|Business and Management |[pic] |
ASSIGNMENT FRONT SHEET
|To be completed by student | |
| |Date Submitted: .......................... |
|Name ....................................................………….(print) | |
| | |
|ID …………………………………………………. | |
| |Student Signature : |
| |(Required for submission) |
| | |
| | |
| |…………………………………………. |
|Certification: I certify that the whole of this work is the result of my individual | |
|effort and that all quotations from books, periodicals etc. have been acknowledged. | |
|Student email address : |
|Programme : MBA |Level : 7 |
|Academic Year : 2012/13 |Semester : 2 |
|Module title : Strategic Thinking and Effecting Change |Assignment : 1 |
|Module code: BUS748 | Word guide: 2,500 ± 10% |
|Percentage Weighting of this assignment for the module: 50% |
|Issue date : March 2013 |Return date : Tuesday 7 May 2013 |
|Lecturer : Amanda Byrne |Second Marker : |
|Notes for students : |
|Students should ensure that they comply with the Institute’s Plagiarism policy. |
|Students must submit a turnitin receipt and summary showing similarity index in hard copy to the Office. |
|10% of marks are awarded for satisfactory use of language and/or good presentation. |
|5% of marks are awarded for satisfactory referencing and/or presentation of a bibliography where either is required. Students should make |
|correct use of the Harvard referencing method. Guidelines for the Harvard method are included in the Student handbooks. |
|Special instructions (if any) : |
|Assignment may not be accepted if not signed by the student. |
|Assignments should be stapled in the top left corner. |
|No plastic cover unless module tutor indicates otherwise. |
|Marker’s comments | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| |Grade % |
ASSIGNMENT 1: CASE STUDY – TESCO: from Domestic Operator to Multinational Giant
Required:
1. Identify the reasons behind Tesco’s international strategy. 15 marks
2. Evaluate Tesco’s international expansion in the context of Yip’s ‘drivers of globalisation’ framework? 25 marks
3. a). What factors might be considered in assessing Tesco’s performance in Thailand and South Korea and in comparing / contrasting their performance in Taiwan. b). How does the United States case fit against the criteria for success and failure that have been examined in the Asian cases? 35 marks
4. Consider the globalisation of Tesco – and specifically the recent 2007+ entry into west coast US markets – in the light of Porter’s diamond. 25 marks
Marks allocated are approximate weightings for these elements in the answer. Answer each question separately but noting that there exists a logical and coherent flow to the discourse.
NB: You may find the Tesco website, financial statements and press reports helpful in background reading as well as academic articles on the company and its international website of some use. The requirement is to apply theoretical bases to the case to engage in coherent and logical analysis and discourse.
Support with appropriate references, if applicable, in Harvard style.
Word limit: 2,500 ± 10%. Excessive wordage may be penalised.
Presentation (including referencing) will be taken into account.
Arial 11 point font, 1.5 line spacing, appropriate margins, layout, pagination, etc.
Would students please note that achievement of the learning outcomes for this assessment is demonstrated against the assessment criteria shown below (which are not necessarily weighted equally). All marks/grades remain indicative until they have been considered and confirmed by the Assessment Board
| Assessment Criteria |Marks Available |Marks Awarded |
| Noting internal and external resources and organisational capabilities. | | |
| | | |
|An examination and application of Yip’s globalisation drivers to the case. |15 | |
| | | |
|A compare and contrast exercise on the various scenarios and environments encountered by Tesco in its | | |
|international expansion. | | |
| |25 | |
|Lateral thinking exercise to adapt Porter’s diamond based on applying manufacturing criteria to the | | |
|service (retail) sector. | | |
| | | |
| |35 | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| |25 | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
|Integral within the weightings above: | | |
|10% of marks available for written English and presentation | | |
|5% for appropriate use of Harvard referencing | | |
| | | |
|A maximum penalty of 10% may be imposed for excessive number of words. | | |
|All 4 pages of the top sheet need to be attached to the submission. | | |
| | | |
|Total |Σ100% | |
Additional comments from second marker or External Examiner (if required)
Master Level Marking Criteria
| | |
|No work has been submitted in the time allowed, or the work submitted demonstrates little or no understanding of|Fail: |
|the task or the subject matter. This may be evident where the work is substantially incoherent, irrelevant or |Marks below 30% |
|lacking in factual content, or where these shortcomings are present in combination such that the work as a whole| |
|is unsound. Major errors of fact or evidence of substantially poor cognitive or other relevant skills will also| |
|lead to a fail. | |
| | |
|The work shows some knowledge and required skills are present to a degree. There may be appreciable error or |Fail: |
|omission of facts, poor structure, misdirection to the task, or poor conceptualisation or illustration of the |Marks in the range |
|work. Evidence of analysis and evaluation is weak. There will be indications in the work that the candidate is|30% – 39% |
|capable of improving it by further application to the task. | |
| | |
|The work contains sufficient descriptive information. There is some analysis and explanation with appropriate |Pass: |
|illustration and example, and some attempt to evaluate. The work will generally be coherent and relevant, it |Marks in the range of |
|will contain some useful proposals or solutions related to familiar solutions and there will be some attempt at |40% – 49% |
|originality. It will be communicated clearly. | |
| | |
|The work contains all the necessary contextual information. There will be adequate analysis, explanation and |Pass: |
|conceptualisation, with appropriate illustration and example, and sound attempts to evaluate and judge. The |Marks in the range of |
|work will be substantially coherent and will contain relevant and feasible proposals or solutions related to |50% – 59% |
|familiar situations, some responses to uncertainty or ambiguity and some acknowledgements of the implications of| |
|change. | |
| | |
|The work will contain complete explanations using most available information. There will be substantial |Pass: |
|analysis; the ability to recognise evidence, use ideas, conceptualise, evaluate and judge in familiar situations|Marks in the range of |
|will be clearly demonstrated. Proposals or solutions will be contextually relevant and useful, with substantial|60% - 69% |
|evidence of the skill necessary to operationalize them in a variety of situations, including those in which | |
|uncertainty, ambiguity or change are present. The work will provide evidence of originality and of useful | |
|knowledge transfer to novel situations. It will be coherent and convincing. | |
| | |
|The work will clearly demonstrate the ability to analyse accurately, reliably and fully, all relevant |Pass: |
|information; to use evidence; to conceptualise, evaluate and judge; to propose and operationalise effective |Marks in the range of |
|solutions, and to show substantial originality and creativity in a variety of familiar situations or in the face|70% and above |
|of ambiguity, uncertainty or change. It will demonstrate valuable knowledge transfer and propose feasible | |
|solutions for a wide range of situations. Evidence of the ability to innovate will be present. | |
-----------------------
Additional comments from second marker (if required):
Additional comments from External Examiner (if required): 