Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual

24/7 Homework Help

Stuck on a homework question? Our verified tutors can answer all questions, from basic math to advanced rocket science!


Overview
In this assignment we build on the analysis we undertook for Assignment 1. In Assignment 2 we now focus on the
organisation. You are required to undertake an analysis of the strategic choices available to our case study
organisation and make a recommendation as to which strategy to pursue.
Directly related to professional practice in organisations, you will integrate theory with informed strategic
choices. This assessment is deliberately designed not only to test what you know, but to also build lifelong learning
skills. It has been developed to give you the best possible opportunity to help the organization to survive and thrive
into the future. The skills that you will be developing include:
• cognitive conceptualisation skills
• critical thinking and analysis skills
• creative application skills.
All these are valuable skills you will need in future employment. How well you are able to demonstrate these skills
and knowledges will impact not only on you and your group (in terms of a mark) but also has the potential to influence
the future of the case study organisation. Your work matters.
Learning Outcomes
The Course Learning Outcomes related to this assessment are:
CLO1: Identify and describe the key components of the strategic management process and how it can be applied in organisations.
CLO2: Assess and judge strategic inputs, including the external and internal environment, strategic mission and strategic intent.
CLO3: Create a strategy including synthesising appropriate elements of business level strategy, competitive dynamics, corporate level
strategy, cooperative strategies and international strategies.
Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
1 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
CLO4: Apply selected theory and strategy frameworks to analyse practical strategy related issues in organisational contexts.
CLO5: Examine the relationship between strategic inputs, strategic actions (formulation, implementation and evaluation) and strategic
outcomes to design a strategic plan.
Assessment Requirements
In this assignment we build on the analysis we undertook for Assignment 1 . In Assignment 2 we now focus on the
organisation. You are required to undertake an analysis of the strategic choices available to our case study
organisation and make a recommendation as to which strategy to pursue.
You are also required to apply the theory, frameworks and concepts covered in the course and to apply them when
conducting an analysis of the strategic choices for The Vetreska Company (https://kr-asia.com/vetreska-isbringing-fashionable-goods-for-your-pets-startup-stories) our case study organisation.
The Data Pack has core
background information.
Assessment Requirements + Criteria |
To fulfil the assessment criteria, your report you should demonstrate you have completed each of these
requirements:

  1. Analyse the current business-level strategy using Porter’s Generic Strategy OR Miles and Snow Strategy
    typologies. Based on your analysis make and justify a recommendation for the most appropriate future businesslevel strategy that you selected [Rubric Criteria 1].
  2. Propose ONE new strategic initiative for the organisation to implement. This initiative can be a major functional
    initiative, such as marketing, use of technology, product (service) innovation/development, and mergers and
    acquisitions. Describe the features of the strategic initiative in detail and explain why it is strategic [Rubric Criteria
    2].
  3. Utilising the SAFe evaluation criteria [see Whittington et al. 2020. Ch. 12: Section 12.3
    future business-level strategy recommendation. Provide financial and stakeholder examples . In applying the
    SAFe criteria you are expected to undertake a high-level risk analysis of the strategy that you are recommending.
    Identify what the main threats are and the organisation’s vulnerability to those threats [Rubric Criteria 3].
  4. Future Directions: Provide a concise overview and justification of the best future strategy options available to the
    organisation – a corporate strategy or an international strategy [Rubric Criteria 4].
  5. Written assignments must be presented in a professional format
    Report presentation, including the quality of your references and
    Criteria 5].
    Advisory notes for this assignment
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    2 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    • Company websites, annual reports, and media reports are important sources of such information, but their
    objectives, and thus credibility, should be carefully analysed and evaluated.
    • You are required to apply appropriate theoretical concepts and analytical tools.
    Assessment Questions?
    Format – In Word, present your assignment in report format
    with a professionally presented Table of Contents, and numbered headings, sub-headings and page
    numbers for each section. Note that the assignment submission MUST be in Word format – pdf submissions will not
    be marked.
    • No Executive Summary is required.
    • ◦ Limited use of tables or diagrams can be used but only to summarise key points made in the section.
    ◦ Dot points are not permitted – key insights must be presented in paragraph form.
