Critically describe & analyse the value chain of your chosen organisation, (diagrams may be used). Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each.

Student Name:

Certification:  I certify that the whole of this work is the result of my individual effort and that all quotations from books, periodicals etc. have been acknowledged.

Student Signature:

Date:

Student Registration Number:

Student email address:

Programme:   BA Undergraduate

Year/Level:  6

Academic Year:  2020/21

Trimester:   1  

Module title:  Strategic Thinking

Assignment no:   1  

Module code:  BUS649

                          Word guide:    2000

Percentage Weighting: 50%

Issue date:   5^th Oct 2020 

Lecturer:

                          Second marker: 

Notes for students:

1. Electronic copy of assignment must be submitted through the Turnitin software.

2. This assignment will be marked electronically and results available online through Grademark in Turnitin within 3 weeks of the submission date.

3. 10% of marks are awarded for satisfactory use of language and/or good presentation.

4. 5% of marks are awarded for satisfactory referencing and/or presentation of a bibliography where either is required. Note that all referenced work should be obtained from credible sources.

5. Students should ensure that they comply with Glyndwr University’s plagiarism policy.

6. Students should make correct use of the Harvard referencing method.

Learning Outcomes Tested in this Assignment:

1. Propose and implement operational management techniques to maintain and improve core business processes
2. Critically evaluate the contribution made to business effectiveness through quality management practices & supply chain procedures.

 Would students please note that achievement of the learning outcomes for this assessment is demonstrated against the assessment criteria shown below (which are not necessarily weighted equally). 

Feedback

All marks/grades remain indicative until they have been considered and confirmed by the Assessment Board

Mark (%)

Grading & Marking Criteria for BA Programmes

80 +

Outstanding work of exceptional merit which is original in content or approach allowing a novel perspective, going beyond what is available in the literature.

70 – 79

Work, which is clearly articulated and well substantiated, based on extensive reading, and demonstrates an authoritative grasp of the concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the subject and to the assessed task. There is clear evidence of originality and insight and an ability to sustain an argument, to think analytically and/or critically and to synthesize material effectively.

60 – 69

Work which demonstrates a very good level of understanding of the concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the subject and which draws on a wide range of properly referenced sources. There is clear evidence of critical judgement in selecting, ordering and analyzing content. The work demonstrates some ability to synthesize material and to construct responses which reveal insight and may offer some occasional originality.

50 – 59

Work derived from a solid basis of reading and which demonstrates a grasp of relevant material and key concepts and an ability to structure and organize arguments. The performance may be rather routine, but the work will be accurate, clearly written and include some critical analysis and a modest degree of original insight. There will be no serious omissions or irrelevancies.

40 - 49

Competent and suitably organized work which demonstrates a reasonable level of understanding with minimal analysis and interpretation. It covers the basic subject matter adequately but is too descriptive and insufficiently analytical. There may be some misunderstanding of key concepts and limitations in the ability to select relevant material so that the work may be flawed by some omissions and irrelevancies. There will be some evidence of appropriate reading, but it may be too narrowly focused.

30 - 39

Work lacks evidence of knowledge relevant to the topic and/or significantly misuses terminology. There is either no evidence of literature being consulted or irrelevant to the assignment set. Inaccurate or inappropriate choice of theory. Unsubstantiated/invalid conclusions based on anecdote and generalization only, or no conclusions at all. Lacks critical thought, analysis, and reference to theory.

  0 - 29

Insufficient level of understanding and knowledge base unacceptably weak. No evidence of logical structure and poorly presented. Referencing is unsystematic or absent.