Assessment 1: Evaluating Business-Level Strategies in a Competitive Market
Course:
MGT 5600: Strategic Management and Decision Making
Institution:
Southern New Hampshire University (SNHU)
Need a custom essay writer? Superior paper help with writing a similar assignment: Assessment of Competitive Strategy and Market Position?
Our qualified academic writers, 75% of whom hold Masters or PhD degrees, write fully original papers tailored to your rubric, citation style, and deadline. Rated 4.9/5 by thousands of students. Free Turnitin plagiarism report included.
Get Expert Help →Submission Date:
End of Week 6
Assessment Type:
Essay (Individual Assessment)
Word Length:
1,000–1,200 words (excluding title page and references)
Can someone write my paper professionally and confidentially?
Yes — My Homework Ace Tutors connects you with expert human writers in your subject area. Every paper is written from scratch (zero AI), checked for plagiarism, formatted to your specifications, and delivered before your deadline with 100% confidentially. Free revisions for 14 days.
🖉 Start My Order →Assignment Overview:
Organizations operate in highly competitive environments where success depends on choosing the right business-level strategy. Managers are expected to align a company’s internal strengths with opportunities in the market to achieve a lasting competitive advantage. The focus of this essay is to evaluate how an organization applies business-level strategies to compete effectively and respond to changes in its external environment.
Assignment Task:
Write an analytical essay evaluating the business-level strategy of a selected organization that operates in either the service, manufacturing, or technology sector. The analysis should include a detailed discussion of the company’s competitive positioning and the factors that contribute to its sustained advantage. Use current data, real-world examples, and credible academic sources to support your discussion.
Save 20% on your first order today
Use code SAVE20 at checkout. Our writers deliver AI-free, plagiarism-free papers ranging from short 1-page essays to full dissertations, and with deadlines from 4 hours to weeks due assignments. Money-back guarantee included.
🏢 Claim 20% Off →Essay Structure:
- Introduction (150–200 words)
Provide a short overview of the organization and its market context. Explain the purpose of your analysis and identify the main business-level strategy used by the organization. - Application of Strategy Frameworks (250–300 words)
Apply at least one recognized framework such as Porter’s Generic Strategies, the Resource-Based View, or Bowman’s Strategic Clock to describe the firm’s current approach. Show how this framework explains the company’s strategic choices. - Internal and External Evaluation (300–350 words)
Examine how internal capabilities and external factors influence the company’s chosen strategy. You may include tools such as SWOT, PESTLE, or Porter’s Five Forces to assess its current position. - Strategic Fit and Future Outlook (250–300 words)
Discuss how well the company’s strategy fits its resources and environment. Recommend any adjustments that could improve competitive performance in the next two to three years. - Conclusion (100–150 words)
Summarize the key findings and restate the relevance of an effective business-level strategy for long-term success.
Formatting Requirements:
- APA 7th edition format
- Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced
- Include a title page and reference list
- Minimum of four peer-reviewed academic sources published between 2018 and 2026
Grading Criteria (Total 100 points):
| Criteria | Excellent (90–100%) | Competent (75–89%) | Basic (60–74%) | Below Expectations (<60%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Application of Theory (30 pts) | Applies relevant strategic models accurately with clear connections to the selected organization. | Uses appropriate theories with moderate explanation and examples. | Applies limited theory with minimal connection to practice. | Fails to apply theoretical concepts effectively. |
| Depth of Analysis (25 pts) | Shows detailed understanding of internal and external factors affecting strategy. | Demonstrates reasonable understanding with some critical discussion. | Descriptive analysis with limited depth. | Lacks analytical discussion or fails to connect ideas logically. |
| Recommendations (20 pts) | Provides realistic, well-supported strategic recommendations. | Provides suitable but limited recommendations supported by partial evidence. | Recommendations lack clarity or supporting evidence. | No valid recommendations provided. |
| Research and Referencing (15 pts) | Uses high-quality academic sources and applies accurate referencing throughout. | Uses appropriate sources with few referencing errors. | Uses limited or outdated references with several formatting issues. | Inadequate academic sources or missing references. |
| Writing Quality (10 pts) | Clear, concise, and well-organized writing with no major errors. | Generally clear writing with minor errors. | Some unclear sections or repeated errors. | Writing lacks clarity and academic tone. |
Starbucks maintains a differentiation strategy that centers on customer experience, ethical sourcing, and premium product quality. Its brand identity and consistency across markets contribute to a strong competitive position. Effective use of digital innovation in customer engagement, such as mobile ordering and loyalty programs, supports its sustained growth and market advantage (Johnson, 2022).
References (Harvard Format)
- Johnson, M.W. (2022). Innovation and Competitive Strategy in the Coffee Industry. Journal of Business Research, 145, 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.045
- Porter, M.E. (2019). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. Free Press. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250020110
- Barney, J.B. and Hesterly, W.S. (2020). Strategic Management and Competitive Advantage. 6th ed. Pearson Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2020.102071
- Teece, D.J. (2023). Dynamic Capabilities in a Digital Era. California Management Review, 65(2), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256231163544
