We're Open

Custom-Written, AI & Plagiarism-Free with Passing "Guaranteed"

Choose a well-known company (e.g. Unilever, Zara, Mc Donald’s, Amazon) (or a company for which you can easily access relevant information) and choose one product group of it.

Assessment Brief

Academic year and term:

2020/21 – Semester 2 (Spring)

Module title:

Supply Chain Strategy & Processes

Module convener:


Type of assessment:

Summative assessment—Individual report-3,000 words-100% weighting

Formative assessment—One page report overview

Assessment deadline:


Formative assessment: TBC

Instructions for assessment

Summative assessment

There will be one summative assessment which involves a comprehensive analysis of any operations performance objectives either a) cost, b) dependability, c) flexibility, d) speed, e) quality of a company (of your choice). Only focus on one of these objectives. Compare the chosen company’s performance with the one of a competitor. This is an individual report and should be 3,000 words (10% tolerance) excluding references, tables, figures, and appendix, and to be submitted via Moodle Turnitin.


Individual or group submission

Word count / length

% Weighting

Must Attempt Y/N

Must Pass


Individual report (Company case analysis)


max. 3,000 words




Steps to be followed:

  1. Choose a well-known company (e.g. Unilever, Zara, Mc Donald’s, Amazon) (or a company for which you can easily access relevant information) and choose one product group of it.
  2. Choose one of the operations performance objectives: a) cost, b) dependability, c) flexibility, d) speed, e)quality
  3. Describe the global supply chain of your chosen company by identifying its supply chain members (upstream (e.g. suppliers) and downstream (e.g. intermediaries)). You can use online sources such as www.bloomberg.com  to identify upstream and downstream players in your chosen company’s supply chain.
  4. Critically analyse its operations performance objective (of your choice) and compare it with one of its competitor.

Formative feedback and assessment

To receive feedback on your progress, we recommend that you submit and individual report plan, that is a written assignment of about 500 words, to be submitted via Moodle. Write a report plan including brief information about your chosen company, product group, and specific dimension(s) of operations performance objective that will be analysed in your individual report. In week 2, purpose and structure of the assignment will be explained in detail in class in the ‘assessment clinic 1’ session. Formative feedback will be given in specified seminar slots/assessment clinic sessions (‘assessment clinic 2’ in week 4, and ‘assessment clinic 3’ in week 7). A summary of the feedback will also be uploaded to Moodle.

Note that we will not provide any written or marks indicative feedback on drafts for summative assessment at any time. Should you perceive any formative feedback such way, then please note that it is not binding for your marking. Markers can also always change, and you have no entitlement to be marked by the module convener or tutors.

Reading list

Recommended books and reports

Chopra S. & Meindl P. (2015) Supply Chain Management, Strategy, Planning and Operation. (6th  ed.) Pearson.

Christopher, M. (2016) Logistics and Supply Chain Management. (5th ed.), Financial Times Publishing.

Harrison, A., Van Hoek, R., & Skipworth, H. (2014) Logistics Management and Strategy: Competing through the Supply Chain. (5th ed.) Pearson.

Heizer, J., Render, B., & Munson, C. (2017) Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management. (12th ed.) Pearson.

Neely, A. D. (2007) Business Performance Measurement: Unifying Theories and Integrating Practice. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.

Savitz, A. W. & Weber, K. (2014) The Triple Bottom Line: How Today’s Companies Are Achieving Economic, Social and Environmental Success – and How You Can Too. Indianapolis: Jossey-Bass.

Slack, N. Brandon-Jones, A., & Johnston, R. (2016) Operations Management (8th Ed). Pearson. 

  1. Choose a well-known company (e.g. Unilever, Zara, Mc Donald’s, Amazon) (or a company for which you can easily access relevant information) and choose one product group of it.

UN (2018) Supply Chain Sustainability Report. (2nd ed.) UN Global Compact. (http://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/issues_doc/supply_chain/SupplyChainRep_spread.pdf)

Recommended journal articles

Aitken J., Childerhouse, P., Christopher, M., & Towill D. (2005) Designing and managing multiple pipelines. Journal of Business Logistics 26(2) pp. 73–96.

Andic E., Yurt, O., & Baltacioglu, T. (2012) Green supply chains: Efforts and potential applications for the Turkish market. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 58 pp. 50–68.

