. Clear evidence of independent thought and effective presentation of ideas. Comprehensive coverage of the strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to it meets the needs of its target audience. Possibly displays a distinct level of originality. | Demonstrates a capacity to apply a good checklist as part of an appropriate critical analysis of the given business plan. A good standard of work throughout. Good presentation of ideas and examples of sound argument and solid evidence. Good coverage of the strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience. | The work explores and analyses the given plan, but is possibly lacking in genuine insight. The checklist may be limited in some ways. Possibly fails to express ideas fully or fails to address all the issues fully including strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience.
The work may be mainly descriptive, but has achieved the learning outcome. |
The work explores the given plan, but is possibly lacking in insight. The checklist may be lacking and underdeveloped in some ways. Possibly fails to express ideas effectively or fails to address all the issues of strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience. The work may be an overly descriptive account demonstrating only minimal interpretation, and very limited evidence of analysis. | Fundamental misconceptions throughout. Limited analysis of a superficial nature relying mainly/wholly on description. Possibly poorly expressed, structured and presented. Possible failure to analyse the correct business plan. Possible failure to develop a meaningful checklist.Possibly failure to address all the issues of strengths and limitations of the plan and the degree to which it meets the needs of its target audience. |
| Aspect | comments |
| Executive Summary Why will the business succeed? What do you want to start (or change)? How much money is required? Why is the venture a good risk? | |
| Business Description What type of business are you planning? What products or services will you sell? What type of opportunity is it (new, part-time, expansion, seasonal, year-round)? Why does it promise to be successful? What is the growth potential? How is it unique? | |
| Marketing Who are your potential customers? How large is the market? Who are your competitors? How are their businesses positioned? How will you price the product or service? What advertising and promotional strategies will you use? | |
| Research, Design, and Development Have you carefully described your design or development? What technical assistance have you received? What development needs do you anticipate? What are the costs of development? | |
| Manufacturing/Operations Where will the business be located? Why? What are your facilities needs? What are your equipment needs? Are there other needs for production? What activities are required to produce your product or service? Who will be your suppliers? What type of transportation is available? What is the supply of available labour? What will it cost to produce your product or service? Per unit? | |
| Organization Who will manage the business? What qualifications do you have? How many employees will you need? How will you structure your organization? What are your plans for employee salaries, wages and benefits? What consultants or specialists will you need? How will you use them? What legal form or ownership will you choose? Why? What licenses and permits will you need? | |
| Critical Risks What potential problems could arise? How likely are they? How do you plan to manage these potential problems? | |
| Financial What is your total estimated business income for the first year? Monthly for the first year? Quarterly for the second and third years? What will it cost you to open (expand) the business? What will your personal monthly financial needs be? What sales volume will you need in order to make a profit during the first three years? What will be the break-even point? What will be your projected assets, liabilities, and net worth on the day before you expect to open? What are your total financial needs? What are your potential funding sources? How will you spend it? How will the loans be secured? | |
| Milestone Schedule What timing have you projected for this project? How have you set your objectives? Have you set up your deadlines for each stage of your venture? Is there a relationship between events in this venture?
Appendix Have you included all important documents, drawings, agreements, and references? |
Order Now