Analysing internal capabilities and external pressures for better strategy decisions

Assessment 1: Strategic Management Case Study Report

Module information

Module title: Strategic Management
Module code: BUSN3025 (or equivalent upper-level Management unit)
Level: Final-year undergraduate
Weighting: 35% of overall module grade
Length: 2,000–2,400-word individual report (excluding references and appendices)
Submission deadline: Week 7, Friday, 23:59 (via LMS Turnitin link)

Assessment description

You investigate the current strategic position of a real organisation and evaluate the suitability of its strategic options in light of internal capabilities and external pressures. The task expects a structured application of core strategic management tools to a recent business situation and a reasoned set of recommendations that reflect contemporary practice.

Case study selection

Select one organisation operating in a competitive industry. The organisation may be public, private, or not-for-profit, but it must have enough publicly available information to support analysis. Many recent briefings use listed companies because annual reports, investor presentations, and analyst commentary are easier to access.

Task requirements

Organise the report into clear sections with headings. The following structure is recommended.

1. Organisational overview (approx. 250–300 words)

• Provide concise information on the organisation’s core business, size, main products or services, and primary markets.

• Identify the key strategic issue or decision area you intend to focus on, for example market entry, diversification, restructuring, or response to new competitors.

2. External environment analysis (approx. 550–650 words)

• Apply an appropriate macro-environment tool such as PESTEL to outline the main political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legal factors that shape the organisation’s context.

• Use Porter’s Five Forces or a similar industry-level framework to assess competitive intensity and the organisation’s position in its sector.

• Highlight the specific external opportunities and threats that relate directly to the strategic issue identified earlier.

3. Internal analysis and strategic capability (approx. 500–600 words)

• Use a structured approach such as VRIO, value chain analysis, or a resource-based view to evaluate the organisation’s resources and capabilities.

• Identify core strengths and weaknesses that influence the organisation’s ability to respond to the external environment.

• Discuss how current strategies draw on those capabilities and where there are gaps or misalignments.

4. Evaluation of current strategy and options (approx. 450–550 words)

• Summarise the organisation’s current strategic direction, for example business-level strategy, corporate-level choices, or internationalisation patterns.

• Use established criteria such as suitability, acceptability, and feasibility to assess the quality of existing strategic responses to the issue you identified.

• Propose at least two realistic strategic options and evaluate their relative merits using relevant theories and evidence.

5. Recommendations and implementation considerations (approx. 250–300 words)

• Present a clear, justified recommendation on which strategic option or combination of options should be pursued.

• Outline concrete implementation considerations, including potential resource implications, key stakeholders, and indicative timeframes.

Research and referencing expectations

• Draw on a minimum of four recent academic sources (2018–2026) that address strategic management concepts, tools, or empirical findings.

• Support your analysis with appropriate use of industry reports, company documents, and reliable news sources where relevant.

• Reference all sources consistently using Harvard style and include a complete reference list at the end of the report.

Formatting and submission

• Word count: 2,000–2,400 words, excluding title page, references, and appendices.

• Use 12-point font, 1.5 line spacing, and standard margins.

• Include page numbers and your student ID on every page.

• Submit a single Word or PDF file through the module’s LMS site before the deadline.

Marking rubric

1. Quality of strategic analysis (35%)

• Excellent (70–100%): Analysis uses appropriate strategic tools accurately and insightfully, integrates internal and external perspectives, and shows consistent focus on the stated strategic issue.

• Good (60–69%): Tools are applied correctly with clear links to the chosen organisation, though depth or integration is uneven in places.

• Satisfactory (50–59%): Tools are used in a basic way with limited critical interpretation or weak integration between different parts of the analysis.

• Limited (40–49%): Misapplication or superficial use of tools with minimal evidence of interpretation.

• Poor (0–39%): Strategic analysis is largely descriptive or incorrect, with little connection to relevant frameworks.

2. Use of theory and evidence (25%)

• Excellent: Demonstrates confident use of recent strategic management literature, clearly links theory to practice, and supports arguments with specific, credible evidence.

• Good: Uses relevant theories and some recent sources, with generally appropriate evidence, though some arguments remain underdeveloped.

• Satisfactory: Shows awareness of core theories but relies on a narrow range of sources or general statements.

• Limited: Minimal or outdated literature, weak evidence base, or heavy dependence on unsupported assertions.

• Poor: Little to no engagement with academic literature or reliable evidence.

3. Quality of recommendations and strategic judgement (20%)

• Excellent: Recommendations are specific, realistic, and aligned with the analysis; shows strong strategic judgement and awareness of risk and implementation challenges.

• Good: Recommendations follow from the analysis and are realistic, but implementation issues or risks are addressed only briefly.

• Satisfactory: Recommendations are broadly relevant but lack specificity or justification.

• Limited: Proposals are vague, generic, or only loosely connected to the analysis.

• Poor: Recommendations are missing or clearly inappropriate.

4. Structure, academic writing, and referencing (20%)

• Excellent: Report is logically organised, writing is clear and fluent, and referencing is accurate and consistent throughout.

• Good: Overall structure is clear, though some sections could be more concise or better linked; minor referencing errors only.

• Satisfactory: Organisation is adequate but uneven; language issues occasionally affect clarity; referencing contains several errors.

• Limited: Structure is difficult to follow, with frequent language mistakes and inconsistent referencing.

• Poor: Serious problems with organisation, clarity, and referencing.

A large grocery retailer facing new discount entrants has increased its focus on private label ranges and store refurbishments. The external analysis highlights intense price competition and rising expectations around digital convenience, which combine to squeeze margins and heighten the need for clear differentiation. Internal evidence suggests that long-standing supplier relationships and an advanced data analytics capability give the retailer opportunities to build more targeted value propositions. Recent strategic management research shows that organisations with coherent combinations of resources and market-facing choices outperform those that rely on incremental, uncoordinated moves, particularly in mature industries where room for organic growth is limited (Barney, 2020).

References

1. Barney, J.B. (2020) Resource-based theory: Creating and sustaining competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 46(8), pp. 1646–1659. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320907646

2. Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Regnér, P., Angwin, D. and Scholes, K. (2020) Exploring Strategy: Text and Cases. 12th edn. Harlow: Pearson.

3. Grant, R.M. (2021) Contemporary Strategy Analysis. 11th edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

4. Wheelen, T.L., Hunger, J.D., Hoffman, A.N. and Bamford, C.E. (2018) Strategic Management and Business Policy: Globalization, Innovation and Sustainability. 15th edn. Harlow: Pearson.