Ace your studies with our custom writing services! We've got your back for top grades and timely submissions, so you can say goodbye to the stress. Trust us to get you there!
Assignment 3: Strategic Plan (Group Assignment) (Week 8)
Phase 1: Assignment Instructions:
This assignment is the last of three assignments. Students will use the tools and concepts learned in the course and in previous business courses to develop an understanding of how organizations develop and manage strategies to establish, safeguard and sustain its position in a competitive market.
This assignment is a group project. You will be placed into groups consisting of no more than four students each. Groups will be assigned early, and the expectation is that the groups will work on the various parts of the assignment as relevant content is covered throughout the course. The group will act as a self-directed team, and will therefore determine its own leadership, timetable, task list, guidelines for communication, goals, and so forth. As an individual, you are expected to participate fully in the project. You are required to use the UMUC group area for discussion.
You will actively participate in completing the assignment and group members will receive the same group grade. However, free-riders who contribute little will receive a different grade than the group grade at the discretion of the instructor. If you fail to contribute to the project, a zero for the assignment will be assigned.
Throughout the course, you have learned about the strategic management and have practiced the various stages through the completion of assignments and learning activities. In phase 1 of this final project, you will work in a group to create a strategic plan and present the plan in a professional manner. The plan requires a paper submitted to the Assignment Folder.
You will perform a strategic plan on a company, from the list provided below. However, instructors may elect to assign a company on the list or of his or her choosing or one of their own as long as previous companies provided in the course are not used. Starbucks, Walmart, Amazon and Apple may not be used. Students who fail to use the companies on the list or an unapproved company will receive a zero for the assignment.
American Eagle Outfitters (NYSE: AEO)
In completing the assignment, you will perform research on the company provided, answer the questions below in narrative form and follow the steps provided below.
Step 1: Preparation for the Assignment
In writing this assignment, you will read and do the following:
Read the grading rubric for the assignment. Use the grading rubric while writing the plan to ensure all requirements are met.
Third person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person.
Contractions are not used in business writing, so you are NOT to use contraction in writing this assignment.
You are expected to paraphrase and are NOT use direct quotes unless related to a company’s mission or vision statements. You are expected to paraphrase, which can be learned by reviewing this link: https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html.
You are responsible for APA only for in-text citations and a reference list. Cite the page or paragraph number.
You may use the resources from the course and from your research. You may not use books and page and paragraph numbers must be used.
Read all course material and perform independent research to provide a comprehensive strategic plan.
Step 2: How to Set Up the Plan
Create a double-spaced, 12-point font Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document. The final product will be no more than 20 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page. Write clearly and concisely.
Follow this format for the comprehensive strategic plan:
Title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name;
introduction
vision and mission
background organization
industry analysis
competitive analysis
financial analysis – not copied data from internet
technique analysis – IFE, EFE, CPM, BCG matrix, Grand Strategy Matrix, and QSPM
alternative strategy generation
SWOT analysis
strategy and prioritization selection
action plan for implementation
evaluative plan
Reference page
Step 3: Create an introductory
Step 4: Develop the plan:
Identify strategies;
Discuss strategies used at corporate, business and function levels using the concepts learned in the course;
Recommend specific strategies and long-term objectives;
Recommend procedures for strategy review and evaluation;
Use frameworks and tools discussed throughout the course.
Step 5: Identify strategy recommendations using the following format for the formulation of strategies.
Step 6: Using the grading rubric as a comparison, read through the paper to ensure all required elements are presented.
Step 7: Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing.
Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a first measure;
Have someone who has excellent English skills to proof the paper;
Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC). The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement.
Step 8: Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder. (The assignment submitted to the Assignment Folder will be considered a student’s final product and therefore ready for grading by the instructor. It is incumbent upon the student to verify the assignment is the correct submission. No exceptions will be considered by the instructor.)
Presented mission, vision and objectives of the company accurately and comprehensively identified and correlated to the definitions of each.
(0.54 – 0.6)
Presented mission, vision and objectives of the company sufficiently identified but not completely accurate or comprehensive correlated to the definitions of each.
(0.48 – 0.53)
Presented mission, vision and objectives of the company were identified but was not complete or needs more clarification on some aspects; no correlation to the meaning of each.
(0.42 – 0.47)
Presented mission, vision and objectives of the company was attempted but key aspects were missing or superficially presented.
(0.36 – 0.41)
Failed to present mission, vision and objectives and the correlation to definitions.
(0 – 0.35)
Presented company background accurately and comprehensively presented.
(0.54 – 0.6)
Presented company background sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.48 – 0.53)
Company background was discussed but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.42 – 0.47)
Company background was attempted but key aspects were missing or superficially presented.
