Individual Coursework Assignment – 80%

The individual coursework assignment is a report focused on the

application of Strategic Planning vs Emergent Strategy, as applied in an
established well-known enterprise of the student’s choosing.

The individual assessment will be due by 3pm on Monday 24th April

2023, to be submitted via Turnitin.

N.B. YOU MUST CHOOSE A DIFFERENT ORGANISATION TO YOUR

MARKETING ASSIGNMENTS

Purpose of Assignment: The assignment is aimed at enhancing your

ability to apply the material learned on this course to a particular case
and its context.

Assignment brief: Each student will select a well-known enterprise and

develop a report no longer than 3500 words (excluding Executive
Summary of no more than one page and references). The report
should critically appraise the application of Strategic Planning vs
Emergent Strategy within the enterprise, drawing upon the wider
theory introduced through the module and using extensive
research and critical analysis of the chosen case.

It is worth spending time researching potential companies, as your report

must have access to relevant examples, market data and
information. Along with the focus of Strategic Planning vs Emergent
Strategy the report should demonstrate how this has contributed to
existing innovations within the company, and opportunities
presented for future innovation.

You must relate content to the relevant theories, focusing upon strategic
planning and emergent strategy, and more importantly apply them to the
chosen company justifying your narrative. The emphasis should not
be on the explanation of the relevant theories (keep this brief) as it
is more important to read widely; apply the appropriate strategic
management frameworks and tools; and provide sufficient
evidence to show that an appropriate depth of research and
analysis has been undertaken. Marks will be given for embedding
suitable arguments and undertaking analysis.
The report should have four sections
- Company Context (presented drawing upon relevant strategic
analysis tools)
- Strategic planning vs. Emergent Strategy
- Innovation: Existing examples and opportunities
- Discussion and Recommendations
Suggested Outline Plan

Cover sheet / declaration form

i. Executive summary (1 page)

This summarises what you found out from each section.
Do not summarise generically what each section covers. This
section gives the key findings and can only be written at the end.

Contents Page (include the page numbers for the sections)

1. Introduction

Set the scope of the case – brief background and what your
report will cover. So for example UK? Or a particular sector
(SBU) within the company?

Apply strategic tools to establish the context (use diagrams,

charts, and tables to succinctly convey this information). Use
PESTEL, Porters five forces, SWOT and Bowmans clock. This
needs to done with the use of pictures, tables, graphs, annotated
diagrams etc. This will help set the context of your strategic
analysis. Use evidence.

2. Critically evaluate Strategic Planning – brief explanation and

link to the case – drawing on the advantages /disadvantages in
relation to the case. Use evidence / examples. Link to the
theorists.

3. Critically evaluate Emergent Strategy – brief explanation and

link to the case - drawing on the advantages /disadvantages in
relation to the case. Use evidence / examples. Link to the
theorists.

4. Drawing on your analysis in section one critically evaluate

innovation existing and future with the use of examples. To
what extent is this planned or emergent – discuss – are there
benefits / drawbacks? What are the competition doing? What
are the expected trends – Mintel can help with this. What is
happening in the macro environment that impacts the business
and what next and why?
 In light of COVID-19 you may wish to discuss the implications
of deliberate versus emergent strategy on the business and how
the organisation might innovate.

5. Conclusion – link back to the question set and bring together the
key ideas. To what extent has the case used strategic planning
versus emergent strategy – justify if there is a best way

6. Recommendations – what should your case / company do next

in relation to strategic planning / emergent strategy and future
innovation

NB: you can use examples from the past but the emphasis needs
to be on up to date analysis. You can draw on the topics that
you have learned over the course of the module to consider the
type of strategy being used.

Reference List

Top Tips for Effective Report Writing

1. It is important that you read widely and use academic sources to

justify your work. APA 7th style references.
2. Report writing is succinct and concise – only 3500 words – do not
repeat points.
3. In a report use plenty of headings / sub headings – plenty of white
space. It should be easy to read – bullet points can be used as well as
diagrams / charts / tables
4. Start a new page for each new section
5. Use third person
6. Avoid “Now where days” and “so on.” The plural of research is
research.
7. Proof read carefully
8. Ensure all tables, charts show the source (citations). If your using
diagrams such as Bowman’s clock then make sure you tailor it to the
case and the competition. There is no need to simply copy material –
apply it!
9. If your work looks more like an essay – apply all of the above!
Marking Criteria

Key Marking criteria will include (please see the marking guide appendix 2 in the
module guide ):

