Company report- Spark NZ Assignment | Essay Help Services

Organization portfolio
Existing business model: core competencies and resourcesWhat are the key resources that create value for customers and support the company’s competitiveness (i.e. financial resources & key assets, IP, skilled staff, customer relationships)? What valuable partnerships have been established (e.g. with suppliers, other stakeholders) and how are these partners integrated in the organization. What are core competencies of the organization (e.g. key activities, processes that the company is doing well, including problem solving, innovation, production)?
Industry and macro environment
What are key factors that influence the industry (technological trends, regulatory environment)? What are industry forces (e.g. suppliers and other partners – to what extent does the organization depend on them? Competitors- who are the dominating players? What can we learn from them? How big is the market (domestic customers in different segments)? How competitive is the market (number, price, product offering).
Business strategy
In relation to these main competitors, what are the competitive advantages/disadvantages of the organization? What is their offering and how do they compete (price, quality, etc)? Which is the most important customer segment they focus on (demographics etc., needs, growth potential)? What is their cost structure? What is the current size, growth opportunities (what are the customer needs and demands, are there signs that the demand increases/decreases)? Is there an area where customers are unsatisfied? Where is the organization strong? Where is the organization at risk? What will happen if they continue on their current path?

BUSMGT 717: Strategic Management

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Company report- Spark NZ Assignment | Essay Help Services
For $10/Page 0nly
Order Essay

Q2 2020

 

Company Strategy Report (Individual Written Project)

 

Word count: minimum 1000 words (maximum 1500 words), excluding references, and appendices (for more information, please refer to the rubric).

 

Part 2/ Final Report Due date: Friday 12th June (Week 9), 09:00 am via Canvas (40%)

 

Word count: minimum 2500 words (maximum 3000 words), excluding references, and appendices (for more information, please refer to the rubric).

 

 

Using secondary data (e.g. library databases, World Bank open data, World Economic Forum strategic intelligence database), prepare a strategy portfolio for the board of ONE of the organizations listed below. You can focus on a certain region or adopt a ‘global’ perspective.

Broadly your task is to analyse the company’s current strategy, identify a megatrend that will substantially affect the company’s strategy and future performance and then recommend a new strategy to address the megatrend.

The assignment is delivered in two parts:

Part 1: Analyse the organization’s current strategy

Final Report: Building from this analysis, identify a megatrend that will affect the organization’s future performance, identify alternative strategies for tackling the megatrend (it may be an opportunity, a threat or both) and recommend the best strategy to the Board.

 

Part 1 (10%)

Organization portfolio; including a critical analysis of:

  • existing core competencies, organization resources and key stakeholders
  • their business strategy and
  • the ‘rules of the game’ of the key industry they are currently operating in (include a clear statement about what you think those rules are)

 

Final Report (40%)

Scenario creation, including a trend prediction (focusing on a specific megatrend that will transform the industry and therefore the company), and arguing why the ‘rules of the game’ will change in future

 

New strategy, including:

  1. Alternative strategies that the organization can take to address the megatrend
  2. Recommended strategy and why
  3. Critical analysis of the assumptions, risks and consequences of the recommendations

 

You may wish to address 2 megatrends (when there are potential synergies). Please discuss this with one of the teaching staff prior to adopting this approach.

 

 

Select one of these eight case organizations to study:

  1. Auckland Transport
  2. Auckland District Health Board
  3. Auckland Council
  4. Fletcher Building
  5. Fonterra
  6. NZ Police/Defence Force
  7. Spark
  8. The Warehouse Group

 

Select one/two of these megatrends:

  1. Artificial Intelligence
  2. Climate Change
  3. Demographic and Social Change
  4. Digitalization
  5. Rapid Urbanization
  6. Sustainability
  7. Technological Breakthroughs: e-mobility, driverless vehicles, robots, virtual world, cyborgs
  8. The Future of Work and well-being

 

To do well:

This report should demonstrate your critical thinking, strategic analysis and ability to argue a case.  Support your analysis, explanation and argument with relevant strategic theories and frameworks.

Pay particular attention to how the ideas in your report link together. It should not read as separate parts. Each part should lead on to the next.  All elements included should be relevant to your task, and that relevance made clear to the reader.

Use a business report style (not an academic essay or academic report style). This means you can use figures, graphics and an easy-to-read-and-navigate layout. You need to use APA style of referencing. Include an executive summary, plus a table of contents, introduction, etc.

Your report structure and content will vary depending on the organization you choose, the megatrend you identify and the nature of the strategic options you identify. You need to consider the best way to present your argument.

 

Packaging and wordcount:

Include Part 1 (Organization analysis) in your Part2/Final report so that the document represents the entire package you would present to the Board. You may edit your submitted Part 1 section in the final report (Organization Portfolio Analysis), because the Final Report will be assessed on overall coherence, relevance and critical thinking. The Final Report should be total 2500-3000 words, including Part 1.

