Posted: May 15th, 2022

MGMT6011 Strategic Management Capstone Assessment Two – Consultative Report

MGMT6011_Assessment_2.Docx Page 1 of 5

ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGMT6011 Strategic Management Capstone
Assessment Two – Consultative Report
Individual/Group Group
Length 3000 words
Learning Outcomes PLO1, PLO2, PLO3 and PLO4
Submission By 11:55 PM, Melbourne time, Friday, end of Module 6
Weighting 50%
Total Marks 50
Objectives:


 Apply strategic management theory into practice;
Development understanding of theories, concepts and models to support operations frm a
strategic perspective;
Identify and analyse strategic issues;
Assess organisational strengths and limitations;
Build awareness of ethical and social considerations for strategic issues;
Evaluate information in support of the development of a case study report; and
Gain global perspectives in the analysis of strategic issues.





Instructions:
Refer to the Hubbard paper on how to analyse a case study. Use it as the basis for analysing the case
study provided. Be sure to integrate your understanding of the theory from the subject. It is
expected that you will use a minimum of 20 academic journal references in putting your case study
report together. Be sure to include a one-page executive summary, as well as formal document
sections.
You are expected to produce an academic report that includes an executive summary, formal
document sections such as a table of contents, introduction and conclusion. As this is the capstone
(or equivalent) subject, it is expected you will be very used to and comfortable with using external
sources to validate your thinking and to demonstrate substantial wider reading.
Students should use the brief to inform what is required in the assignment and the following rubric
to inform the standard of work required to earn your desired grade.
MGMT6011_Assessment_2.docx Page 2 of 5
Learning Rubrics

Assessment
Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (Functional) Pass (Proficient) Credit (Advanced) Distinction High Distinction (Exceptional)
Identification of
strategic issues
5 marks Does not adequately demonstrate an
awareness of strategic issues. Focuses
on low-level ideas that are operational
in nature or that do not affect the long
term viability of the enterprise. Adequately
demonstrates an
awareness of strategic
issues. More work is
needed to articulate an
understanding of the
case study and its
emergence as a key
competitor. Meets minimum
requirements in
demonstrating an
awareness of strategic
issues. May require
some additional work
in making some aspects
of the case study
clearer to the reader,
or to provide more
contextual detail. Exceeds minimum
requirements,
clearly articulating
a penchant for
awareness of
strategic. The
report, particularly
the start, is
focused on the
strategic issues
facing the case
study organisation. Demonstrates an
outstanding
awareness of strategic
issues in the
presentation of the
case study. This
aspect of the report
should be used to
demonstrate to future
students how to
demonstrate strategic
awareness!
Assessment of
organisational context
10 marks Does not demonstrate any formal
techniques in assessing and analysing
the external environment. Relies on
narrative to describe context. Adequately applies one
or more formal
techniques in assessing
and presenting the
context for the case
study organisation.
Some greater attention
to detail is needed. Meets minimum
requirements in
applying formal
techniques. Could use
an additional technique
to fully present the
context. Minor errors
in the application may
feature. Moves beyond
minimum
requirements by
attempting a
PESTEL, SWOT and
five forces analysis
to a good standard.
Context is clear. Shows an outstanding
application of formal
techniques, including
PESTEL, SWOT and
the five forces model
to an excellent
standard. Analyses
critically presented
and shows no bias.
MGMT6011_Assessment_2.docx Page 3 of 5