    Referencing Style: Consistent reference style throughout the report is essential.
    • Apply either the or Harvard
    are using EndNote or Google Scholar
    citation).
    • The examples and tips on how to
    Number of References – minimum 10 scholarly and professional sources – (includes the required references).
    Use as a
    starting point.
  6. Attend the weekly classes as the theories and concepts that are essential for the assignment will be covered.
    Your lecturer will discuss the assignment in class and respond to questions.
  7. Outside of class time post your question on the Discussions board to see if it has already been answered.
  8. ent and referencing
    related questions
  9. f can also answer
    questions through an online appointment
    Submission
    • If changes are made to these submission instructions, the changes will be advised in the weekly class or Canvas
    Announcements.
    You are required to submit your assignment online in Word format. When you submit work electronically, you agree to
    the

    he assignment can be found in this link
    Submit your assignment into the Final Submission link in the Assignment 2 page in Canvas. Turnitin is also
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    3 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    embedded in this link for checking the authenticity and similarity of your report.
    • Note: The Title Page and Table of Contents (TOC) may have high similarity as every report is following a similar
    structure. If the similarity in the body of the report is >20% then
    ◦ paraphrase sections (other than the Title page and TOC that are showing similarity)
    ◦ check you have correctly referenced all citations and sources of information.
    BEFORE SUBMISSION check you have undertaken the following |
  10. Check that the report has covered all Assessment Criteria as detailed in the marking Rubric [ see below]
    2 . Use Study help 24/7 -Studiosity (in Canvas) +
    and
    assignment meets the criteria
  11. Reference check – check that you have applied the (or
    Harvard if you are using EndNote) referencing style
  12. Keep a back-up copy of all work on a device other than your computer in case you experience computer
    problems. IT failure is not an allowable reason for avoiding late penalty or an extension.
  13. Save a screen shot of the time of submission in case this is queried by your lecturer.
    Academic integrity and plagiarism
    is about honest presentation of your academic work. It means acknowledging the work of others while developing
    your own insights, knowledge and ideas.
    You should take extreme care that you have:
  14. Acknowledged words, data, diagrams, models, frameworks and/or ideas of others you have quoted (i.e. directly
    copied), summarised, paraphrased, discussed or mentioned in your assessment through the appropriate
    referencing methods
  15. Provided a reference list of the publication details so your reader can locate the source if necessary. This includes
    material taken from Internet sites
    If the sources of information in your paper are not correctly acknowledged, you may be accused of plagiarism
    because you have passed off the work and ideas of another person without appropriate referencing, as if they were
    your own.
    Plagiarism covers a variety of inappropriate behaviours, including:
    • Failure to properly document a source
    • Copyright material from the internet or databases
    • Collusion between students
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual https://rmit.instructure.com/courses/98327/assignments/713154
    4 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Strategy identification and justification (S2-22 Ass2)
    Assessment Declaration
    When you submit work electronically, you agree to the
    Rubric Marking Criteria
    The Rubric details the marking criteria for each grade level. Feedback will be provided through the rubric and written
    comments.
    Details of the range of grades awarded is in the last page of this Course Guide
    You may request a review of an assessment result or appeal a final course grade in accordance with the Conduct of
    Assessment and Appeals section of the Assessment processes. Further details regarding the review of assessment
    are detailed in Other Relevant Information in the Course Guide
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    5 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Criteria Ratings Pts
    6 pts
  16. GENERIC
    STRATEGY
  17. Analyse the
    current strategy
    applying either
    Porter’s Generic
    Strategy or Miles and
    Snow Strategy
    typologies.
  18. Based on your
    analysis make and
    justify a
    recommendation for
    a future businesslevel strategy.
    6 to >4.8 Pts
    High Distinction
    Determines the
    current and
    future generic
    strategy of the
    organisation
    utilising applying
    either Porter’s
    Generic Strategy
    or Miles and
    Snow Strategy
    typologies to
    very strongly
    justify
    conclusions.
    Demonstrates
    the ability to
    construct a
    comprehensive
    and
    sophisticated
    discussion and
    draws sound and
    thoroughly
    supported
    conclusions
    about the
    strategic
    alignment of the
    organisation.