You do not have sufficient word limit to simply write down everything you find out and all your ideas, so summarize the key findings and report your critical analysis succinctly and clearly. Don’t just describe and list. Don’t just ‘read and repeat’.

Final report will be submitted on Canvas but via Turnitin and any matches will be carefully scrutinized by the markers.  Do not copy and paste data about the organizations into your report.  Plagiarism and academic dishonesty will be heavily penalized.

Marks will be deducted if you are over the word count of 3000 words for the main report (everything except appendices, list of references, table of contents, list of figures and tables, title page)

 

Assessment and feedback:

Students have the option of providing a draft of their Part 1 and Part 2 report to BCT 48 hours in advance to gain developmental feedback on their progress.

 

Questions to ask yourself when developing your Strategy Portfolio Report

 

Not all of these questions and concepts will be relevant for every organization and megatrend but are provided as a prompt to get you thinking.

 

Audience (Organization Board members)

 

Which individuals will read your report?  What do they know already? What are their preconceptions and prejudices? What will it take to persuade them about the merits of your ideas and strategic thinking?

 

Organization portfolio

 

Existing business model: core competencies and resources

What are the key resources that create value for customers and support the company’s competitiveness (i.e. financial resources & key assets, IP, skilled staff, customer relationships)? What valuable partnerships have been established (e.g. with suppliers, other stakeholders) and how are these partners integrated in the organization. What are core competencies of the organization (e.g. key activities, processes that the company is doing well, including problem solving, innovation, production)?

 

Industry and macro environment

What are key factors that influence the industry (technological trends, regulatory environment)? What are industry forces (e.g. suppliers and other partners – to what extent does the organization depend on them? Competitors- who are the dominating players? What can we learn from them? How big is the market (domestic customers in different segments)? How competitive is the market (number, price, product offering).

 

Business strategy

In relation to these main competitors, what are the competitive advantages/disadvantages of the organization? What is their offering and how do they compete (price, quality, etc)? Which is the most important customer segment they focus on (demographics etc., needs, growth potential)? What is their cost structure?  What is the current size, growth opportunities (what are the customer needs and demands, are there signs that the demand increases/decreases)? Is there an area where customers are unsatisfied? Where is the organization strong?  Where is the organization at risk? What will happen if they continue on their current path?

 

 

Scenario Creation

 

Formulation of a plausible trend scenario

What global megatrends may affect the industry, such as regulatory changes, free trade agreements, societal trends, e-commerce, aging population, ecological changes? How will these megatrends influence the market opportunity for the organization? (positively and negatively – how big would the impact be?) What data is available to quantify the impact of the megatrend?

 

How could the organization respond strategically to the changes? How would the organization need to adjust its existing resources and capabilities? How does this affect the organization growth projections, revenue model?

 

 

New strategy and recommendations

 

Recommendations

What options does the organization have to change its strategy to address the megatrend (this may be in the form of minimizing a risk or taking advantage of an opportunity). Should the organization continue its existing strategy or exit the business?  How can you compare the performance impacts (revenues, costs, profits, market share etc.) of the alternative strategies? What are your key strategy recommendations and why? How could the organization implement such a strategy?

 

Risks

What are the risks/major unknowns and/or trade-offs? What assumptions have you made? What are the consequences if the organization does not implement the recommendations?

 

 

 

 

BUSMGT 717: Strategic Management                                       

Rubric:  Part 1- Organization portfolio

  Excellent Good Work Needs Improvement Unacceptable
External analysis (30%) In-depth discussion of critical external factors affecting organization by using appropriate framework/s consistently backed by relevant research. Good discussion of critical external factors affecting organization by using appropriate framework/s mostly backed by relevant research. Some discussion of external factors affecting organization by using some framework/s at times backed by relevant research. Superficial discussion of external factors affecting organization using no/inappropriate framework/s backed by little/no research.
Internal analysis (30%) In-depth discussion of the organization’s existing resources and core capabilities, and critically investigates the important factors that may impact on future success. Good discussion of the organization’s existing resources and core capabilities and investigates the important factors that may impact on its future success in the market. Some discussion of the organization’s existing resources and core capabilities and describes factors that may impact on its success in the market. Superficial discussion of the organization’s existing resources and core capabilities. It is unclear how key factors will impact on its success in the future.
Critical analysis

(20%)

The report provides a clear, unbiased view of the organization’s current position. It also points towards important limitations of the argument as well as how those might be addressed. Overall, the work provides a very realistic and convincing assessment of the problem/ opportunity. The report makes a convincing and well-balanced argument about the organization’s current position. There are minor inconsistencies in the evaluation of the problem/opportunity and/or little appreciation of possible limitations of the evidence used. The report focuses only on the conclusion of the evaluation but does not provide any insight into the organization’s current position. The implications of changes in major assumptions are not articulated. The report is difficult to follow and it is unclear as to what the organization’s current position may be.
Research