Assessment
Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (Functional) Pass (Proficient) Credit (Advanced) Distinction High Distinction (Exceptional)
Analysis of strategic
issues
10 marks Does not use the prescribed
techniques—value chain and VIRO—to
an adequate standard. Analysis is
cursory or non-existent. Does not trace
the source of competitive advantage. Demonstrates an
adequate application of
value chain- and/or
VIRO analyses.
Significantly more
detail is required to
demonstrate mastery
of these. Analysis may
need to be focused
more. Meets minimum
requirements in the
preparation of value
chain- and VIRO
analyses. May need to
trace competitive
advantage back to its
source in order to fully
demonstrate proficient
use of the prescribed
techniques. Moves beyond
minimum
requirements in
the application f
the value chain
and VIRO analyses.
Demonstrates a
firm grasp of the
analytical tools and
shows progress
toward mastery of
them. Demonstrates
outstanding
application of value
chain and VIRO
analysis to produce
considered and critical
analysis of sources of
sustainable
competitive
advantage. Mastery
of analytical
techniques has been
shown.
Recommendations
5 marks Little or no recommendations are
provided. Of those that are present
they are pedestrian, lack imagination or
do not relate to the development of the
case study. Adequate volume of
recommendations is
provided. The
individual
recommendations can
be seen to relate to the
development of the
case study but need
development in order
to generate blockbuster
status. Meets minimum
requirements in the
development of an
appropriate volume of
recommendations that
are related to the case
study and demonstrate
an appropriate degree
of imagination, leading
to a clear attainment of
sustainable competitive
advantage. Exceeds minimum
requirements in
the development
of a number of
strong
recommendations
that relate to the
case study and
demonstrate
imagination. A
clear path forward
has been charted. Recommendations
can be seen to
integrate directly with
theoretical concepts
established earlier in
the report.
Recommendations
consistently transcend
practical
considerations and
represent the
attainment of
sustainable
competitive
advantage.
MGMT6011_Assessment_2.docx Page 4 of 5

Assessment
Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (Functional) Pass (Proficient) Credit (Advanced) Distinction High Distinction (Exceptional)
Report presentation
5 marks The presentation needs serious work.
One or more critical elements—
introduction, conclusion or executive
summary—are missing, the paper is
grossly over the word limit. The paper
may lack headings and adequate
division into paragraphs. The paper is adequately
presented, although it
is hard for a reader to
navigate. One of the
introduction,
conclusion or executive
summary is missing or
needs work. There may
be a breach of the word
limit and expression
needs significant work
to get your message
across to the reader. The presentation meets
a minimum
requirement and
includes all formal
document sections
(introduction,
conclusion and
executive summary).
Some additional
headings or division
into paragraphs would
help reader
comprehension. Some
work on phrasing will
also help readability. The paper moves
beyond minimum
requirements as it
is presented
professionally. The
formal document
sections
(introduction,
conclusion and
executive
summary) are
present and meet
expectations. An outstanding
presentation. All
sections flow logically,
are linked and have
been punctuated with
a compelling
executive summary,
introduction and
conclusion. All figures
are labelled
appropriately,
introduced and form
part of a cogent
argument in the
discussion. This is a
model presentation
for future students.
Use of appropriate
academic sources
5 marks Little or no academic references are
used to reinforce certain points. An attempt to integrate
academic sources has
been demonstrated.
But significant
additional reading is
required to be
demonstrated. An attempt has been
made to incorporate
academic sources into
the paper. There is a
good volume of sources
being used and the
paper would benefit
from some critical
appraisal of that
literature. The paper
demonstrates a
good volume of
sources being cited
throughout. The
author has been
critical of academic
sources and all
sources referred
are in the
references list (and
vice versa). A substantial amount
of credible and strong
academic sources
have been cited
throughout the
report. The correct
referencing style has
been adhered to.
MGMT6011_Assessment_2.docx Page 5 of 5

Assessment
Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (Functional) Pass (Proficient) Credit (Advanced) Distinction High Distinction (Exceptional)
Integration of subject
theory
10 marks Makes little or no attempt to validate
theory from the subject into the
presentation of the material. Makes an attempt to
incorporate theoretical
concepts from the
course into the report. Attempts to show
theory as a feature of
the report. May need
some additional critical
thought to develop
mastery of those
theoretical
components. Has clearly made
theoretical
concepts the
feature of the
report. Is critical of
theoretical
components,
tracing the original
source of the
concept and
showing a theory
practice bridge. Demonstrates
mastery of theoretical
concepts from the
subject by critically
reflecting on and, at
times introducing
counterarguments to
those ideas. The
paper should be
reserved as a model
answer for theoretical
integration.

Check Price Discount

Study Notes, Research Topics & Assignment Examples: Prison Riots and Violence »FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT