CPD & Strategic

Management
7ME502

Coursework 1 Assessment Brief

Analysis of an Industrial Sector
Module Leader- John Thorley

Sensitivity: Internal
 Contents
Module Leader .........................................................................................................................................3
Key dates and details ...............................................................................................................................3
Description of the assessment.................................................................................................................3
Assessment Content ................................................................................................................................4
Anonymous Marking ................................................................................................................................7
Assessment Regulations ..........................................................................................................................7

Sensitivity: Internal
 Module Leader
• John Thorley
• J.thorley@derby.ac.uk internal phone number 01332 593233
• Office hours Tuesday 1.00pm – 2.00pm Thursday 2.00pm – 3.00pm

Key dates and details

Assessment Type: Individual Report

Assessment weighting: 40%
Word count 2500 words +/- 5%
Learning Outcome: 1
Submission Method: Turnitin
Submission Date: 23:59 UK time, 18th. March 2024
Provisional Feedback Release Date: 23.59 UK time, 25th April 2024

Description of the assessment

Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of the assignment, students will be able to:

1. Critically analyse a sector of industry relevant to your industry/specialism on a global scale.

Course work (40%) Learning outcome 1 to be assessed.

An individual written report (2500 words in length) which will develop your managerial skills in
preparation for work in a global industry environment. You will study strategic concepts and be able
to transfer them into your own industry/specialism through a structured approach.

Sensitivity: Internal
 Assessment Content

The Brief

Your brief is to produce a report that strategically analyses a sector of a National / global industry
relevant to your own specialism and an organisation operating within it.

Step 1 Choose an industry

If you are employed, then choose that industry. If you are a full-time student, choose an industry
you would like to work in or is important to the country in which you intend to work.

Step 2 Research the industry.

An industry sector is probably best analysed using a PESTEL model and the Porter 5 forces model.
What are the main strategies of firms operating in the sector? What is the size of the market? What
are the external pressures on such organisations at the moment? What threats and opportunities
are there?

Step 3 Research the organisation

A combination of the resource View of the organisation, SWOT analysis and possibly Portfolio
Analysis may work best. You should then be able to compare this with what is happening in other
organisations within the industry. Based on the current state, how could the operational strategy be
used to gain a competitive advantage?

Step 4 Consolidate your personal strategy

Critically explore why, where and how you would best fit in within this industry and organisation. If
you are employed, reflect on the above and discuss whether a new personal strategic direction is
required. This is probably best evaluated using the SPEAR model. The amount of thought, self-
analysis and reflection can be huge, but the summary for the assignment is just one or two
paragraphs.

Step 5 Produce a report

A high degree of critical analysis and reflection (not just description) is expected at the MSc level.
Your conclusions should relate to the industry and opportunities and the strategies used by firms to

Sensitivity: Internal
 compete within it. You must present the scope and the size of the market you are analysing.
Prioritise key points from PESTEL, Porter’s Five Forces and SWOT to use in your discussion. Support
any claims with cited and referenced materials.

You are encouraged to use other techniques learnt on this module or other modules in this
assignment.

This is an individual assignment.

Marking Criteria

1. Appropriate use of tools such as PESTEL, Porter’s Forces and SWOT and others: (20 MARKS)
2. Critical analysis of an industry and organisation operating within it. Discussion on how
outside influences is shaping organisational strategy (40 MARKS)
3. Demonstrate critical analysis and personal evaluation through self-study to summarise your
personal strategy in terms of career development (10 MARKS)
4. Report’s structure, flow, signposting, sub-headings, use of grammar, spelling, punctuation
and Harvard Referencing and citations. Depth of research and varied sources. (30 MARKS)

Potential Structure (Guide only)