(10%)

All information is highly relevant and from credible sources. The evidence is represented fairly and thoroughly. The analysis shows an excellent focus on key sources for analysing the situation. All assumptions are well grounded in the research. The report makes good use of evidence from credible sources. The analysis is mostly accurate and complete – there are only minor errors and few unclear components. All sources are correctly acknowledged and well-integrated into the core argument. The research selected in not fully relevant and/or incorrectly represented. The analysis remains vague and does not show a deep engagement with the content. Little or no research is apparent. Most of the evidence is from unreliable sources, not represented correctly, or irrelevant.
Structure and format (5%) The report is structured logically with clear and coherent sections, full and correctly formatted reference list, and excellent use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report is structured logically with clear sections, full and correctly formatted reference list and good use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report is structured logically with some sections clearly defined, full and correctly formatted reference list and some use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report structure lacks logic, sections are not clearly defined, and the reference list is incomplete/incorrectly formatted with only very sparse use of in-text referencing.
Communication and use of language/tone (5%) Use of sophisticated and constructive language that is precise, engaging, with an easy flow and varied sentence structure. Use of language that is constructive, fluent and error free, exhibiting the ability to vary sentence construction. Use of basic and sometimes imprecise language, and some attempt to vary sentence construction. Use of language that is unconstructive and imprecise for the audience or purpose, and a limited awareness of how to vary sentence structure.

 

 

 

 

BUSMGT 717: Strategic Management                                       

Rubric: Part 2/Final strategy portfolio report

 

  Excellent Good Work Needs Improvement Unacceptable
Strategic analysis (20%) The report develops a trend scenario considering critical strategic factors that may fundamentally change the rules of the industry. The report also critically reflects how these may transform the organization. The report develops a trend scenario considering strategic factors that may fundamentally change the rules of the industry. The report also indicates how these may transform the organization. The report develops a trend scenario considering strategic factors that may fundamentally change the rules of the industry but it is not clear how these are critical for the organization. It is not clear from the report what strategic factors are critical.
Strategic relevance

(20%)

Opportunities and challenges resulting from potential environmental upheaval are clearly defined and quantified. Multiple alternative strategies are compared. A sound final recommendation for how resources and capabilities need to be transformed is explained. Opportunities and challenges resulting from potential environmental upheaval are defined and quantified. One or two alternatives are considered. Some recommendations for how resources and capabilities need to be transformed are given. Opportunities and challenges resulting from potential environmental upheaval are to some extent defined and quantified, and some recommendations for how resources and capabilities need to be transformed are given. The report fails to define and quantify the potential opportunities and challenges resulting from environmental change, and recommendations given are not persuasive.
Critical analysis

(20%)

The report provides a clear, unbiased view of the strategic challenge. It also points towards important limitations of the argument as well as how those might be addressed. Overall, the work provides a very realistic and convincing assessment of the problem/opportunity. The report makes a convincing and well-balanced argument to solve the strategic challenge. There are minor inconsistencies in the evaluation of the problem/opportunity and/or little appreciation of possible limitations of the evidence used. The report focuses only on the conclusion of the evaluation but does not provide any insight into the process. The implications of changes in major assumptions are not articulated. The report is difficult to follow and it is unclear as to what the problem/opportunity is about.
Research

(20%)

All information is highly relevant and from credible sources. The evidence is represented fairly and thoroughly. The analysis shows an excellent focus on key sources for analyzing the business opportunity. All assumptions are well grounded in the research. The work makes good use of evidence from credible sources. The analysis is mostly accurate and complete – there are only minor errors and few unclear components. All sources are correctly acknowledged and well-integrated into the core argument. The research selected in not fully relevant and/or incorrectly represented. The analysis remains vague and does not show a deep engagement with the content. Little or no research is apparent. Most of the evidence is from unreliable sources, not represented correctly, or irrelevant.
Structure and format (10%) The report is structured logically with clear and coherent sections, full and correctly formatted reference list, and excellent use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report is structured logically with clear sections, full and correctly formatted reference list and good use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report is structured logically with some sections clearly defined, full and correctly formatted reference list and some use of in-text referencing to support the argument. The report structure lacks logic, sections are not clearly defined, and the reference list is incomplete/incorrectly formatted with only very sparse use of in-text referencing.
Communication and use of language/tone (10%) Use of sophisticated and constructive language that is precise, engaging, with an easy flow and varied sentence structure. Use of language that is constructive, fluent and error free, exhibiting the ability to vary sentence construction. Use of basic and sometimes imprecise language, and some attempt to vary sentence construction. Use of language that is unconstructive and imprecise for the audience or purpose, and a limited awareness of how to vary sentence structure.

 

Calculator

Calculate the price of your paper

Total price:$26

Need a better grade?
We've got you covered.

Order your paper