Posted: December 11th, 2014

Global Strategic Management

Global Strategic Management

ASSIGNMENT 2.

Examiners: Lorraine Limbrick
Moderator:  SEIB Moderation Panel

Instructions to students:
•    This paper contains one individual written assignment (word count 5,000 words; worth 75% of the marks for the module)
•    You are allowed up to 5 pages of appendices for Assignment 2 (for supporting material only that must be discussed and cross-referenced in the main answers)
•    The assignments must be typewritten (word processed) and in a font size of no less than 11 points.
•    You must reference (Harvard referencing style) any material that you use. You must also include a bibliography.
•    ONE copy of your assignment must be handed into Business School Reception Leek Road no later than 16.00hrs on 18th December 2014. Mark your assignment for the

attention of Lorraine Limbrick.
•    ONE copy of your assignment must also be submitted no later than 16.00hrs on 18th December 2014 via Turnitin on the Module Website (Blackboard).
•    Please be sure to complete an Assignment Record and Receipt Sheet and obtain and retain the receipted copy
•    University rules will be strictly applied in the event of plagiarism/late submission

Ethics Disclaimer
The University’s guidelines for ethical approval have been consulted and as all ethical issues and implications in relation to the above project have been considered

ethical approval need not be sought.
This assignment requires no active primary research.
Academic Misconduct
The Business School takes any cases of academic misconduct, including plagiarism very seriously. The penalties are severe and can in some cases result in a student not

being allowed to continue their studies. The policy on Academic misconduct can be found at:  http://www.staffs.ac.uk/assets/academic_misconduct_tcm44-26770.pdf
You should hand in one copy of your assignment by the time and date above to the appropriate ‘hand-in location’ at the Business School Receptions on either the second

floor Brindley Building, B227 or K166, Octagon, Beaconside as specified above. The Brindley reception is open Monday to Thursday 9.00am to 6.00pm and Friday 9.00am to

4.30pm.  The Octagon reception is open Monday to Thursday 8:45am to 4:30pm and Friday until 4:00pm.  Fill in the Business School front cover (staple together with your

assignment). This must be date stamped. MAKE SURE that you fill in all the relevant details on this form (these are given above!). One copy of the front sheet, date

stamped, will be returned to you by the Office.  This is your receipt, keep it.  You can submit work by post, but you must send it recorded delivery, it must be

postmarked two days before the deadline date and a copy must be kept by you in case it is lost in the post.  Faxed assignments will not be accepted.
If you fail to submit any assessment for a module you will be given a Grade Point N (Fail due to non-submission) for that module and you will not have a guaranteed

re-sit entitlement. Any further attempt entitlement will be at the discretion of the Award Board.
Assignments must be submitted by the due date.  The only circumstance in which assignments can be submitted late is if an extenuating circumstances claim is made.  In

these circumstances work may be submitted up to 5 working days late only (this is not automatic).  If the extenuating circumstances are upheld, the assignment will be

graded as usual.  If the claim is rejected and the work is of a pass grade a maximum of a 4R for undergraduate and 7R for postgraduate will be awarded.  If your work

is submitted after the 5 working days a 0 will be awarded.
Maximum Word Length:    5,000
State the number of words used on the assignment front sheet. You may include diagrams, figures etc. without word penalty.  A sliding scale of penalties for excess

length will be imposed according to the amount by which the limit has been exceeded.
1-10%        excess         no penalty
11-20%    excess         10% reduction in the mark
21-30%     excess         20% reduction in the mark
31%+        excess      the work will be capped at a pass i.e. 40% or grade point 4.

NB. None of the above penalties will be used to change your mark which is above the pass mark, to one that is below the pass mark.  Therefore the maximum penalty for

exceeding the word limit will be a reduction to a pass grade.

Module Learning Outcomes
1.    WILL HAVE DEVELOPED  A CRITICAL UNDERSTANDING OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS, THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO ORGANISATIONAL PURPOSE AND DEVELOPMENT, AND HOW TO APPLY

SUCH CONCEPTS IN AN INTERNATIONAL/GLOBAL CONTEXT    Knowledge & Understanding/Application/Collaboration
ASSIGNMENT 1 & 2
2.    WILL BE ABLE TO APPLY APPROPRIATE TECHNIQUES FOR STRATEGIC APPRAISAL AND EVALUATION OF STRATEGY OPTIONS FOR BOTH DOMESTIC AND GLOBAL BUSINESS. WILL ALSO BE

ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROBLEMS OF MAKING STRATEGIC CHOICES FROM LIMITED DATA AND THE LIMITATIONS OF MODEL DRIVEN ANALYSIS.

Enquiry/Analysis/ Problem Solving
ASSIGNMENT 2
3.    WILL BE ABLE TO APPLY AND CRITICALLY ANALYSE KEY OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES, CONCEPTS, THEORIES AND MODELS IN BOTH SERVICE AND MANUFACTURING CONTEXTS AND

SETTINGS     Application/Analysis/Integration
ASSIGNMENT 2
4.    WILL HAVE SOME RECOGNITION OF THE DIFFICULTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIES, AND THE PROBLEMS FOR ORGANISATIONS IN CHANGING

INTERNAL BELIEFS AND PERCEPTIONS TO MAINTAIN A VIABLE FIT WITH A CHANGING, OFTEN GLOBAL, ENVIRONMENT.    Communication/Knowledge & Understanding/Problem Solving
ASSIGNMENT 2

Introduction
This assignment is designed to test your knowledge of concepts, theories and models of International management and strategy, and your ability to apply this knowledge

analytically and creatively.  You should acknowledge data sources in your text.