Cover page

Content’s page

Introduction –

Main Body

Discussion

Conclusion

References

Appendices

Sensitivity: Internal
Assignment brief Very Poor (15%) Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Good PASS MERIT (65%) DISTINCTION Outstanding Exceptional
(35-%) PASS (45%) (55%) (75%) DIST (85%) DIST (95%)
Appropriate
application of tools No tools applied or Missing some or Contain some Outstanding Exceptional
Demonstrates very Comprehensive
applied incorrectly all of the tools. sound aspects but Demonstrates use application of application of
such as PESTEL, good application of application of tools
Tools are the application of of all the tools with tools and tools and
Porter’s Forces and tools is not good depth and
the tools and uses and techniques
applied additional tools for applied in a techniques techniques
SWOT incorrectly supported with research in places applied in a applied in a
analysis coherent context
academic rigour coherent context coherent context
(20 MARKS)
Critical analysis of Demonstrates an Demonstrates
an industry and No analysis or Demonstrates a outstanding level an exceptional
organisation discussion. No No critical very good level of Demonstrates an of analysis and level of analysis
Some aspects of Demonstrates
operating within it. evaluation. Nothing analysis and no critical analysis and excellent level of discussion around and discussion
analysis and / or good analysis and
Discussion on how of merit discussion provides very good analysis and industrial strategy around industrial
some discussion discussion
outside influences is discussion on the discussion around and an strategy and an
but they are demonstrating
shaping industry influences industrial strategy organisation organisation
limited in content some good
organisational affecting and an organisation operating within it. operating within
and depth understanding
strategy organisational operating within it. it.
(40 MARKS) strategy

Demonstrates Demonstrat
Demonstrate a
an es an
critical analysis and Demonstrates a Demonstrates
No discussion or No critical outstanding exceptional
personal evaluation Some aspects of very good level of an excellent
reflection analysis and no Demonstrates level and level and
through self-study personal analysis personal evaluation, level and depth
discussion. No some analysis depth of depth of
to summarise your and evaluation, through use of tools of authentic
reflection or and evaluation authentic authentic
personal strategy in but the use is and summary of personal
evaluation of with depth and personal personal
terms of career inadequate or of feedback applied to evaluation
personal authenticity evaluation evaluation
development poor quality external applied in
position. applied in applied in
opportunities context
context context
(10 MARKS)

Report’s structure, The citing and The citing and

No reference Poorly cited and Minimal standard The citing and The citing and The citing and
flow, grammar, referencing are referencing are
section and or referenced of citing and referencing is clear referencing are referencing are
spelling, Harvard mostly clear and clear and of an
citations. Not material or no referencing has and of a very good clear and Spelling, an exceptional
Referencing and of a good excellent standard.
matching / poor cited or been standard. The grammar, standard. The
citations. Depth of standard. The AND the report,
structure and referenced demonstrated to report structure is structure is of an report is
research and varied report is fairly well structure and
presentation material. some extent. OR very good, clear outstanding exceptional for
sources. structured and presentation are
Spelling errors poor report and coherent standard. for this this module over
(30 MARKS) presented excellent.
structure cohort the years
 Anonymous Marking
Submissions in Turnitin and Blackboard

You must submit your work using your student number to identify yourself, not your name. You
must not use your name in the text of the work at any point. When you submit your work in Turnitin
you must submit your student number within the assignment document and in the Submission title
field in Turnitin.

Assessment Regulations
The University’s regulations, policies and procedures for students define the framework within
which teaching and assessment are conducted. Please make sure you are familiar with these
regulations, policies and procedures.

Assessment Criteria

The grading scale applies to Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the University Credit Framework. The descriptors
are typical characteristics of the standard of work associated with each grade and are given in details
by level. Please refer to the 3Rs document for a comprehensive view of this scale.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/academic-regulations

PLAGIARISM

An “academic offence” is committed when a student tries to gain improper advantage for her/himself,
or not following the Academic Regulations, concerning any part of the assessment process. Please
refer to the 3Rs statement:

http://www.derby.ac.uk/academic-regulations

Performance Criteria
The grading scale applies to Level 4 in the University Credit Framework is associated with each grade
as shown below:

READING LINK TO ASPIRE

CPD and Strategic Management (7ME502) | University of Derby (talis.com)

Sensitivity: Internal
 90-100% Excellent

Distinction
Meets all criteria in 80-89% range below, plus demonstrates exceptional ability and insight,
indicating the highest level of technical competence; work is virtually flawless and has potential
to influence the forefront of the subject and may be of publishable/exhibitable quality. Relevant
generic skills are demonstrated at the highest possible standard.

