Strategic Perspectives: Strategy Review Portfolio CW1
WESTMINSTER BUSINESS SCHOOL
School Of Organisations, Economy and Society
Semester 2, 2023/2024
Module Title: Strategic Perspectives
Module Code: 6MNST008W.2
Assessment title: Strategy Review Portfolio Part A
Assessment weighting: 50%
Assessment deadline:
Assessment format: A Portfolio report with analysis and tables containing theoretical frameworks tailored to the case study organisation
Word limit: Up to 2000 words
Table Of Contents
COURSEWORK ASSESSMENTS: STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES.. 3
STRATEGY REVIEW PORTFOLIO CW1. 3
Assessment Summary. 3
Case Study Choice. 3
Structure of the Assessment. 5
Format and Design. 6
Learning Outcomes Addressed. 6
Assessment criteria. 6
Anonymous marking. 7
Referencing requirements for the assessment 7
The deadline and submitting your coursework – check list. 8
Difficulties in submitting assignments on time. 8
Academic Support and Feedback Arrangements. 9
Academic integrity. 10
University of Westminster Quality & Standards statement. 10
Generative AI in your Studies. 10
Marking and Moderation. 11
COURSEWORK ASSESSMENTS: STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES
STRATEGY REVIEW PORTFOLIO CW1
You are advised to use one of the following ‘live’ or ‘real-world’ case studies since these are organisations with whom the university has an ongoing relationship so should be able to provide you with information from live briefings. These organisations are scheduled to give Guest talks during the first half of the semester so are available for answering queries and providing information. These are known as ‘core assessment case studies’ and include the following organisations:
- The Marketing and events company Cosmonauts which employs around 20 staff including an alumni who completed this module last year Robins Spats who has obtained the approval of the CEO Timo Karakashev
- The Executive Search company Pacific International which employs also around 20 staff including an alumni who completed this module two years ago Ebba Gotthard who has obtained the approval of her CEO David Howells to provide this case study
- The housing social enterprise Change Ahead which is linked to the University of Westminster through membership of Social Enterprise UK.
- The finance organisation Blue Bay Asset Management where the main contact is Taiwo Obeh who graduated from Westminster in 2023
- Sony vision – Alex McCarthy alumni from 2023 in Marketing
These organisations are all known to academic staff and have agreed to brief students in a lecture and discuss their organisations in seminars with a view to meeting those students who choose their case study in an online meeting. Please note that these organisations can only provide as much information as confidentiality and commercial sensitivities allow. There is also the opportunity to share findings with the case study organisations in a strategy pitch in the summer of 2024 through the Students as Co-Creators programme (SCC) where students can opt to be paid a modest fee by the University to share their findings with the case study outside the module assessment process.
You are advised to only choose one case study in detail in CW1 to provide a foundation for the strategy review in CW2.. There is an example case study strategy review of the University of Westminster which has theoretical frameworks for each of the 8 strategy topics outlined above in CW1 and CW2. This strategy review uses material such as the ‘Being Westminster Strategy’ for 2022 to 2029 with a focus on the Westminster Business School and SOES. Please note that the University of Westminster must not be used as a case study for either Assessment.
There are also ‘seminar’ case studies using various well-known organisations (such as Monsanto, Cirque du Soleil, Jaguar Land Rover and Disney) which act as a way to stimulate discussion on key issues. These seminar case study organisations are not generally allowed to be your case study unless approval has been obtained from the Module Leader. The larger organisations are likely to have much material on strategy reviews on the internet so any sources must be referenced very carefully without using AI. The recommendation is to use the authentic case studies such as the core assessment case studies since these should provide more information to you than the seminar case studies as well as give possibilities for employability opportunities.
If you have knowledge of an organisation from an internship or placement which has potential future employability opportunities to you, then you may also be able to choose this once the Module Leader and Seminar Leader have approved this with you. Students will be encouraged to choose a Guest Speaker case study so they can share their findings with an organisation with whom the University or the individual has direct contact. Students should take the approach of providing a consultancy service to the case study organisation in response to a client request for a strategy review. The client therefore might be interested in the review providing a report on the current strategy but would be especially keen to hear the ideas for future strategy based on original and independent thinking which will achieve higher marks as a result.