    The discussion
    relies upon the
    evidence
    presented
    elsewhere in the
    report and stated
    conclusions align
    with the
    discussion. Work
    is of an
    exceptional
    standard and
    includes
    evidence of
    creativity,
    synthesis and
    organisational
    insights.
    4.8 to >4.2 Pts
    Distinction
    Determines the
    current and
    future generic
    strategy of the
    organisation
    applying either
    Porter’s Generic
    Strategy or Miles
    and Snow
    Strategy
    typologies. to
    strongly justify
    conclusions.
    Work shows a
    sophisticated
    application of the
    appropriate
    strategic
    management
    discipline
    knowledge
    although may
    lack some of the
    finer details.
    Demonstrates
    the ability to
    construct a welldeveloped
    discussion and
    draws sound
    conclusions
    about the
    strategic
    alignment of the
    organisation. The
    discussion relies
    upon the
    evidence
    presented
    elsewhere in the
    report and stated
    conclusions align
    with the
    discussion. Work
    is of a high
    standard but is
    lacking in a few
    of the finer
    details with some
    4.2 to >3.5 Pts
    Credit
    Determines the
    current and
    future generic
    strategy of the
    organisation
    utilising applying
    either Porter’s
    Generic Strategy
    or Miles and
    Snow Strategy
    typologies. to
    adequately justify
    conclusions.
    Works shows a
    solid application
    of the
    appropriate
    strategic
    management
    discipline
    knowledge
    although lacks
    some of the key
    details required
    for a convincing
    argument.
    Demonstrates
    the ability to
    construct a solid
    discussion and
    draws sound
    conclusions
    about the
    strategic
    alignment of the
    organisation. The
    discussion relies
    upon the
    evidence
    presented
    elsewhere in the
    report and stated
    conclusions align
    with the
    discussion. Work
    shows some
    signs of creativity
    but is lacking in
    the finer details
    3.5 to >3.0 Pts
    Pass
    Determines the
    current and
    future generic
    strategy of the
    organisation
    utilising applying
    either Porter’s
    Generic Strategy
    or Miles and
    Snow Strategy
    typologies. to
    justify
    conclusions.
    Work shows
    some application
    of the
    appropriate
    strategic
    management
    discipline
    knowledge
    although lacks
    the key details
    required for a
    convincing
    argument.
    Demonstrates
    the ability to
    construct a
    reasonable
    discussion but
    conclusions
    about the
    strategic
    alignment of the
    organisation are
    not well
    developed. The
    discussion relies
    upon the
    evidence
    presented
    elsewhere in the
    report and stated
    conclusions align
    with the
    discussion. Work
    shows some
    signs of creativity
    3 to >0 Pts
    Fail
    Fails to
    identify the
    current and
    future
    strategy of the
    organisation
    and/or
    provides
    irrelevant
    information
    from
    irrelevant
    sources in an
    unstructured
    manner. Does
    not
    adequately
    apply either
    Porter’s
    Generic
    Strategy or
    Miles and
    Snow
    Strategy
    typologies. Is
    unable to
    identify
    important
    factors and/or
    draw
    reasonable
    conclusions
    about the
    strategic
    alignment of
    the
    organisation.
    Work is
    lacking
    required
    details.
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    6 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Criteria Ratings Pts
    10 pts
    12 pts
    organisational
    insights..
    including
    organisational
    insights.
    but is lacking in
    the finer details
    including
    organisational
    insights.
  19. ORGANISATION’S
    STRATEGIC
    INITIATIVE
  20. Propose one new
    strategic initiative for
    implementation. This
    initiative can be a
    major functional
    initiative.
