THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON

Faculty of Business and Law

MODULE: BUS3005 (All cohorts) 2020-2021

Module Code Level Credit Value Module Leader

BUS3005 6 20 Dr Shahin Mitha

Assessment Brief

Assessment title: Portfolio of strategic planning and personal reflection

28th July 2021

Deadline:

Weighting: 50%

Feedback and
28th August 2021
Grades due:

Resit Date: 28th September 2021

1
The Assessment Task
Select one international company (ideally the one used in Assessment 1 – Essay)

Part A (1): Critically evaluate the performance of your selected company highlighting
competitive strengths, market position and areas where improvement across the value
chain may be required – 500 words

Part A (2): Using your evaluation propose a strategic plan for the same company using
appropriate tools to explain and justify your strategic choices (with sources of theory and
practice based examples). Consider the company’s pursuit of competitive advantage in
your discussion. – 1250 words

Part B: Reflect upon the module. Consider the online learning activities <and in class
workshops> and e-tivities. What have your learnt from these? How has your thinking
progressed when observing a holistic strategic view of organisations in their markets? To
what extent will the module support you in your career development, and how? – 250
words

Learning Outcomes
The learning outcomes that are being assessed in this assessment are:

Subject – Specific Knowledge, Understanding and

Application
a) Select and justify the application of appropriate academic theory to
critically review case based examples.

b) Identify, select and utilise relevant sources that are appropriate to

task. This includes data, academic literature and information from
business practice

c) Make judgements and recommendations through critical analysis

and evaluation in relation to industries, markets, and individual
companies

Your grade will depend on the extent to which you meet these learning outcomes in the way
relevant for this assessment. Please see the grading rubric at the end of this assessment brief
for further details of the criteria against which you will be assessed.

Word Limits (where appropriate)

The maximum word limit for this assessment is 2000 words

In accordance with the Assessment and Feedback Policy, as stated in section 4.40 where a
submission exceeds the stipulated word limit by more than 10%, the submission will only be
marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be included in
2
the final grade for the assessment item. Abstracts, bibliographies, reference lists,
appendices and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements.

In line with section 4.41 of the same Policy, where a submission is notably under the
word limit, the full submission will be marked on the extent to which the learning
objectives have been met.

Assessment Support
1. Workshop support to discuss initial assignment briefing (week 10 of teaching)
2. Opportunity to show draft extracts/ essay plans for individual formative feedback on
progress 1 week prior to the deadline
3. Academic skills embedded into workshops to support assignment development -
weekly

Generic Grading Criteria

You will find the generic grading criteria for achievement at University Grading Criteria. Also
explained here are the meanings of the various G grades at the bottom of the grading scale.

Assessment Submission
To submit your work, please go to the ‘Submit your work’ area on the NILE site and use the
relevant submission point to upload your report. The deadline for this is 11.59pm (UK local
time) on the date of submission. Please note that essays and reports must be submitted as
word documents and not PDFs.

Written work submitted to TURNITIN will be subject to anti-plagiarism detection software.

Turnitin checks student work for possible textual matches against internet available resources
and its own proprietary database.

When you upload your work correctly to TURNITIN you will receive a receipt which is your
record and proof of submission.

If your assessment is not submitted to TURNITIN rather than a receipt you will see a green
banner at the top of the screen that denotes successful submission.

N.B Work emailed directly to your tutor will not be marked. The only exception to this
is when you are instructed to do so because TURNITIN is down.

Late submission of work

For first sits, if an item of assessment is submitted late and an extension has not been
granted, the following will apply:

 Within one week of the original deadline – work will be marked and returned with full
feedback, and awarded a maximum bare pass grade.
 More than one week from original deadline – maximum grade achievable LG (L
indicating late).
3
Extensions
The University of Northampton’s general policy with regard to extensions is to be supportive
of students who have genuine difficulties, but not against pressures of work that could have
reasonably been anticipated.

For full details please refer to the Extensions Policy. The module leader can, where
appropriate, authorise a short extension of up to two weeks from the original submission
date for first sits only.

Mitigating Circumstances
For guidance on Mitigating circumstances please go to Mitigating Circumstances where you
will find detailed guidance on the policy as well as guidance and the form for making an
application.

Please note, however, that an application to defer an assessment on the grounds of mitigating
circumstances should normally be made in advance of the submission deadline or
examination date.

Plagiarism and Academic Integrity

Unless this is a group assessment, the work you produce must be your own with work taken
from any other source properly referenced and attributed. The University of Northampton
policy will apply in all cases of copying, plagiarism or any other methods by which students
have obtained (or attempted to obtain) an unfair advantage.