Structure of the Assessment
Part A of the Strategy Review is based on ‘Strategy Position’ which provides context to the Strategy of the Organisation. This first section requires 2000 words to be written analysing the four strategy topics of CSR, Leadership, External Environment and Internal Resources by applying the theoretical strategy models to the case studies. These strategy models should be incorporated into tables which should be referred to in the analysis of each topic to highlight key points. At least one table should be included in the submission up to a maximum of three. Snips or highlights of the tables are allowed to highlight the key points and the reason and rationale for choosing this table should be provided. The words created within the table can be included in the 2000 word count up to a maximum of 50% but it is recommended that the word count is only 25% from the tables. Students may opt to use the word count of up to 2000 words on the explanation of the tables excluding the words in the tables themselves.
The strategy tables are completed each week in the seminar using a Strategy Tool Kit with pro forma in Word for the tables as a way to develop the ideas which will be discussed in the 400-word sections and the total 2000 words of Part A of the Strategy Portfolio. The ideas in the tables can be extracted into the discussion with a short summary table left for reference. The inclusion of the tables in the final report shows the evolution of the analysis of the current strategy and the basis on which future strategy options have been identified. As a result, at least one strategy table should be used for each of the four topics with key points highlighted and referenced in the 2000-word analysis.
Therefore, for each of these topics, the student should write 400 words on each of the four strategy topics using any of one of the case studies outlined. The student can refer to one or more strategy models within each topic to define its current strategy and possible future options referring to diagrams of the strategy models in the text as tables within the 400 words. Each of the 400-word sections should discuss how strategy models apply to the selected case study to understand the current strategy which should enable the student to identify feasible future strategy options. The structure should be along the lines of the following:
CW1 Strategy Review Portfolio Part A
- Title with choice of Case Study
- Contents Page for Part A
- Introduction containing reason for choice of case study and introducing the main strategy themes using tools such as the Three Horizons framework as outlined by Whittington as well as an applicable analysis of a strategy definition such as Minzberg or Porter etc.
- External Environment Analysis of up to 400 words with at least one table containing strategy theory such as PESTEL and Five Forces
- Internal Resources Analysis of up to 400 words with at least one table containing strategy theory such as RBV theory with VRIO and Porters Value Chain
- CSR Analysis of up to 400 words of current and future strategy including at least one table containing strategy modules customised to the case study
- Leadership Analysis of up to 400 words with at least one table containing strategy theory
- Conclusion of 200 words on the main strategy findings from both current and future strategy analysis
- References
- Appendices
Format and Design
The document should be produced in Word in Arial 12. There is a pro forma provided for the strategy tables in Word so that these can be customised to your analysis of the case study. However, you may wish to use other tools to design the strategy frameworks if you wish. There is an example strategy analysis of the University of Westminster as well as other examples from students last year who chose the technology consultancy Idems International case study or the marketing agency Twelve East Group. It is therefore not possible to use any of these three organisations for the case study in 2023/24 assessments.
Learning Outcomes Addressed.
- Demonstrate systematic understanding of the strategic leadership knowledge and its interrelationship with organisation’s strategy.
- Identify investigative techniques to critically analyse the external and the internal environment of organisations that operate in complex and unpredictable contexts by applying current and classic strategic concepts, frameworks and models.
- Synthesise information about and select from a range of techniques in order to design and formulate sustainable strategic solutions for organisations.
Assessment criteria
The assessment criteria and weightings show you what is important in the assessment and how marks are shared across each criterion. When you are completing your assessment remember you need to fulfil the assessment criteria below.
