Analyse the drivers and inhibitors of the development of relevant industry, considering political, economic,societal, technological, legal and environmental (PESTLE) developments. Critically evaluate this theory and the organisations practices in relation to the external forces your analysis identifies.

Assessment Criteria
Learning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment:
1. Critique a range of strategic issues from different perspectives
2. Examine frameworks, models and concepts for the analysis of organisational resources and capabilities,
strategic choice and implementation
3. Examine their own role in developing and implementing strategy
Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment:
1. Critically evaluate a range of strategic issues from different perspectives
2. Critically apply frameworks, models and concepts of strategic analysis for the investigation of
organisational resources, capabilities, strategic choice and implementation
3. Reflect on their own thinking, experience and learning
Feedback / Marking criteria for this Assignment
Performance will be assessed using HBS Grading Criteria and Mark scheme.
Guidance for improvement will be given in writing on the Assessment Feedback Form or on the StudyNet
Feedback Form within 4 weeks of submission.
Plagiarism offences will receive standard penalties.
For each day or part day up to five days after the published deadline, coursework relating to modules
submitted late will have the numeric grade reduced by 10 grade points until or unless the numeric grade
reaches 50%. If a submission is more than 5 days after the published deadline, a grade of zero will be
awarded.
as
Detailed Brief for Individual Assessment
Students are asked to select their case study from a choice based on de Wit (2017) and associated with certain
strategy paradoxes and dilemmas referred to during the second teaching weekend module delivery and online
contact time. It is anticipated that students will select paradoxes and dilemmas related to that which they debated
in class or online (or which resonates with their own professional/personal experience). Specifically, Section V (de
Wit, 2017, p653).
Choose ONE Case Study
1. Amazon.com: Business Model and its Evolution – Business Level Strategy – *Markets vs Resources (de
Wit, 2017, p690)
2. Corporate Restructuring at Google – Corporate Level Strategy – *Responsiveness vs Synergy (de Wit,
2017, p708)
3. Time for Change at The Change Foundation – Strategy Formation – *Deliberateness vs Emergence (de
Wit, 2017, p731)
4. Renault-Nissan Alliance: Will further Integration create more synergy – Network Level Strategy –
*Competition vs Cooperation (de Wit, 2017, p720)
5. Tesla Motors’ business model configuration – The Industry Context – *Compliance vs Choice (de Wit,
2017, p759)
6. Your own organisation (in the context of one or more of the dilemmas* referred to above)
Answer at ONE question from each Section.
SECTION A (Answer ONE question) (25%)
1. Analyse the external forces in the relevant industry from the perspective of the case you have select. Use
Porter’s 5-forces to help structure this. Critically evaluate this theory and the organisation’s practices in
relation to the external forces that your analysis identifies.
2. Analyse the drivers and inhibitors of the development of relevant industry, considering political, economic,
societal, technological, legal and environmental (PESTLE) developments. Critically evaluate this theory
and the organisations practices in relation to the external forces your analysis identifies.
SECTION B (Answer ONE question) (25%)
3. How did the organisation seek to satisfy the competing demands of the strategic tension primarily at play?
Drawing on evidence from the case explain the paradox, tension or dilemma which the case best
exemplifies. Critically evaluate how those involved in the case have managed these strategic tensions and
appraise, with justification, what risks the organisation may face in the future.
SECTION C (Answer ONE question) (50%)
4. According to de Wit, “Some people argue or assume that the strategy context has a dynamic all of its
own… … [and] context sets strict confines on freedom to maneuvre” (de Wit, 2017, p7). On the other
hand, “Others believe that strategists should not be driven by their context… … [and] should shape their
own circumstances” (ibid).
From your experience in the simulation game—and using an appropriate reflective framework—critically
reflect on your use of the strategy approaches, models and practices in the game. How did these impact
your decisions and results? Are there any lessons learnt and how these may impact your practice in the
future? That is, how has your experience in the game affected your strategic practice and thinking?
Further Guidance for Coursework Assignments
When writing your case analysis, avoid using jargon, acronyms, and abbreviations and watch your spelling and
grammar. Aim for short sentences and paragraphs and simple words and phrases. Avoid lists and bullet points
and instead use sub-headings and continuous prose. Use examples from the case to add specificity, to illustrate
or ‘evidence’ your point and support your argument. Similarly, ensure that you explicitly link theory and
perspectives to the case to support and justify your own perspective on the issues.
These case study assessment exercises simulate to some extent the way we receive information on a daily-basis,
too much of it is deemed apparently irrelevant unless linked with other events and ideas. We classify and
reclassify such information constantly to deal with differing situations or to adapt to new interpretations. The
assessment exercises therefore require you to interpret and re-interpret data as you look at it from one viewpoint,
or perspective, and then another. This ability is one of the things you should seek to demonstrate, relating events
to module perspectives you have used and deploying explanations that seem most useful, or reasonable, to you.
You also need to argue in support of your own judgement. This requires that you select the most convincing
explanations of events on the basis of your analysis and build up an argument in defence of the best
interpretation in your view of business and management situations. You may use headings, diagrams, and/or brief
tables to illustrate points and as evidence to back up your argument (note table contents do not contribute to word
count). These should be relevant, succinct and their significance to your argument should be clear. Assume
assessors know the basic theoretical models and frameworks. Do not use up your word count describing them, it
is sufficient to mention them and give a reference. Your use of evidence from the case study should show that
you know how to apply theory and thus demonstrates your understanding of it.
Student Support and Guidance
• For further help, contact your module leader in their drop-in hours or by email.
• Use the Grading Criteria in your Programme Handbook and mark scheme to help improve your work.
• Go to CASE workshops, use the CASE website and drop-in hours
www.studynet.herts.ac.uk/go/CASE/
• Academic English for Business support is available through daily drop-ins from the CASE office. See
the CASE workshop timetable on the CASE main website page for details.
• Make full use of Library search to identify relevant academic material and the ‘Subject Toolkit for
Business’ which contains links to other Information Databases and the Information Management
contact details.
(http://www.studynet1.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/LIS.nsf/lis/4DAF5390094771C2802575ED004212BF)
• Some tutors allow students to test their work using Turnitin. Guidance on submission to Turnitin via
StudyNet can be found by using the following link.
http://www.studynet1.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/asu.nsf/resource+library/TURNITIN+FOR+STUDENTS
+2016+USER+GUIDE.pdf/$FILE/TURNITIN+FOR+STUDENTS+2016+USER+GUIDE.pdf