(0.36 – 0.41)
Failed to present company background.
(0 – 0.35)
Industry analysis was performed accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Industry analysis was performed sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Industry analysis was performed but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Attempted to perform an industry analysis but key points were missing or superficially presented.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to perform an industry analysis.
(0 – 0.71)
Competitive analysis was performed accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Competitive analysis was performed sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Competitive analysis was performed but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Attempted to perform a competitive analysis but key points were missing or superficially presented.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to perform an competitive analysis.
(0 – 0.71)
Financial analysis was performed accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Financial analysis was performed sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Financial analysis was performed but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Attempted to perform a financial analysis but key points were missing or superficially presented. Financial data presented with little or no analysis.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to perform a financial analysis.
(0 – 0.71)
Technique analysis was performed accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Technique analysis was performed sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Technique analysis was performed but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Attempted to perform a technique analysis but key points were missing or superficially presented.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to perform an technique analysis.
(0 – 0.71)
Alternative strategy generation was presented accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Alternative strategy generation was presented sufficiently but could be more comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Alternative strategy generation was presented but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Alternative strategy generation was attempted but is presented superficially or key elements were missing.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to present alternative strategy generation.
(0 – 0.71)
Strategy and prioritization selection was accurately and comprehensively.
(1.08 – 1.2)
Strategy and prioritization selection was sufficiently discussed but is not completely accurate or could be more comprehensive.
(0.96 – 1.07)
Strategy and prioritization selection was presented but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.84 – 0.95)
Strategy and prioritization selection was attempted but is superficial or key elements were missing.
(0.72 – 0.83)
Failed to discuss strategy and prioritization selection.
(0 – 0.71)
Action plan for implementation was accurately and comprehensively presented.
(0.72 – 0.8)
Action plan for implementation was sufficiently but is not completely accurate or could be more comprehensive.
(0.64 – 0.71)
Action plan for implementation was presented but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.56 – 0.63)
Action plan for implementation was attempted but is superficial or key elements were missing.
(0.48 – 0.55)
Failed to discuss action plan for implementation.
(0 – 0.47)
Evaluative plan was accurately and comprehensively presented.
(0.72 – 0.8)
Evaluative plan was sufficiently but is not completely accurate or comprehensive.
(0.64 – 0.71)
Evaluative plan was presented but needs more clarification on some aspects.
(0.56 – 0.63)
Evaluative plan was attempted but is superficial or key elements were missing.
(0.48 – 0.55)
Failed to discuss evaluative plan.
(0 – 0.47)
Comments reflect a highly accomplished level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned conclusions.
(2.7 -3)
Comments reflect a satisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in partially correct conclusions that lack development or detail that demonstrates insight into reasoning.
(2.4 – 2.69)
Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in conclusions that are underdeveloped or lack soundly reasoned conclusions.
(2.1 – 2.39)
Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in conclusions that are underdeveloped or lack soundly reasoned conclusions.
(1.8 – 2.09)
Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in failure to draw little to no conclusions.
(0 – 1.7)
Presents exceptionally well-supported arguments or positions with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.
(2.7 – 3.0)
Presents excellent arguments or positions that are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.
(2.4 – 2.69)
Satisfactory arguments or positions are presented but there is a mix of opinion or unclear view with supported arguments using course readings. Case study facts are occasionally used but arguments would be much stronger with use of facts.
(2.1 – 2.69)
Arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in course readings.
(1.8 – 2.09)
Arguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas. Does not provide facts presented in case study.
(0 – 1.79)
Demonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of course readings, and assignment format.
(0.9 – 1.0)
Demonstrates excellent understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment.
(0.8 – 0.89)
Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment.
(0.79 – 0.79)
Fails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment.
(0.6 – 0.69)
Fails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements.
(0 – 0.59)
Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used.
(1.8 – 2)
Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One to three errors found.
(1.6 – 1.79)
Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four to 10 errors found.
(1.4 – 1.59)
Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.
(1.2 – 1.39)
Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.
(0 – 1.19)
No APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.
(0.9 – 1.0)
Attempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.
(0.8 – 0.89)
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 times in document.
(0.7 – 0.79)
Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 4-5 times; or presents only 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper that requires APA citations throughout the document.
(0.6 – 0.69)
No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.
(0. – 0.59)
Overall Score
Looking for top-notch essay writing services? We've got you covered! Connect with our writing experts today. Placing your order is easy, taking less than 5 minutes. Click below to get started.
https://writerbay.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/logo-300x86.png00Paulhttps://writerbay.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/logo-300x86.pngPaul2022-06-02 12:22:472022-06-02 12:22:47FInal in few weeks