The pass mark for the Part A portfolio is 40%. The average of both of CW1 and CW2 together will form the module mark. There are four areas which are being used to assess the presentation of each member of the project team which are as follows. The exact way in which each of these criteria is marked is set out in the rubric below:
| Mark Area | Potential
Mark % |
| Persuasiveness of Arguments | 20 |
| Analysis of strategy topics investigated and theoretical models used | 30 |
| Strength of conclusions and feasibility of recommendations | 30 |
| Structure of Portfolio/Presentation; referencing and organisation | 20 |
| Total ∑ | 100% |
There is a detailed rubric at the end of this briefing document which sets out the attainment levels against each of the four criteria so an overall assessment can be determined when these four criteria are added together using an automated Blackboard process. You will then be also provided with a summary of your overall strengths to develop and academic skills to improve.
The University has arrangements for marking, internal moderation, and external scrutiny. Further information can be found in Section 12 of the Handbook of Academic Regulations, westminster.ac.uk/study/current-students/resources/academic-regulations .
Anonymous marking
Do NOT include your name or student number within the file name or anywhere within your submission. The submission will be subject to anonymous marking. Having logged into blackboard the system will record your details anonymously and tutors will only see your name after the entire submission has been assessed and provisional marks have been released to all students at the same time.
Referencing requirements for the assessment
Statements, assertions and ideas made in coursework should be supported by citing relevant sources. Sources cited in the text should be listed at the end of the assignment in a reference list. Any material that you read but do not cite in the report should go into a separate bibliography. Unless explicitly stated otherwise by the module teaching team, all referencing should be in Cite Them Right referencing format. If you are not sure about this, the library provides guidance (available via the library website pages).
The deadline and submitting your coursework – check list
Unless indicated otherwise, coursework is submitted via Blackboard. The deadline for this assessment is Tuesday 26 March 2024 at 13:00 for Part B of the Strategy review. Students with a 5-day MC or RAF may submit on the date set by Registry which will be around the time of Thursday 4 April 2024. This means that your work should be fully uploaded before 13:00. The University would treat your submission as late, if your work has not been fully uploaded and stored on the server before 13:00. In order to avoid your submission being marked as late, you should upload your work as soon as possible before the deadline and must not wait until or just before the deadline to start uploading your work.
At busy times the coursework submission process may run slowly. To ensure that your submission is not recorded as a late submission, avoid submitting very close to the deadline.
To submit your assignment:
- Log on to Blackboard at http://learning.westminster.ac.uk;
- Go to the Blackboard site for this module;
- Click on the ‘Assessment’ area for the module
- Click on the link for the assignment to submit
- Follow the instructions, ensuring that you have selected the correct file to upload.
If you submit your assessment late but within 24 hours or one ‘working’ day of the specified deadline, 10 of the overall marks available for that assessment will be deducted as a penalty for late submission, except for work which is marked in the marginal pass rate range (9% above the pass mark) and in this case the mark would be capped at the pass mark. If you submit your coursework more than 24 hours after the specified deadline you will be given a mark of zero for the work in question.
Difficulties in submitting assignments on time
If you have difficulties for reasons beyond your control (e.g. serious illness, family problems etc.) that prevent you from submitting the assessment, make sure you apply to the Mitigating Circumstances board with evidence to support your claim as soon as possible. Further details can be found on the following URL: https://www.westminster.ac.uk/current-students/guides-and-policies/assessment-guidelines/mitigating-circumstances-claims
If you are unsure about the above information, you should seek academic support from your module leader, personal tutor or your course leader. You will find details of your module leader in this module’s handbook and you can find the name of your course leader and personal tutor from your “My Student Records” page via the University’s student portal.
If you do not submit the coursework on time log a call via the IT Service Desk that can be found on this webpage: https://servicedesk.westminster.ac.uk/support/home
Please make sure that your message is very specific. The Service Desk will then email you confirmation that you will be able to use as supporting written evidence for your MC claim. You should take screenshots or make short videos that capture the issue, such as the error messages on the screen, as you may use them as supporting written evidence for your MC claim.
Academic Support and Feedback Arrangements
For this assessment there will be an opportunity for an academic support & feedback drop-in session, where you will receive support and feedback on your assessment prior to submission. Further details are provided in the module handbook. There will also be opportunities to receive academic support during lectures through allocated questions and answers sessions and through the discussion board on the module blackboard site.