If you are in any doubt about what constitutes plagiarism or any other infringement of
academic integrity, please read the University’s Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. For
help with understanding academic integrity go to UNPAC and follow the Top Tips for Good
Academic Practice on the student hub.

Please note that the penalties for copying work from another source without proper
referencing are severe and can include failing the assessment, failing the module and
expulsion from the university.

Feedback and Grades

These can be accessed through clicking on the Feedback and Grades tab on NILE. Feedback
will be provided by a rubric with summary comments. For work submitted to TURNITIN,
please also click through for within text comments (or add information on accessing more
detailed feedback if not a TURNITIN submission).

4
Grading Rubric

No
Grading Rubric submission / Fail Pass Commended Merit Distinction
no evidence
Learning Outcomes Work submitted is Evidence Of satisfactory Of sound quality, Of high quality, Of very high
addressed through this of no academic included or quality, demonstrative demonstrating quality,
assignment value / nothing provided but demonstrating which is sufficient evidence which demonstrating
submitted missing in evidence of and appropriate is rigorous and evidence which is
some very achieving the to the task or convincing, strong, robust and
important requirements of activity appropriate to consistent,
aspects. the learning the task or appropriate to the
outcomes activity task or activity

LO: Apply research to make Shows evidence of Shows strong

informed judgements and Shows some research from evidence of research
Lacks evidence evidence of research commendable and from commendable
evaluation to develop a strategic Shows evidence of
of consultation from commendable high-quality and high-quality
research from a
plan No submission / with a range of and good quality sources of sources of
range of sources
submission is sources. sources of information. information.
of information.
limited to title Requires information. Informed Informed
Recommendations
page and minimal improvement in Judgements and judgements and judgements and
are made in
word count the validity of recommendations recommendations recommendations
developing a
the business are made in are made in are made in
business plan.
plan proposals developing a solid developing a developing an
business plan. viable business extremely viable
plan. business plan.

LO: Present and discuss No submission / Lacks There is some There is some There is There is strong
opportunities for business to submission is evidence of discussion discussion and evidence evidence
limited to title clear social demonstrating evidence throughout the throughout the
engage in positive social and page and and support for demonstrating strategic plan strategic plan
environmental change by offering minimal word environmenta social and support for social demonstrating demonstrating
alternative management strategies count l strategies in environmental and support for support for social
the planning. planning in the environmental social and and
in a complex professional business A lack of strategic plan. planning in the environmental environmental
environment theory and This is strategic plan. developments developments
evidence to supported by This is supported that are that are positive,
support this some theory to by some theory positive and well thought out
learning justify the ideas to justify the supported with and supported
objective. discussed. ideas discussed. some analysis with analysis of
as to the feasibility and
feasibility and practicality.
practically of Theory underpins

5
 their
implementation
. Evidence of
the discussion
theory in the
effectively to
discussion
reinforce the
shows some
student’s ideas
reinforcement
of the student’s
ideas.
LO: Critically reflect upon your own No submission / The student The students The student shows The student is The student is
personal development to identify submission is does not satisfy shows satisfactory some self- clearly self-aware extremely self-
limited to title page the criteria of level of awareness awareness and and has aware and has
transferable skills and knowledge and minimal word the reflective raises some points highlighted some highlighted a range
of their academic
count section or has for consideration points that are of points pertinent
not included this development and that link to their pertinent to their to their development
section. There is recognition of academic development both academically
a lack of self- transferable skills development and academically and and in terms of
awareness and for employment. employability skills. in terms of transferable skills
analysis of the The articulation of The articulation of transferable skills for employment. The
module in terms the reflective the reflective section for employment. articulation of the
of its relevance is to a solid The articulation of reflective section is
section is to a
towards the standard the reflective of an extremely high
students own satisfactory section is of a standard
development as standard. good standard.
a learner and
graduate
employee
candidate.
Academic quality & rigour No submission / Unsatisfactory An excellent
submission is structure and A satisfactory structure and flow
limited to title page A solid structure and towards argument
flow is structure and flow Very good
and minimal word flow towards
presented. towards argument structure and flow development.
count argument
Sources fail to development. towards argument Sources are
development. consistently cited
be cited & Sources are development.
Sources are usually and referenced
referenced to a generally cited Sources are
cited and referenced correctly using
satisfactory and referenced mostly cited and
correctly using Harvard style
standard. using Harvard referenced
Harvard style referencing.
Support in style referencing, correctly using
referencing, though
academic though there may Harvard style
there may be some
writing and be technical referencing.
technical errors.
referencing is errors.
recommended.