  21. Describe the
    features of the
    strategic initiative in
    detail and explains
    why it is strategic
    10 to >8.0 Pts
    High
    Distinction
    Proposes one
    only highly
    appropriate
    strategic
    initiative that
    indicates
    sophisticated
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    details for the
    initiative and the
    explanation as
    to why it is
    strategic are
    well structured,
    well argued and
    supported by a
    comprehensive
    range of
    relevant
    research. The
    proposal shows
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    8 to >7.0 Pts
    Distinction
    Proposes one
    only very
    appropriate
    strategic
    initiative that
    indicates very
    good
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and
    its strategic
    context. The
    details for the
    initiative and the
    explanation as
    to why it is
    strategic are
    well structured,
    well argued and
    supported by a
    very good range
    of relevant
    research. The
    proposal shows
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    7 to >6.0 Pts
    Credit
    Proposes one
    only appropriate
    strategic
    initiative that
    indicates solid
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and
    its strategic
    context. The
    details for the
    initiative and the
    explanation as
    to why it is
    strategic are
    generally well
    structured, well
    argued and
    supported by a
    solid range of
    relevant
    research. The
    proposal shows
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    6 to >5.0 Pts
    Pass
    Proposes a
    partial /more than
    one initiative that
    needs more
    detail for its
    appropriateness
    to be assessed.
    The proposal
    indicates a basic
    comprehension
    of the company’s
    capability and its
    strategic context.
    The details for
    the initiative and
    the explanation
    as to why it is
    strategic are
    reasonably well
    structured and
    argued and
    supported by a
    basic range of
    relevant
    research. The
    proposal shows
    some sensitivity
    to contextual
    factors as well as
    all of the ethical,
    logical, and
    cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    5 to >0 Pts
    Fail
    Proposes one
    /more than one
    /no initiative that
    is difficult to
    evaluate
    because it is
    vague or only
    indirectly
    addresses the
    strategy needs
    of the company.
    The proposal
    indicates limited
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    details for the
    initiative and the
    explanation as
    to why it is
    strategic are
    limited and there
    is a lack of
    supporting
    research for the
    proposal. The
    proposal is are
    not sensitive to
    contextual
    factors nor the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
  22. JUSTIFY THE
    FUTURE BUSINESS
    LEVEL STRATEGY
    12 to >9.6 Pts
    High
    Distinction
    9.6 to >8.4 Pts
    Distinction
    Very good
    8.4 to >7.2 Pts
    Credit
    Good
    7.2 to >6.0 Pts
    Pass
    Basic
    6 to >0 Pts
    Fail
    Inadequate
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    7 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Criteria Ratings Pts
    RECOMMENDATION
  23. Justify the future
    business-level
    strategy
    recommendation
    through utilising the
    SAFE framework
    (Suitability,
    Acceptability,
    Feasibility and
    Evaluation)
    2.Provide financial
    and stakeholder
    examples .
  24. Undertake a highlevel risk analysis of
    the recommended
    strategy
  25. Identify key threats
    and vulnerability to
    the organisation
  26. Identify what the
    main threats are and
    the organisation’s
    vulnerability to those
    threats
    Advanced
    application and
    implementation
    of all
    requirements.
    Justifies the
    future businesslevel strategy
    recommendation
    through utilising
    the SAFE
    framework at an
    advanced level.
    Financial and
    stakeholder
    examples, highlevel risk
    analysis of the
    recommended
    strategy, key
    threats and
    vulnerability to
    the organisation
    shows advanced
    level of
    organisational
    insights.
    Demonstrates
    application of
    specialist terms
    and theories at
    an advanced
    level.
    application and
    implementation
    of all
    requirements.
    Justifies the
    future businesslevel strategy
    recommendation
    through utilising
    the SAFE
    framework at a
    very good level.
    Financial and
    stakeholder
    examples, highlevel risk
    analysis of the
    recommended
    strategy, key
    threats and
    vulnerability to
    the organisation
    shows a very
    good level of
    organisational
    insights but
    misses some
    points.
    Demonstrates
    application of
    specialist terms
    and theories at
    very good level.
    application and
    implementation
    of all
    requirements.
    Justifies the
    future businesslevel strategy
    recommendation
    through utilising
    the SAFE
    framework at a
    good level.
    Financial and
    stakeholder
    examples, highlevel risk
    analysis of the
    recommended
    strategy, key
    threats and
    vulnerability to
    the organisation
    shows a good
    level of
    organisational
    insights but
    some examples
    lack insights.
    Demonstrates
    application of
    specialist terms
    and theories at
    good level
    -avoid
    generalisations
    in sections.
    application and
    implementation
    of all
    requirements.
    Superficial
    justification of
    the future
    business-level
    strategy
    recommendation
    through utilising
    the SAFE
    framework at a
    basic level.
