ssssment

Module Title: The Global Strategist Module Leader: Dr Stephen Asafo Agye
Tutors: Dr Ibukun Sokari, Mohammad Hussain,
Elif Celenk, Dr Kent Springdal

Module Code: LSB4005-N

Assignment Title: Deadline Date: 15th December 2023 (portfolio) and 15th
December 2023 (pitch)
Pitch (20%) + Portfolio of Work (80%)-
Individual Strategic Analysis Report
(Word limit: 3500 words) Deadline Time: 23:59

Submission Method: Online (Blackboard)

In Course Assessment

Submission Notes:

● Please follow carefully the instructions given on the Assignment Specification

● When an extension has been granted, a fully completed and agreed Extenuating Circumstances
form must be submitted

Library Support for Academic Skills

Did you know you can book an individual 30 minute tutorial in the Learning Hub with an adviser to help you
FULL DETAILS OF THE ASSIGNMENT ARE ATTACHED
with your academic skills, writing or numeracy? Or that there are loads of really useful workshops available
INCLUDING MARKING & GRADING CRITERIA
to help you with your studies and assessments? Have a look at the Succeed @ Tees workshops for more
details.
ssssment

Module Assessment Specification:

Module Learning Outcomes:

This assessment specification evaluates the following learning outcomes:

Personal and Transferable Skills:

● PTS1. Create a pitch suitable for a professional networking event.

● PTS2. Systematically apply an advanced awareness of a range of relevant ethical and professional
values and codes of conduct to personal and / or group decisions, actions, and outcomes in contexts of
varying complexity.

Research, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills:

● RKC1. Critically evaluate how differing customer and stakeholder needs impact the strategic
positioning of an organisation.
● RKC2. Demonstrate a systematic understanding of the external, internal, competitive, and global
contexts in which organisations operate.

Professional Skills:
● PS1. Think critically and globally and make informed strategic decisions based on an appropriate
range of business sources.

Module Aims:
As the global business environment becomes ever more complex and volatile, there is a need for
organisations of all shapes and sizes to think and act more entrepreneurially, innovatively, and
creatively to be able to change and adapt. This interdisciplinary module will provide learners with an
understanding of the internal and external factors that impact strategic decision-making.
Learners will be introduced to a variety of strategic theories, tools, and concepts, but all in the context
of the external environment and its impact on strategic challenges and choices. Learners will be
exposed to a variety of academic and practical material that they can apply to their own organisation,
or a live case organisation to appreciate the importance of developing and implementing innovative
strategic plans for the success of the organisation, its key stakeholders and society more broadly.

Module Assessment Requirements:

Assessments will be by one in-course assessment, consisting of two elements:

Component 1: Pechu Kucha (20%)

Learners will undertake a professional pitch based on their recommendations from their Analytical
report.

Details for this submission can be found on the assessment section of this module and the Core
Curriculum Blackboard site.

Assessment Criteria

Work will be assessed for:

● Clarity and delivery of the pitch.
ssssment

● Content: problem statement, proposed solution, experiments, results, future work

● Creativity of the pitch

● Complexity of the pitch

● Appeal of the pitch.

This component will assess learning outcome 1. It will be marked out of 100 and weighed at 20%.
This element will support the assessment of learning outcomes PTS1.

Component 2: Individual Professional Portfolio (80%)

Learners will produce an individual strategic analytical report incorporating a range of academic
tools and models to facilitate a critical analysis of a chosen company and provide subsequent
recommendations.

Task

Learners will construct a 3,500-word Strategic Analysis of a chosen company and drawing upon
theoretical models and concepts covered throughout the module, learners will select an appropriate
company and perform a Strategic Analysis on that company and provide appropriate
recommendations.

Learners must reflect on lessons from weeks 1-4, keeping in mind the word count and the
assessment criteria. The report must ensure that: A business terms of reference, A Core
Competencies Clock, SWOT Summary and a Marketing Plan are all included and appropriate
strategic recommendations are provided.
This component will assess learning outcomes 2-5: PTS2, RKC1, RKC2, PS1 and it will be
marked out of 100 and weighed at 80%.

Module Submission:
Submission is via the appropriate submission point on the module page on Blackboard.

TU London operates a standard procedure for providing of feedback to students in line with the
University's Assessment and Feedback Policy.

Module Marking Criteria:

The element one: The group presentation will be assessed according to the quality of the following
criteria
● Clarity and delivery of the pitch.

● Content: problem statement, proposed solution, experiments, results, future work

● Creativity of the pitch

● Complexity of the pitch

● Appeal of the pitch.

ssssment

The element two: Completion of a strategic analysis of an organisation through the completion of:
● A business terms of reference

● A Core Competencies Clock

● SWOT Summary

● Marketing Plan

● Strategic Recommendation
Element 2: Individual Professional Portfolio (weight 80%)

