Strategic and Financial Performance Management

Coursework 2

Individual coursework – management accounting – application of

internal accounting approaches and critical analysis of the results of the
same in order to impact on performance, as well as analysis of the
techniques themselves.
Weighting: 50 %
Word limit: 2,000 words (plus or minus 10%). A 5% penalty will be
applied for breaches of this range.
Assesses Learning Outcomes: 2 and 3.
2. Critically evaluate the wider role of fundamental analysis within the
context of corporate performance;

3. Critically evaluate using financial management practices to

produce information appropriate for management to aid planning, control
and decision making at strategic, tactical and operational levels.

In this assignment you are being asked to analyse and evaluate an

internal management accounting approach.

Requirement:

You should assume that you are starting up a new company. You may
choose the specific industry and its product(s)/service(s). Taking one
technique from the management accounting part of the course, e.g.
costing (standard, absorption, marginal, activity based), budgeting,
planning, performance measures, decision making tools etc., discuss why
you would implement this technique in the context of your new business
in order to achieve your strategic aim/objectives.

You should include an appraisal of the technique you have chosen and
why you have chosen it; its strengths and weaknesses, what results you
might expect to learn from it, and how you would use those results.

Consider how practical the technique is for a start-up company, and how
you might need to develop or modify it as the company becomes more
established.

Note: this assignment is not about how to set up a new business; you do
not need to provide a business plan or indeed evidence that the company
has a market etc. The assignment is about why you, as a manager, would

Sensitivity: Internal
 choose to implement one particular internal accounting/measurement
approach in a start-up/new business.

Your report should aim to:

1. Provide an introduction to your company; for example, industry

sector, product/service and geographic location and your overall
strategic aim for the company in the future (e.g. to be number one
in the industry, be the ‘best’ employer). It is not expected that your
business would achieve this aim at the end of the first year, but it
indicates the strategic focus of your company.

2. Present the particular internal management accounting technique

you have chosen to apply to your new business and why you think
it is appropriate to support your strategic aim. You should analyse
the data you expect to obtain from the technique and any limitations
you can see, either from an implementation point of view or from a
data point of view.

3. Analyse how the data you might obtain from your technique will
assist you in improving the performance of the company on the way
to achieving your strategic aim. This need not be necessarily in the
financial sense, as it could be improving customer satisfaction,
employee retention or market share for example, depending on the
technique you have selected. You should also consider how you
might need to adapt your technique as the business becomes more
established.

4. Conclude with an overall appraisal of the technique in the start-up

company to support you in achieving the business’ strategic aim.

Please note: this assignment is NOT on any existing company (although

you can of course, draw on any experience of other companies), you are
assuming a start-up situation. If any submission is on an existing
company, there will be a 5% mark penalty.

There is no requirement for an executive summary.

All sources of information used must be reported according to the

Harvard referencing system.

Sensitivity: Internal
 Evaluation criteria
This is a guideline for the relative weighting of elements of the
assessment and below is the marking rubric used in this coursework:

Criterion Weighting

Introduction and initial presentation of company 20%

and appropriateness of technique selected to
support strategic aim

Analysis and application of technique, including 25%

an appreciation of the strengths and
weaknesses of the technique

Consideration of the data obtained from the 35%

technique and discussion of the development
of the technique/data as the business matures

Conclusion 10%

Format and presentation, including referencing 10%

Sensitivity: Internal
 Outstanding 90- Excellent 70- Very good 60-69% Good/satisfactory Unsatisfactory (40-49%) Very poor (5-39%)
100% 90% 50-59%
Intro. Indust Outstanding Excellent Very good Adequate Limited introduction to work No introduction to
20% introduction to introduction to introduction to introduction to Limited description of the work
Introduction and work work work work industry and company, with No or poor
initial analysis of Strong Excellent Very good Adequate little referencing description of the
company and appreciation of presentation presentation of the presentation the company and its
industry industry and of the company and company and industry, with no
company's place company and industry, including industry with some or poor
within it, all industry, referenced sources referencing of referencing
excellently including sources
referenced referenced
sources
Analysis of Outstanding, Excellent and Very good choice of Reasonable choice Poor choice of technique Very
technique 25% extensive and appropriate technique and of technique and and appreciation of inappropriate
appropriate choice of explanation of strengths and strengths and weaknesses choice of
analysis of technique, strengths and weaknesses technique and no
technique, with with clear weaknesses discussion of
full appreciation explanation of strengths and
of strengths and strengths and weaknesses
weaknesses weaknesses
Evaluation 35% Outstanding Excellent Very good A good standard, a An unsatisfactory standard, Well below the
Financial evaluation, evaluation, evaluation, some fairly good level of little critical analysis and pass standard
evaluation of critical analysis, very strong very good critical critical analysis and evaluation A poor critical
the company incisive original critical analysis, with a few evaluation Little evidence of original analysis and
thinking, analysis, with minor errors of Some evidence of thinking or originality evaluation
commendable minor errors understanding original thinking or Not well researched No evidence of
originality, well only. Very good ideas and originality, Ideas unclear and incoherent originality
researched Good clearly explanations, with Quite well Some significant Poorly researched
Outstanding expressed some evidenced researched understandings and errors Ideas confused
coherence and ideas and research. Some evidence of and incoherent
logic reasoning, Very good sense of misunderstandings Some serious
Trivial errors only coherence and logic errors and

Sensitivity: Internal
 supported by misunderstanding
good research s
Excellent logic
Very minor
errors only
Conc & rec 10% All concepts and All chosen Uses some relevant Some effort to Key elements of the Largely irrelevant
Conclusion and material fully ideas are ideas answer the question question remain ideas
recommendatio relevant to the relevant to the Chooses Some missing, weak unanswered/underdevelope Does not answer
n analysis and answer appropriate or irrelevant d the question that
recommendation Answers the concepts and makes elements Confused choice of concepts was asked
s including question fully an attempt to Links to answer are to answer the question Covers concepts
materials sourced covering all answer the question unclear in places Important concepts may be which are not
from key concepts Information is May ‘pad’ with difficult to pick out relevant to the
independent No evidence of mostly relevant to irrelevant answer.
research ‘padding’ with the question information
irrelevant Only minor missing
information elements
Minimal ‘padding’
with irrelevant
information
Format, pres. Outstanding, Logical Largely well- Some Repeated Very difficult to
10% sophisticated organisation structured answer spelling/grammatica spelling/grammatical issues read and follow
Format and written and flow of Only minor l errors but do not Weak Referencing skills Extensive
presentation, communication ideas spelling/grammatica significantly Difficult to read and follow problems with
including No significant Error free l errors interfere with written
referencing areas for further written Good grasp of understanding presentation
development communicatio Harvard Referencing Some attempt to No or incorrect
n Mainly easy to read Harvard Reference referencing
Precise and follow Difficult to read and and/or high levels
Harvard follow in places of plagiarism
Referencing
An enjoyable
read

Sensitivity: Internal
Sensitivity: Internal