May/June 2022 Exam paper

Question-by-question analysis

See below, examples of how to approach the

questions.

1.1a) Use an example related to the Investec case study to explain the concept of
‘transient competitive advantage. (2 marks)

Sample of answers

1
Part 1.1a (2 marks) of Question 1 required you to use an example from the case study to
explain the concept of transient competitive advantage.
No marks were awarded for the theoretical definition of transient competitive advantage.

2 marks allocated for an example related to Investec, such as the use of Biometric technology
when performing ATM transactions to ensure that only authorised customers can use the ATM
services. This would give Investec an edge because however, it would be short-lived since
other banks/financial institutions can also implement the same innovation.

b) ‘According to the information provided in the case study, Investec has a transient
competitive advantage’. Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Justify your
answer. (3 marks)

2
Part 1.1b (3 marks) of the question asked for your view on whether Investec has a transient
competitive advantage and to justify your answer.
Marks were awarded for correctly disagreeing with the statement and then explaining that
Investec has a sustainable competitive advantage. See the above example of a correct
response.

1.2. a) Evaluate the 1999 mission statement of Investec to determine whether it

meets the requirements of a good mission statement. (3 marks)
Hint: When evaluating the mission statement use a table with the following headings;
components, yes/no, excerpts from the statement.

3
Part 1.2a (3 marks) of the question required you to evaluate the mission statement and to
determine if it meets the requirements of a good mission statement. We recommended the
use of a table with headings: components, yes/no, excerpts.
The 2021 Investec mission statement should have been evaluated against the criteria of
product/service, the market and the method (technology) used.

Some students included the criteria for the vision statement here – which proves lack of
understanding and did not earn marks.

Part 1.2b (7 marks) of the question asked for a comparison between the 1999 and 2021
mission statements and asked for comments on how it has changed.
The comparison should have covered the product, market and technology described in the
1999 mission statement and the 2021 mission statement. Both the 1999 and 2021 mission
statements only meet one core component i.e., product and/or service – in both statements
Investec is in the business of banking. However, the other two core components i.e., market
and technology used are not mentioned. It is noted that over the years the statement has
improved to include other components such as commitment to stakeholders and
organisational philosophy.
For both years, Investec should have indicated the market which they serve and specify the
method used to deliver the products and services.

4
2.a) Use the case study to identify five threats from the external environment.
(5 marks)

Question 2a (5 marks) required you to identify any five threats from the external environment.
Students who identified internal weaknesses did not earn marks. This question required you
to prove your understanding that a threat is external to the organisation. The case study
offered examples of new entrants, constraints in the economic environment, the uncertainty
from Covid, poverty and unemployment and increases in cyber-crime. Marks were awarded
for additional examples that prove understanding.

5
2. b) Give detailed recommendations on how Investec can counter threats identified in
a) above. (15 marks)

6
Question 2b (15 marks) required you to offer detailed recommendations on how Investec can
counter the threats identified in the first part of the question.
We found that many students performed poorly in this question. Recommendations given by
most students were vague, some were not detailed enough to earn full marks. We awarded 3
marks for each recommendation that is linked to the threats identified in the first part of the
question. We remind you that the MNG3701 module teaches that organisations should use
their internal strengths to counter external threats using strategies that are acceptable, feasible
and appropriate. Understanding these fundamental principles of strategic planning was tested
in this question. Many students lost marks for generic recommendations that are not grounded
in sound strategic management principles.

7
8
Question 3.1 (7 marks) stated that Investec follows a differentiation strategy. The question
required you to confirm agreement or disagreement and give reasons.
We required you to disagree with the statement. Investec follows a focus differentiation
strategy. However, we gave the benefit of doubt to students who did not specify ‘focus’
differentiation provided the justification is sufficient and still linked to evidence of
understanding that Investec provides for a niche market with niche products and services and
focus on high net-worth individuals.

3.2) Although still not implemented, it was proposed during a strategic planning
session that Investec should introduce affordable business banking in their corporate
client offering. This would be done through a low-cost business account that would
target small businesses with a turnover of R250 000 per year.

a) Identify the business level strategy for the proposed business account. (2 Marks)

9
Question 3.2
This question described the proposal for Investec to introduce affordable business banking in
their corporate client offering.
Question 3.2a (2 marks) required you to identify the business level strategy.
The strategy should have been identified as focused low-cost.

10
Question 3.2b (6 marks) required you to use the suitability and feasibility key evaluation criteria
to evaluate the proposed strategic choice.
No marks were awarded for theory. Marks were awarded for showing that the proposed cost
leadership strategy is NOT suitable, but may be feasible.
We awarded marks for sound academic arguments. 3 marks were awarded for arguments on
the suitability and 3 marks for arguments on feasibility.

Question 4 was a 20-mark essay question – like Assignment 02. It required you to write a 1-
page essay to discuss the concepts of resources, capabilities and core competencies using
the Investec case study.
15 of the 20 marks were awarded to the content of the essay with marks being allocated for
proving understanding. Merely copying content from the prescribed material did not earn
marks – the practice of copying and pasting does not prove understanding or ability to apply
course concepts to a real-life scenario. A maximum of 3 marks were awarded for providing
theory with 12 marks dedicated to the examples and application.
5 of the 20 marks were awarded for adhering to the technical requirements – specifically,
introduction, using headings, citing at least 3 academic sources with correct
citation/referencing, and a conclusion. Regretfully, many students lost ‘easy’ 5 marks for not
heeding to the technical requirements. Bear in mind that a critical cross field outcome of a
Bachelor degree exit level module (such as MNG3701) is the ability to produce written texts
of descriptive, prescriptive and argumentative characters to accepted international standards
in his or her specific field of training.

11