Class Points Comprehension Analysis Critical Academic Writing

ssssment Evaluation
(Showing (Presenting (Showing capacity (Presenting a clear
knowledge & logical arguments for original thought and structured
understanding supported by by questioning assignment; use of
about the subject evidence) ie relevant arguments relevant literature;
matter) i.e. - Fully Comprehensive and/or identifying academic honesty;
understands the analysis that uses their strengths and referencing and
chosen all the tools to weaknesses) i.e citation) i.e.
organisation's derive meaningful Evaluates all data - Writing is clear,
objectives, insights. critically, concise, and well-
values, and - Demonstrates questioning organized.
current state. the ability to sources and - Uses appropriate
Demonstrates identify patterns, examining biases. academic language
deep trends, and key - Provides well- and terminology.
understanding of issues. thought-out - Properly cites all
all provided tools: recommendations sources.
Business Terms based on thorough
of Reference, evaluation
Core
Competencies
Clock, SWOT
Summary,
Marketing Plan,
and Strategic
Recommendation
Distinctio 90-100 Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Presents work of
n comprehension analysis which critical evaluation exceptional quality,
of the subject exceeds and synthesis which merits
matter which expectations for which exceed special recognition
exceeds this level, such expectations for by the award of the
expectations for that the work this level, such that highest possible
this level, such merits special the work merits mark.
that the work recognition by the special recognition
merits special award of the by the award of the
recognition by highest possible highest possible
the award of the mark. mark.
highest possible
mark.
80-89 Demonstrates an Extremely well- Demonstrates an Excellent structure
excellent focused and excellent ability to and very well
command of the logical work with critically evaluate presented;
subject matter, very accurate and synthesise excellent use of
which includes portrayal of relevant arguments academic writing
strong evidence concepts/theories; and debates in a techniques, using a
of understanding drawing on a manner that also wide range of
of higher-level wide/varied range demonstrates a appropriately-cited
issues. of evidence. highly developed and referenced
capacity for original material; excellent
thought. spelling/grammar.
70-79 Demonstrates a Well-focused and Demonstrates a Very clearly
very good logical work with very good ability to structured and
command of the very accurate critically evaluate presented; very
subject matter. portrayal of and synthesise good use of
concepts/theories relevant arguments academic writing
and a very good and debates in a techniques, using a
use of evidence. manner that also wide range of
demonstrates a appropriately-cited
very good capacity and referenced
for original thought. material; very good
spelling/grammar.
Merit 60-69 Demonstrates a Coherent and Demonstrates a Clearly structured
good logical work which good ability to and presented;
appreciation of demonstrates critically evaluate good use of
the subject good use of and synthesise academic writing
matter. concepts/theories relevant arguments techniques, using a
supported by and debates in a range of
evidence. manner that also appropriately-cited
demonstrates and referenced
some capacity for material; good
original thought. spelling/grammar.
ssssment

Element 1: Pitch (Weighted to 20%)

Exceptional
● Pitch delivered with comprehensive clarity: pitch is well-organised, main
80%+
points / arguments are succinct, slides and narration are cohesive,
vocabulary, spelling and grammar used with high execution.
● Comprehensive coverage of content specific requirements, which includes
extensive knowledge of the topic. A detailed, and correct, technical
explanation of how the technology works. Links drawn between this
technology and existing approaches, especially if the connections drawn
are technical and mechanistic. Where relevant, legal and ethical issues
are considered, and the student may draw on theories from the legal and
ethical fields, e.g. utilitarianism, deontology, copyright law
● Comprehensive use of visual aids – images and texts strongly illuminate
points.
● Comprehensive engagement with novel and nuanced perspectives that
are well-supported by relevant and wide-ranging literature / research /
client knowledge, which have high-level critique applied.
Excellent
● Pitch delivered with very good clarity and most of the following: pitch is
70-79%
well-organised, main points / arguments are succinct, slides and narration
are cohesive, vocabulary, spelling and grammar used effectively.
● Detailed coverage of content specific requirements. Correct, technical
explanation of how the technology works. Links drawn between this
technology and existing approaches, especially if the connections drawn
are technical and mechanistic. Where relevant, legal and ethical issues
are considered, and the student may draw on theories from the legal and
ethical fields, e.g. utilitarianism, deontology, copyright law
●

● Very good use of visual aids. Some demonstration of originality in design.

● Detailed engagement with different perspectives supported by relevant

literature / research / client knowledge, which may also have critique
applied.
Good
● Pitch delivered with good clarity: pitch is organised, main points are mostly
60-69%
succinct, slides and narration are cohesive, vocabulary, spelling and
grammar errors may occur.
● Clear coverage of content specific requirements. A moderately detailed
technical explanation of how the technology works, that is wholly or almost
entirely correct. Links drawn between this technology and existing
approaches, although the student does not necessarily a show a detailed
and mechanistic understanding. Legal and ethical issues are considered,
where relevant, although not necessarily contextualised with a theoretical
background.
● Good use of visual aids.
ssssment

● Clear engagement with literature / research / client knowledge, which is

mostly relevant and begins to show appreciation of different perspectives.
Satisfactory
● Pitch delivered with limited clarity lacking at times: pitch mostly organised,
50-59%
main points, slides and narration are mostly cohesive, some vocabulary,
spelling and grammar errors.
● Limited coverage of content specific requirements. A basic technical
explanation of how the technology works, that is mostly correct. Ethical
and legal issues considered.
● Limited use of visual aids.

● Limited engagement with literature / research / client knowledge. This may

not be fully relevant at times, or may contribute only a basic understanding
to the topic.
Fail
● No clarity in the organisation of pitch, main points, cohesiveness of slides
<50%
and narration,
● Spelling and grammar errors are common and often impede meaning.

● Not sufficient coverage of content specific requirements

● Little to no use of visual aids.

● Little to no engagement with literature / research / client knowledge. This

may contribute an incorrect or irrelevant perspective / understanding of the
topic.
Individual Feedback: (Add to BB – Areas of strengths and areas to improve)