After submission, summative feedback will be provided online via blackboard, where feedback takes the form of an indication of performance on the provided making grid or rubric which will be integrated into Blackboard so you will be able to see a mark for the attainment level of each criterion which produces an overall assessment score. There is a weighting for each of the criteria. You will also receive a summary of key points of strength, weakness and academic skills you can improve upon.
We aim to provide you this feedback within 15 working days after submission of all the papers which are to be marked including the RAF and self-certification MC’s. The exact timing of the release of feedback will be provided as the deadline line approaches. After the feedback has been released you may email the marker for further feedback. If you are unsure about how to see your provisional marks and feedback, the following LINK will explain how you cand do this – https://blog.westminster.ac.uk/blackboardhelp/marks-and-feedback/
General feedback for the entire module will also be made via blackboard to the module, which will discuss the key areas of shared strengths, weaknesses, and academic skills improvements. This general feedback is likely to be issued before your specific summative feedback and we would strongly encourage you to read this feedback to improve your understanding of the module and potentially areas of weaknesses in your academic skills which you could develop before the second submission of this module.
Academic integrity
What you submit for assessment must be your own current work. It will automatically be scanned through a text matching system to check for possible plagiarism.
Do not reuse material from other assessments that you may have completed on other modules. Collusion with other students (except when working in groups), recycling previous assignments (unless this is explicitly allowed by the module leader) and/or plagiarism (copying) of other sources all are offences and are dealt with accordingly. If you are not sure about this, then speak to your class leader.
University of Westminster Quality & Standards statement
Plagiarism is a particular form of cheating. Plagiarism must be avoided at all costs and students who break the rules, however innocently, will be penalized. It is your responsibility to ensure that you understand correct referencing practices. As a University level student, you are expected to use appropriate references and keep carefully detailed notes of all your sources of material, including any material downloaded from the www.
Plagiarism is defined as submission for assessment of material (written, visual or oral) originally produced by another person or persons, without acknowledgement, in such a way that the work could be assumed to be your own. Plagiarism may involve the unattributed use of another person’s work, ideas, opinions, theory, facts, statistics, graphs, models, paintings, performance, computer code, drawings, quotations of another person’s actual spoken or written words, or paraphrases of another person’s spoken or written words. Plagiarism covers both direct copying and copying or paraphrasing with only minor adjustments:
- a direct quotation from a text must be indicated by the use of quotation marks (or an indented paragraph in italics for a substantive section) and the source of the quote (title, author, page number and date of publication) provided.
- a paraphrased summary must be indicated by attribution of the author, date and source of the material including page numbers for the section(s) which have been summarized.
Generative AI in your Studies
Rapidly advancing AI technologies, notably in language and image generation, necessitate clarity on the University’s stance towards tools like ChatGPT and DALL-E. The University insists on original work from students, requiring independent thought and proper source citation. Outsourcing assignments to machines or third parties constitutes cheating, undermines critical thinking skills, hinders student development, and diminishes their potential contributions in both the academic and professional world.
The University recognises that students may legitimately use GenAI in a number of ways including for example: Assisting with grammar and spelling, utilizing it as a search tool for researching assignment topics, helping with planning, and developing the outline structure of a written assessment, generating ideas for graphics, images, and visuals, obtaining explanations of concepts, debugging code, overcoming writer’s block. These specific applications of GenAI can support students in their academic endeavours. However, it’s important to note that while these uses are permissible, students must still adhere to the principles of academic integrity and properly cite any sources or references derived from the assistance provided by GenAI. Please see the link below more details on this
Please note that some subject areas/specific taught modules will potentially have other legitimate ways for you to use GenAI and that details of this will be communicated to you by module leaders where necessary.
Marking and Moderation
The University has arrangements for marking, internal moderation and external scrutiny. Further information can be found in Section 12 of the Handbook of Academic Regulations, westminster.ac.uk/study/current-students/resources/academic-regulations