Baltacioglu T., Ada E., Kaplan, M.D., Yurt, O., & Kaplan, C. (2007) A new framework for service supply chains. Service Industries Journal 27(2) pp. 105–124.

Bourne, M., Kennerley, M., & Franco-Santos, M. (2005) Managing through measures: A study of impact on performance. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 16(4) pp. 373–395.

Chavez, R., Gimenez, C., Fynes, B., Wiengarten, F., & Yu, W. (2013) Internal lean practices and operational performance: The contingency perspective of industry clockspeed. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 33(5) pp. 562–588.

Christopher, M., Mena, C., Khan, O., & Yurt, O. (2011) Approaches to managing global sourcing risk. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 16(2) pp. 67–81.

Christopher, M. & Ryals, L.J. (2014) The supply chain becomes the demand chain. Journal of Business Logistics 35(1) pp. 29–35.

Cooper, M. C., Lambert D.M., & Pagh J. D. (1997) Supply chain management: More than a new name for logistics. The International Journal of Logistics Management 8(1), pp. 1–14.

Ellram, L.M., Tate, W.L., & Billington, C. (2004) Understanding and managing the services supply chain. Journal of Supply Chain Management 40 pp. 17–32.

Ferdows, K. (1997) Making the most of foreign factories. Harvard Business Review 75(2), pp.73–87.

Ferdows, K. & De Meyer, A. (1990) Lasting improvements in manufacturing performance: In search of a new theory. Journal of Operations Management 9(2) pp. 168–184.

Fisher, M. (1997) What is the right supply chain for your product? Harvard Business Review 75(2) pp. 105–116.

Fisher, M., Hammond, J., Obermeyer, W., & Raman, A. (1994) Making supply meet demand in an uncertain world. Harvard Business Review 72(3) pp. 83–92.

Gereffi, G. & Lee, J. (2012) Why the world suddenly cares about global supply chains. Journal of Supply Chain Management 48(3) pp. 24–32.

Hesping, F.H. & Schiele, H. (2015) Purchasing strategy development: A multi-level review. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 21(2) pp. 138–150.

Juttner, U., Peck, H., & Christopher, M. (2003) Supply chain risk management: Outlining an agenda for future research. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications 6(4) pp.197–210.

Kaplan, R. S. & David, N. (1992) The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance.  Harvard Business Review 70(1) pp. 71–79.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991), “Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 420-450.

Romano, P. and Vinelli, A. (2001), "Quality management in a supply chain perspective: Strategic and operative choices in a textile‐apparel network", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 446-460.

Robinson, C.J. and Malhotra, M.K., 2005. Defining the concept of supply chain quality management and its relevance to academic and industrial practice. International Journal of Production Economics, 96(3), pp.315-337.

Van Duin, J.H.R., van Dam, T., Wiegmans, B., Tavasszy, L.A. (2016) Understanding financial viability of urban consolidation centres: Regent street (London). Transportation Research Procedia 16 pp. 61–80.

Ward, P.T., McCreery, J.K., Ritzman, L.P., & Sharma, D. (1998) Competitive priorities in operations management. Decision Sciences 2 pp. 1035–1046.

Wong, C.Y., Boon-itt, S., Wong, C.W.Y. (2011) The contingency effects of environmental uncertainty on the relationship between supply chain integration and operational performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29 pp. 604–615.

Yildirim C., Oflac S. B., & Yurt O . (2018) The doer effect of failure and recovery in multi-agent cases: Service supply chain perspective. Journal of Service Theory and Practice 28(3) pp.274–297.

Yu, W. (2014) Cooperative purchasing in small and medium-sized enterprises. In: U., R. & R., R. (eds.) Supply Chain Strategies, Issues and Models. Springer. pp. 193–208.

Yu, W. (2015) The effect of IT-enabled supply chain integration on performance. Production Planning & Control 26(12) pp. 945–957.

Yu, W., Chavez, R., Feng, M., & Wiengarten, F. (2014) Integrated green supply chain management and operational performance. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 19(5–6) pp. 683–696.
Further case studies

Adıvar, B.O., Yurt, O. (2009) Line Haul Optimization for OFLT Inc: A Teaching Case Study. Journal of Advances in Management Research. 6(2) pp. 206–219.

Yurt, O. & Karabas, I. (2016) Internationalisation process of a worldwide leading company – Get more electronics: A teaching case study. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies 7(1) pp. 1–14.