    Financial and
    stakeholder
    examples, highlevel risk
    analysis of the
    recommended
    strategy, key
    threats and
    vulnerability to
    the organisation
    shows some
    organisational
    insights but
    many examples
    lack insights.
    Demonstrates
    some application
    of specialist
    terms and
    theories at basic
    level -avoid
    generalisations
    in sections.
    application and
    implementation
    of all
    requirements /or
    some
    requirements
    missing.
    Superficial
    justification of
    the future
    business-level
    strategy
    recommendation
    through
    inadequate
    utilisations the
    SAFE
    framework at an
    unsatisfactory
    level. Financial
    and stakeholder
    examples, highlevel risk
    analysis of the
    recommended
    strategy, key
    threats and
    vulnerability to
    the organisation
    lacks
    organisational
    insights. Poor
    application of
    specialist terms
    and theories .
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    8 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Criteria Ratings Pts
    8 pts
  27. FUTURE
    DIRECTIONS
    1 Provide a concise
    overview and
    justification of the
    best future strategy
    options available to
    the organisation – a
    corporate strategy or
    an international
    strategy
    8 to >6.4 Pts
    High
    Distinction
    Proposes and
    justifies highly
    appropriate
    potential
    corporate or
    international
    strategy
    directions that
    indicate
    sophisticated
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    proposals show
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    6.4 to >5.6 Pts
    Distinction
    Proposes and
    justifies very
    appropriate
    potential
    corporate or
    international
    strategy
    directions that
    indicate very
    good
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    proposals show
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    factors as well
    5.6 to >4.8 Pts
    Credit
    Proposes and
    justifies
    appropriate
    potential
    corporate or
    international
    strategy
    directions that
    indicate solid
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    proposals show
    sensitivity to
    contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    4.8 to >4.0 Pts
    Pass
    Proposes and
    justifies partially
    appropriate
    potential
    corporate or
    international
    strategy
    directions that
    indicate a basic
    comprehension
    of the
    company’s
    capability and its
    strategic
    context. The
    proposals show
    some sensitivity
    to contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    4 to >0 Pts
    Fail
    Proposes and/or
    justifies
    inappropriate
    potential
    corporate and
    international
    strategy
    directions that
    are difficult to
    evaluate
    because they
    are vague. The
    proposals
    indicate limited
    comprehension
    of the company’s
    capability and its
    strategic context.
    The proposals
    are not sensitive
    Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
    9 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
    Criteria Ratings Pts
    4 pts
    factors as well
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
    to contextual
    factors as well
    as all of the
    ethical, logical,
    and cultural
    dimensions of
    the problem.
  28. REPORT
    PRESENTATION +
    REFERENCING
    The overall
    presentation and
    quality, access and
    use information
    professionally and
    referencing.
    1.Professional
    presentation with
    recent references.
  29. Includes Table of
    Contents, numbered
    headings and subheadings.
  30. References in
    Harvard style.
    4 to >3.2 Pts
    High
    Distinction
    Report meets
    academic
    requirements
    with structured
    headings and
    sub-headings in
    the Table of
    Contents and
    body of the
    report. Report
    structure flows
    logically. It
    shows an
    exceptionally
    clear
    understanding of
    subject matter
    and appreciation
    of issues; well
    organised,
    formulated and
    sustained
    arguments; well
    thought out and
    structured
    diagrams;
    relevant
    literature
    referenced.
    Evidence of
    creative insight
    and originality in
    terms of
    comprehension,
    application and
    analysis with at
    least some
    synthesis and
    evaluation. Very
    high standard of
    fluency and
    3.2 to >2.8 Pts
    Distinction
    Report meets
    academic
    requirements
    with structured
    headings and
    sub-headings in
    the Table of
    Contents and
    body of the
    report. It shows
    a strong grasp of
    subject matter
    and appreciation
    of key issues,
    but lacks a little
    on the finer
    points; it has
    clearly
    developed
    arguments,
    relevant and well
    structured
    diagrams,
    appreciation of
    relevant
    literature and
    evidence of
    creative and
    solid work in
    terms of
    comprehension,
    application,
    analysis and
    perhaps some
    synthesis. 6.4 to

5.6 Pts Report
structure flows
logically with
some errors
among the
following:
standard of
2.8 to >2.4 Pts
Credit
Report meets
academic
requirements
with structured
headings and
sub-headings in
the Table of
Contents and
body of the
report. Report
structure mostly
flows logically
with some
errors among
the following:
standard of
fluency and
expression with
your academic
writing style but
with description
in some
sections;
spelling and
grammar.
