Assignment Brief

Term 3_Year 2022-2023

Submission Deadline: Teaching Week 7
Via Turnitin

Unit title & code LNDN11011- Strategic Financial Management and Analysis

Assignment number 1: Report of practical/field/ clinical work

and title
Assignment type Coursework: Individual Report

Weighting of 50%
assignment
Size or length of 2000 words
assessment
Unit learning outcomes KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING

L1. Examine the competitive forces in the marketplace.

L2. Critically evaluate an organisation’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities

and threats and its strategic options.

TASK

You are required to write a report examining a chosen MNC’s strategic position and
competitive forces and submit your report electronically via Turnitin that covers the following
area. Your MNC will be given by tutor and/or can be selected in consultation with your tutor.
1. Identify and critically evaluate the competitive market environment of your chosen.
2. Complete a SWOT analysis and critically evaluate your chosen organisation’s
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats and its strategic options.
 3. Identify and critically evaluate different types of finance the business relies on such as
Debt financing, Equity financing or Lease financing.
4. Complete a financial market analysis of your chosen organisation (Discussion should
include critical evaluation of financial market condition that your chosen organisation
raise fund from and different types of efficient market).

General Guidance

The paper must include:

• Your assignment should be written in the style of a report to be presented to a

Board of Directors.
• It should therefore include title and contents pages (not included within the word
limit).
• You should use Times News Roman, font size 12, spacing 1.5.
• The paper should be written in an academic style.
• In-text citation should be provided and a full list of references using the
Harvard format.
• Submission should be made via Turnitin.
• Penalties will apply for late submission and being more than 10% either side of
the word limit.
• No cutting and pasting from websites of any kind is permitted.
• No copying or plagiarism is permitted.

MARKING CRITERIA AND FEEDBACK

Section/ element Allocated Marks

Knowledge and Understanding and Application of 30%

Concepts
Analysis 25%

Critical Approach 25%

Effectiveness of Communication 20%

 Knowledge and
Understanding and
Application of Concepts
An exceptionally
comprehensive, detailed,
profound grasp of key
concepts at this level.
A large quantity of
accurate, factual, historical
85-
and contextual detail.
10
The purpose of the task
0%
has been fully understood.
An excellent answer that is
thorough, complete,
comprehensive & relevant.
Conceptual knowledge
Excellent
applied with consummate
skill.
A comprehensive, detailed
grasp of key concepts at
this level. Factual, historical
and contextual detail is
abundant and accurate.
70- The purpose of the task
84 has been fully understood.
% An excellent answer that is
relevant, thorough and
comprehensive.
Conceptual knowledge
applied with considerable
skill
Very good knowledge and
understanding of key
concepts at this level.
Factual, historical and/or
contextual information is
evidenced where
Very Good
60-
appropriate and is largely
69
accurate.
%
A very good answer that is
relevant, thorough and
complete. The purpose of
the task has been fully
understood. Conceptual
knowledge applied very
skilfully.
Good knowledge and
understanding of key
concepts but there may be
gaps. A reasonable amount
of factual, historical and/or
contextual information,
50- which contains a few
Good
59 serious inaccuracies.
% The task has been
understood and addressed
competently. The answer
may lack thoroughness and
detail and contain some
irrelevancy. Conceptual
knowledge applied with
adequate skill.
A fair knowledge and
understanding of key
concepts at this level but
there may be significant
40- gaps. An attempted
49 inclusion of factual,
Fair
% historical and/or contextual
information, (likely to
contain inaccuracies).
The question has been
addressed simplistically
and the purpose of the task
Analysis
Your work shows that you
are able to analyse key
concepts in a way that is
unusually advanced for this
level of study and that goes
beyond the ideas and
approaches that we
studied.
Your work shows a good
ability to analyse key
concepts using the ideas
and approaches that we
covered in the course of
the module.
Your work shows that you
are able to analyse ideas
using the approaches that
we covered in the module.
Your work tends to be
descriptive, with only
limited analysis using the
ideas and approaches that
we covered in the module.
Your work is descriptive,
rather than analytical, and
you have made a number
of assertions without any
evidence to back up your
arguments.
Critical Approach
The argument is developed
logically and skilfully. Is
critical, imaginative and
insightful.
The work shows excellence
in bringing together
evidence in support of the
argument.
Extensive relevant,
authoritative independent
reading.
The argument is developed
logically and shows
excellent critical insight.
Brings together evidence in
support of the argument.
Significant, relevant,
authoritative independent
reading.
The argument is developed
logically -a very good level
of critical thinking.
Brings together evidence in
support of the argument.
Some useful, relevant and
authoritative independent
reading.
The argument sometimes
lacks coherence.
Some attempt at critical
thinking is made but too
descriptive.
Lacks coherence and
application of evidence in
support of the argument.
Lacks evidence of
independent reading.
Limited evidence of logical
argument or critical
thinking. -seldom brings
together evidence in
support of the argument.
Research minimal and/or of
questionable relevance &
authority.
Effectiveness of
Communication
Written communication is
excellent. The work is extremely
fluent. It is well-structured and
accurate.
A very sophisticated grasp of
appropriate subject-specific
terminology. Very few, if any,
language errors. Referencing is
faultless.
Written communication is highly
successful. The work is a very
fluent, well-structured and
accurate, -very good grasp of
appropriate subject-specific
terminology.
Occasional language errors but
they do not impede
communication.
Referencing is generally correct.
Written communication is very
successful. The work is largely
fluent and well-structured,
accurate.
A sound grasp of appropriate
subject-specific terminology.
Errors occasional and only when
complex ideas are discussed.
Referencing contains few errors.
Communication is good. The
work is reasonably fluent, well-
structured and accurate.
Some grasp of appropriate
subject-specific terminology. The
error is evident but does not
impede understanding of the
main points.
Referencing may contain error.
Written communication is only
partly successful. Lacks
precision.
The work is moderately fluent
&shows a basic grasp of
appropriate terminology.
Significant errors in grammar,
syntax, and terminology in
several places. Referencing may
contain significant error.
 may not have been fully
understood. Maybe
incomplete and contain
irrelevancy. Application of
conceptual knowledge is
only partly successful.
Weak or very limited Your work is descriptive The argument, critical Written communication is not
understanding of key and shows no attempt to thinking, and research are successful. The work lacks
concepts at this level with analyse ideas or largely limited or absent. fluency and precision.
very significant gaps. arguments. Any referencing
Factual, historical and/or Some of your work is conventions if extant are A poor grasp of appropriate
contextual information is irrelevant/ not always applied incorrectly. terminology. Frequent errors in
limited or very limited logical or coherent and has grammar, syntax, and
0- and/or inaccurate. a high number of terminology seriously impede
39 The answer given is poor inaccuracies. understanding. The reader may
Fail

% and/or incomplete. The be unable to follow the essay.

main purpose of the task Any referencing highly
may be/is misunderstood erroneous.
and so the answer lacks
relevance to the question,
the answer is incomplete
and/or irrelevant.
Any attempt to apply
conceptual knowledge is
very limited/does not exist.