Relevant academic journals

  • Journal of Supply Chain Management
  • Journal of Operations Management
  • Supply Chain Management: An International Journal
  • International Journal of Operations & Production Management
  • International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management
  • Industrial Marketing Management
  • Production and Operations Management (POM)
  • Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

Relevant trade journals and newspapers

  • Supply Chain Management Review
  • CSCMP’s Supply Chain (Quarterly)
  • Global Trade
  • Logistics Management
  • Food Logistics
  • Supply and Demand Chain Executive
  • Supply Management
  • Supply Chain Frontiers
  • Financial Times
  • Management Today


How will your work be assessed?

Your work will be assessed by a subject expert who will use either the marking criteria provided in the section “Instructions for assessment” or the Marking rubric enclosed in the Appendix, as appropriate for this module. When you access your marked work it is important that you reflect on the feedback so that you can use it to improve future assignments.

Referencing and submission

You must use the Harvard System.

The Business School requires a digital version of all assignment submissions. These must be submitted via Turnitin on the module’s Moodle site. They must be submitted as a Word file (not as a pdf) and must not include scanned in text or text boxes. They must be submitted by 2pm on the given date. For further general details on coursework preparation refer to the online information at StudentZone, http://studentzone.roehampton.ac.uk/howtostudy/index.html.

Mitigating circumstances/what to do if you cannot submit a piece of work or attend your presentation

The University Mitigating Circumstances Policy can be found on the University website: Mitigating Circumstances Policy

Marking and feedback process

Between you handing in your work and then receiving your feedback and marks within 20 days, there are a number of quality assurance processes that we go through to ensure that students receive marks which reflects their work. A brief summary is provided below.

  • Step One – The module and marking team meet to agree standards, expectations and how feedback will be provided.
  • Step Two – A subject expert will mark your work using the criteria provided in the assessment brief.
  • Step Three – A moderation meeting takes place where all members of the teaching and marking team will review the marking of others to confirm whether they agree with the mark and feedback
  • Step Four – Work then goes to an external examiner who will review a sample of work to confirm that the marking between different staff is consistent and fair
  • Step Five – Your mark and feedback is processed by the Office and made available to you.

Additional instructions for re-sit: Individual Report

The same assignment task as for the main assignment period applies to the re-sit, with further instructions see below.

Re-sit deadlines will be published via Moodle. Visit the module’s Moodle site and check your Roehampton email account on a regular basis. The school is not obliged to check whether you have noticed re-sit deadlines.

You are required to improve and resubmit your original work as well as adding a further reflective commentary in form of a 400-700 words Essay. You must resubmit your work using the specific re-sit Turnitin link on Moodle. This additional word count can be added on top of the original word count of this assignment, if you used the full word count.

The original marking criteria will still apply (see marking grid in Appendix) except that the 10% weighting for Presentation, Logical structure,  English expression, correct referencing will be awarded instead to your additional Reflective Essay section. That is, a statement demonstrating how you learnt from the feedback and what you did differently the second time. Also reflect how the module contents could be beneficial as knowledge of best practices for a future management, public administration or advisory career. Choose a well-known company (e.g. Unilever, Zara, Mc Donald’s, Amazon) (or a company for which you can easily access relevant information) and choose one product group of it.

If you did not submit work at the first opportunity, you cannot reflect on your feedback. However, in such case, your Reflection Essay section should reflect upon a) how the module’s concepts are informing the professions and open up areas of future empirical research and b) how the module contents could be beneficial as knowledge of best practices for your future management, public administration or advisory career.

If you were deferred at the first assessment opportunity you do not need to include the reflective piece as this is a first submission at a later date, not a re-sit.

The Reflective Essay is marked based on the criteria of Criticality and Evidence-based Logic of arguments. It is an independent writing task and no supervision will be provided for conducting the essay.

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
tailored to your instructions
paypal checkout

The services provided by Assignment Experts UK are 100% original and custom written. We never use any paraphrasing tool, any software to generate content for e.g. Chat GPT and all other content writing tools. We ensure that the work produced by our writers is self-written and 100% plagiarism-free.

Discover more

International House, 12 Constance Street, London, United Kingdom,
E16 2DQ

UK Registered Company # 11483120

100% Pass Guarantee


We've produced some samples of what you can expect from our Academic Writing Service - these are created by our writers to show you the kind of high-quality work you'll receive. Take a look for yourself!

View Our Samples