Exceptional achievement distinguishable even amongst the best quality work and deserving of
the highest possible marks within the Distinction grade.

80-89% Excellent

High to very high standard work with most of the following features: authoritative subject

Distinction
knowledge; a high level of critical analysis and evaluation; incisive original thinking;
commendable originality; exceptionally well researched, with a very high level of technical
competence; high quality presentation; impressive clarity of ideas; excellent coherence and
logic. Work is close to the forefront of the subject and may be close to publishable or
exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very high level. Referencing
is consistently used, complete and accurate. Only trivial or very minor errors.

Very high-quality work worthy of a high Distinction grade mark.

70-79% Excellent

Authoritative, current subject knowledge; excellent critical analysis and evaluation – including

Distinction
dealing with ambiguity in the data; significant originality; well researched with a high level of
technical competence – work is accurate and extensively supported by appropriate
evidence; excellent presentation; commendable clarity of ideas; thoughtful and effective
presentation; very strong sense of coherence and logic; relevant generic skills are
demonstrated at a high level; referencing is excellent– consistently used, complete and accurate;
a small number of misunderstandings/minor errors only.

High quality work deserving of a Distinction grade.

60-69% Very good

Work is well-developed and coherent; demonstrates sound, current subject knowledge; a very
good level of critical analysis and evaluation; some evidence of original thinking or
originality; well researched; no significant errors in the application of concepts or appropriate
Merit

techniques; a very good standard of presentation; ideas generally clear and

coherent; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very good level; referencing is very
good; minor errors and misunderstandings only, possibly with some deficiencies in
presentation.

Well above pass standard and worthy of a Merit grade.

Sensitivity: Internal
 50-59% Good/Satisfactory

Has achieved intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features. Satisfactory
subject knowledge; a fair level of critical analysis and evaluation; the work is generally sound
but tends towards the factual or derivative, and there may be minimal evidence of original

Pass
thinking or originality; adequately researched; a sound standard of presentation; ideas fairly
clear and coherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings, possibly shown by
conceptual gaps or limited use of appropriate techniques; relevant generic skills are generally
at a satisfactory level; referencing is generally accurate; some weakness in style or
presentation.

Satisfactory overall – a clear pass

Unsatisfactory
40-49%
Has narrowly failed to achieve intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following

Marginal Fail
features. Satisfactory subject knowledge to some extent; some sound aspects but some of the
following weaknesses are evident: factual errors; conceptual gaps; inadequate critical analysis
and evaluation; little evidence of originality; not well researched – limited use of appropriate
techniques; presentation does not meet the standard required; ideas unclear and/or
incoherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings; relevant generic skills
unsatisfactory to some extent; referencing may be inadequate.

Work is unsatisfactory but shows potential for achieving learning outcomes if feedback is
addressed. - Marginal fail

Very Poor
5-39%
Has failed to achieve intended learning outcomes in several critical respects. Will have some or
all of the following features to varying extent: inadequate subject knowledge; factual
errors; conceptual gaps; minimal/no awareness of relevant issues and theory; limited/no use
of appropriate techniques; standard of presentation unacceptable; ideas confused and/or
incoherent – work lacks sound development; a poor critical analysis and evaluation; no
evidence of originality; inadequately researched; some serious misunderstandings and
errors; quality of relevant generic skills does not meet the requirements of the task.

A clear fail well short of the pass standard

Fail

Nothing of Merit
1-4% Nothing of value is contained in the submitted work. The work presents information that is
irrelevant and unconnected to the task; no evident awareness of appropriate principles,
theories, evidence or techniques

NS Non-submission
No work has been submitted.

Sensitivity: Internal
 Z Academic offence notation
Applies to proven instances of academic offence.

10

Sensitivity: Internal