 Initiative: originality, innovativeness of answer

 Assignment Structure: clarity of aims, objective, structure and presentation
 Quality of Writing: Readability and ability to convey key message(s) concisely
 Quality/Scope of Literature Review: Understanding of established knowledge
 Suitability of Literature: Use of suitable sources, focused to answer key research aims
 Literature Analysis: Quality/level of analytical skill demonstrated
 Insightfulness of Analysis: Interest and usefulness of findings, conclusions drawn.
 Understanding: Assignment demonstrates students have understood key topics
 Overall Quality of Assignment
Mark (%)Class Structure and Engagement with Knowledge and Application Analysis and Evaluation Quality of
Descriptor Quality of Writing literature Understanding Conclusions
70-100 Excellent structure, Engagement with an Excellent, coherent and Answers question Ideas always expressed logically and Excellent. Key
Distinction all areas flow well extensive range of detailed knowledge, with a fully and coherently. Excellent critical thinking, ideas drawn
and are logical. relevant and credible systematic and highly completely. analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Can together with a
Excellent structure / literature. A wide range of critical understanding of the Excellent adaptation interpret qualitative and quantitative strong conclusion
presentation sources used including key principles and theories. and application of data accurately and with high level of in relation to the
addressing all areas independently sourced. Considers wider aspects of concepts. Clear insight. Excellent ability to devise strong questions
Consistently accurate the subject area, with use of links between persuasive arguments with explicit
application of referencing. current research to inform theory and practical recognition of other stances.
understanding. application. Demonstrates a good grasp on the
wider aspects of the discipline including
opposing opinions. Excellent use of the
literature to support arguments and
take a reflective stance.
60-69 Very good a few Engagement with a wide Knowledge is reasonably Answers question Sound critical thinking, analysis, Very good
Meritable minor errors. Very range of literature, extensive, coherent and fully. Very good synthesis and evaluation of the key conclusion
Pass good clear including sources detailed. Exhibits very good adaptation and concepts and principles. Can interpret drawing most of
structure / retrieved independently. critical understanding of the application of qualitative and quantitative data the key ideas
presentation with Selection of relevant and key concepts. Demonstrates concepts. accurately. Ability to devise and sustain together with a
suitable use of credible sources. depth and breadth of Sometimes lacks persuasive arguments using evidence good conclusion
headings, graphs. Generally sound knowledge and is in most consideration of the to synthesise rather than describe.
Most areas covered referencing, with no/very parts using research to links between Shows awareness of other stances and
to a good standard few inaccuracies or inform understanding. theory and opinions to support appropriate and
inconsistencies. application. valid judgements
50-59 Basic but Engagement with a Limited knowledge and Only answers some Limited attempt at critical thinking, Satisfactory
Pass satisfactory attempt, limited range of mostly critical and systematic aspects of the analysis, synthesis and evaluation, conclusion with
some grammatical relevant and credible understanding of the key question. tending towards description. Mis some gaps
and punctuation sources but with some concepts and principles Satisfactory interpretation of qualitative and
errors. Satisfactory reliance on information within the subject area. adaptation or quantitative data with major errors.
structure / gained through class Some consideration given to application of Some evidence to support emerging
presentation contact. Some omissions current research in the concepts. Some arguments and judgements but these
Some gaps in the and minor errors. development of ideas. irrelevant material may be underdeveloped or with a little
essay Referencing conventions inconsistency / mis-interpretation
evident though not always
applied accurately or
consistently.
40-49 Several areas Poor engagement with Gaps knowledge of the key Only answers some Ideas rarely expressed logically. Little Poor conclusion
Fail unclear and essential reading. No concepts and principles, aspects of the or no linking of ideas within the text. that fails to bring
incoherent. Poor evidence of wider with only superficial critical question. Limited Largely descriptive work, with the key ideas
structure / reading. Reliance on and systematic adaptation or superficial evaluation and analysis of together and
 presentation not inappropriate sources, understanding. Some application of the key concepts and principles. Weak address the
following best and/or indiscriminate use significant inaccuracies concepts. Inclusion interpretation of data, flawed question
practise of sources. Heavily reliant and/or irrelevant material. of a wide range of development of arguments and
Quite a few gaps in on information gained Demonstrates no irrelevant material. judgements. Information accepted
the essay through class contact. awareness of current uncritically, uses generalised
Inconsistent and weak research within the statements made with scant evidence
use of referencing. discipline. and unsubstantiated opinions. Ideas
sometimes illogical and contradictory
with no consideration given to the wider
opinions/views.
30-39 Mostly unclear, and Little or no evidence of Major gaps in knowledge Wholly fails to Ideas expressed incoherently. No Very poor
Bad Fail incoherent. Very reading and/or reliance and understanding of the answer the linking of ideas within text. Wholly or conclusion that
poor structure / on inappropriate sources. key concepts and principles question. No almost wholly descriptive work. Little or does not address
presentation not Views and findings mostly of the subject matter. adaptation or no evaluation of the underlying the questions set.
following best unsupported and non- Inclusion of irrelevant application of concepts and principles
practice authoritative. material. Substantial concepts.
Many gaps in the Referencing conventions inaccuracies and no critical
essay used incoherently or and systematic
largely absent. understanding.
Demonstrates no
awareness of current
research within the
discipline.