ASSESSMENT 1 – Based on the case study provided and your own research complete a report on Ryanair based on the structure below. The report must refer to academic literature as well as Ryanair case study content.
The Report must be a 2,000 word report +/- 10% on Ryanair’s Business Strategy.
The report MUST follow the following structure. Please ensure you have a separate section for each of the following headings:
- Title page: Name of company, RYANAIR and word count of report.
- Introduction (100 – 150 words)
a. Aim & General Purpose of this report
- Strategic Purpose: (250 – 300 words)
- Provide an overview of Ryanair briefly outlining its main products/services/geographical markets
- Environmental analysis (1000 – 1200 words)
- Macro using relevant strategic tool(s) e.g. PESTLE, Six Segments,etc. identify the main macro factors impacting Ryanair.
- Subsequent analysis should focus on 2-3 key factors and how these factors may create opportunity/threats for Ryanair
- Meso using relevant strategic tool(s) e.g. Porter’s 5 forces identify the industry forces and assess the industry forces impacting on Ryanair.
- Subsequent analysis should focus on 2-3 key forces and how these forces may create opportunity/threats for Ryanair
- Micro Highlight Ryanair’s internal strengths and weaknesses
- Business Strategy (300 – 400 words)
- – Based on the company’s strategic purpose and environmental analysis set out the Ryanair company’s competitive strategy using Porter’s Generic Strategies.
- Conclusion (100 – 150 words)
- Summarise the key themes to emerge from your strategic report
List of References – As well as providing citations within the text you MUST produce an end reference list of all sources cited in the body of your report. These must be listed in alphabetical order using the guidance provided in the module handbook
Report One Marking Guidelines
REPORT ONE
| Marking Criteria | Marking Band | Grade and Feedback |
| Strategic Purpose (20%) | 0 | Zero marks – this section is missing. |
| 20% or less | This section does not cover the remit in sufficient detail regarding the firm’s activities, vision/mission & values. Elements are missing or poorly framed. Research is limited, for example few if any citations | |
| 30% | You have partially covered the remit but your discussion is overly descriptive and very weak in terms of explanation of the firm’s activities,, company values and/or objectives | |
| 40% | Despite some omissions, you have provided a basic coverage of the remit. However more use of supporting evidence and literature is required to improve your explanation of the firm’s vision/mission & values , thus making your work less descriptive. | |
| 50% | Good attempt to cover the remit, with evidence of explanation emerging as to the firm’s vision/mission & values but still too much description. To improve you are required to provide more critical reflection drawing on links between theory and practice and a wider range of sources to defend your analysis. | |
| 60% | The remit is well covered, demonstrating a good level of understanding of strategic management concepts relating to strategic purpose. Thorough research and analysis is evident and statements are mostly very well supported by the evidence presented, but more critical analysis is still required in some areas of the remit. Wider reading/use of literature on business values is likely to improve your analysis. | |
| 70% | In this section, you have produced a very analytical discussion that covers the remit fully. A wide range of evidence has been used to support your analysis and you have successfully made links between theory and company practice. To improve your score, further evidence of critical thinking in the use of evidence is required. Some further rewriting would also improve the quality of your arguments. | |
| 85% | You have done an excellent job of fulfilling the remit. You have researched this area well, demonstrating an excellent grasp of the topic of business values with deep insight into strategic management literature in this area. Your analysis is very well written, fully supported with a wide range of evidence and demonstrates critical thinking in the use of evidence presented. Well done | |
| 100% | Outstanding in every respect. | |
| Environmental analysis (45%) | 0 | Zero marks – this section is missing. |
| 20% or less | Your analysis is limited in depth and scope This section does not cover the remit in sufficient detail. Elements of the environmental analysis are missing or poorly framed. Research is limited, for example few if any citations | |
| 30% | You have partially covered the remit, but your discussion is overly descriptive and very weak in terms of explanation as to the macro, meso and micro environments. You need to demonstrate better understanding through greater research and/or greater written fluency | |
| 40% | Despite some omissions, you have provided a basic discussion that partially covers parts of the macro, meso and micro environments. Much greater use of supporting evidence or literature is required to improve your analysis and or greater written fluency. | |
| 50% | Good attempt to cover the macro, meso and micro environments, but still tendency to description To improve you are required to provide more critical reflection making more links between theory and practice and using a wider range of sources to defend your analysis. | |
| 60% | The environmental analysis is well covered, demonstrating a good level of understanding of strategic management concepts relating to this section. Thorough research and analysis is evident and statements are mostly well supported by the evidence presented, but more critical thinking is required to improve your analysis. | |
| 70% | In this section, you have produced a very analytical discussion that fully demonstrates a critical understanding of the macro, meso and micro environments. A wide range of evidence has been used to support your analysis and you have successfully made links between theory and practice. To improve your score, further evidence of critical thinking in the use of evidence is required in some parts of your work. Some further rewriting would improve the quality of your arguments. | |
| 85% | ! You have done an excellent job of fulfilling both parts of the remit. You have researched this area well, demonstrating an excellent grasp of industry developments and a clear insight into strategic management literature in this area. Your analysis is well written, fully supported with a wide range of evidence and demonstrates critical thinking in the use of evidence presented. Well done | |
| 100% | Outstanding in every respect | |
| Business Strategy (25%) | 0 | This section is missing. |
| 20% or less | This section is very poor. You have failed to demonstrate a clear understanding of ideas or concepts related to Business strategy e.g. Porter’s generic strategies. | |
| 30% | This section provides some but insufficient analysis of the company’s business strategy. However you need to do much more to demonstrate an understanding of how to correctly apply Porter’s generic competitive strategies model. | |
| 40% | You have covered the remit partially. However, although you have applied the Porter’s Generic model your analysis is weak because it is not well supported with evidence. You also need to do more to demonstrate an understanding of business level strategy. | |
| 50% . | This section covers most of what is required by the remit in terms of discussing the extent to which the company is following strategies defined in Porter’s generic competitive strategies model, however to improve further you needed to provide a fuller and more critical analysis of the model and its application | |
| 60% | This section demonstrates a well balanced discussion of the generic competitive strategies and its application to the life cycle. To improve more critical reflection is still required and further links to the literature would facilitate this | |
| 70% | This section provides a comprehensive review of the Porter’s generic competitive strategies used by the company demonstrating full understanding and some critical insight into the application of Porter’s model in relation to the life cycle. Some further attention to detail would further improve the level of your analysis; a deeper scrutiny of the literature would help you achieve this outcome | |
| 85% | This section provides an excellent, critical review of the competitive strategies used by the company demonstrating critical insight into Porter’s model AND an excellent level of critical reflection of the company’s strategy in relation to the lifecycle. | |
| 100% | Outstanding in every respect | |
| Presentation (10%) Presentation of report (Executive Summary, Introduction, Conclusion, layout, use of imagery, colour, etc) | 20% or less | This section reflects poor performance in terms of three or more of the indicators left. Your performance suggest you have not understood or engaged in the learning process |
| 30% | This section reflects poor performance in terms of two or more of the indicators left. Your performance suggests you have not understood or engaged in the learning process | |
| 40% | Your performance is barely satisfactory; because one or more of the indicators left suggests a major weakness | |
| 50% | Your performance is satisfactory, but one or more of the indicators left still requires significant improvement | |
| 60% | A good performance across the indicators although one indicator is weak | |
| 70% | A generally excellent performance, particularly in two of the indicators. | |
| 85% | An excellent performance, particularly in two of the indicators | |
| 100% | Outstanding in every respect |
0 comments