Headings and
sub-headings
mostly align
with the content.
Complies with
the word limit.. It
has a
competent
understanding
of subject
matter and
appreciation of
some of the
main issues
though possibly
with some gaps,
clearly
2.4 to >2.0 Pts
Pass
Report mostly
meets academic
requirements in
the Table of
Contents and body
of the report.
Report structure
lacks logical flow
in some sections
with errors among
some of the
following: standard
of fluency and
expression with
your academic
writing style with
description in
some sections;
spelling and
grammar.
Numbered
headings and subheadings mostly
align with the
content. Complies
with the word limit.
Shows some
appreciation of
subject matter and
issues; work
generally lacks in
depth and breadth
and with gaps.
Often work of this
grade comprises a
simple factual
description (i.e.
basic
comprehension)
but little
application or
analysis. Work of
2 to >0 Pts
Fail
Report does
not meet
academic
requirements
in the Table of
Contents and
body of the
report. Report
structure lacks
logical flow in
some sections
with errors
among some
of the
following:
standard of
fluency and
expression
with your
academic
writing style
with
description in
some
sections;
spelling and
grammar.
Headings and
sub-headings
mostly align
with the
content.
Complies with
the word limit.
The literature
has not been
used
effectively,
with
references
poorly
integrated
Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
10 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm
Total points: 40
Criteria Ratings Pts
expression with
your academic
writing style;
correct spelling
and grammar.
Headings and
sub-headings
align with the
content in each
section.
Complies with
the word limit. 8
to >6.4 Pts High
Distinction 1.
Has effectively
utilised the
literature, with
references
integrated
throughout the
report at a very
high standard,
with multiple
citations to
support the
analysis. 2. High
level of
consistency and
correct use of
Harvard
referencing
guidelines in-text
and in reference
list. The
reference list
only contains the
essential
sources that are
applied in-text
and vice versa.
fluency and
expression with
your academic
writing style;
spelling and
grammar.
Headings and
sub-headings
mostly align with
the content.
Complies with
the word limit. 1.
Has effectively
utilised the
literature, with
references
integrated
throughout the
report at a high
standard, to
support the
analysis. 2.
Strong level of
consistency and
correct use of
Harvard
referencing
guidelines in-text
and in reference
list. The
reference list
only contains the
essential
sources that are
applied in-text
and vice versa.
developed
arguments,
relevant
diagrams and
literature use,
perhaps with
some gaps, well
prepared and
presented. It
also has solid
evidence of
comprehension
and application
with perhaps
some analysis.
The literature
has been used
to support the
analysis at a
competent
standard, with
references
integrated
throughout the
report. 2.
Competent level
of consistency
and use of
Harvard
referencing
guidelines intext and in
reference list.
The reference
list only contains
sources that are
applied in-text
and vice versa.
this grade may be
poorly prepared
and presented.
Investment of
greater care and
thought in
organising and
structuring work
would be required
to improve. The
literature has
mostly been used
effectively, with
references
integrated
throughout the
report at a basic
standard -some
sections lack
citations. Basic
level of
consistency and
use of Harvard
referencing
guidelines in-text
and in reference
list and/or with
some errors in the
citations. The
reference list only
contains the
essential sources
that are applied intext and vice
versa.
Recommendation
– use the
university study
services to further
develop your
referencing skills
throughout the
report at an
unsatisfactory
standard, with
sections
lacking
citations. 2.
Does not meet
minimum
referencing
guidelines.
Poor
/inconsistent
application of
Harvard
referencing
guidelines intext and in
reference list
and/or with
errors in the
citations. The
reference list
contains
sources that
are/are not
applied in-text
and vice
versa.
Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual
11 of 11 18/9/2022, 6:38 pm

Hire a competent writer to help you with

Assessment 2: Strategy Formation | Individual

troublesome homework