Use of appendices – Models and theories that are central to your answer should be situated in the main body of the answer, supporting models and data can be located

in appendices.  It is, however, important to draw the reader’s attention to the appendices when the information there supports arguments being made in the main body of

the assignment.  At postgraduate level you should be able to interweave appendices and the main text in a way that your main arguments can be understood without

reading the appendices.  The appendices should allow the reader to understand the points made in more detail.  If the appendices are not used to support the arguments

made in the main text they will not be read.

Sources of data, theories and models should be referenced using the Harvard system.

TASKS

The company to be examined is Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles.  You will need to carry out independent research. Sources start with:
•    The Fiat-Chrysler case-study: issued with this question paper
•    The company’s website http://www.fiatspa.com  which leads to other linked websites.
•    MINTEL Reports: Various
•    Euromonitor Reports: Various
•    Your Assignment 1 work on the Global Automobile Manufacturing Industry
•    Various other sources

•    You will also find articles about Fiat-Chrysler and the Global Automobile Manufacturing industry in the business news. For example:
•    www.telegraph.co.uk
•    www.guardian.co.uk
•    www.bbc.co.uk

Also look at business sections of other reputable international newspapers.

Task 1
Carry out a full strategic analysis and evaluation of Fiat-Chrysler’s current (2014) strategic position in the Global Automobile Manufacturing Industry. Use appendices

to provide detailed supporting evidence and make sure that you integrate key points from the appendices into your answers. Your analysis should include as a minimum:

1a
•    The product market mission of the company.
•    The basis of competition (Porter’s generic and/or Bowman as a minimum).
•    Strategic Group Analysis.
•    The activities and resources of the company (Value Chain and the Resource Based View).
•    Conclusions about core competences and competitive advantage.                                        (40 marks)

1b
•    An assessment of the relative importance of the performance objectives (cost, quality, speed, dependability and flexibility) for the management of operations

at Fiat-Chrysler.
•    An evaluation of how supportive Operations are to the overall strategy of Fiat-Chrysler.
•    An analysis of how Fiat-Chrysler ensures it can meet its performance objectives (use relevant Operations Management concepts, theories and models.
(20 marks)
1c
•    A VRIO analysis of core assets and competences.
•    A comparison with competitors in the same industry (against key performance indicators – you should have this from assignment 1).
•    Conclusions (SWOT and conclusions).                (10 marks)

Task 2
Using appropriate theory, construct a detailed Stakeholder Analysis for Fiat-Chrysler. In your opinion, does Fiat-Chrysler manage to satisfy all of its stakeholders

all of the time? Which are the most powerful groups for the company and why? Could any of these groups pose a threat in the future? Use appendices to provide detailed

supporting evidence and make sure that you integrate key points from the appendices into your answers.

(15 marks)

Task 3
Using the FIRM framework and any other appropriate strategic tools/models, evaluate two recent strategic options that Fiat-Chrysler has followed in NEW international

markets. In light of your answer to task 2, also consider the effect that these strategic options may have on the various stakeholder groups identified. You must

provide supporting evidence and reference all sources.

(15 marks)

Notes
Cross-reference to supporting evidence in your Assignment 1 answer (analysis of Fiat-Chrysler’s external environment). You could also put supporting material from

assignment 1 into your appendices.

Models you could use to analyse and evaluate Fiat-Chrysler’s strategies (Q3) include: TOWS matrix, Ansoff’s matrix, BCG Matrix, Market Attractiveness matrix, FSA/CSA

matrix, Porter’s Diamond framework, Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions, etc. These are models/tools and not strategies in their own right. You should apply the models

selectively to help you to explain, analyse and evaluate.

Useful Sources
There is an extensive reading list in your Module Handbook. Please select appropriate papers and incorporate into your answers to further demonstrate that you have

achieved the learning outcomes. The following sources (among others: see Module Handbook) are relevant to the questions:

Barney, J.B. (1991) “Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage”, Journal of Management, Vol. 17, No. 1

Barney, J.B. (2001) “Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on the resource-based view”, Journal of Management, Vol. 27, 643-650

Campbell-Hunt, C (2000) “What have we learned about generic competitive strategy?  A meta-analysis, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21,127-154

Hill, C. W. L. (1988) “Differentiation versus low cost or differentiation and low cost: A contingency framework” Academy of Management Review Vol. 13, 401-412.

Johnson, G. (1988) “Rethinking Incrementalism”, Strategic Management Journal, 9, 75 – 91
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2007) Exploring Corporate Strategy, Text and Cases, 8th edition, Prentice Hall Europe (pages 399 – 428)
Jenkins, W (2009) Managing Strategy Custom textbook, Pearson Education, (pages 192 – 203)
McGahan, A.M. (2004), “How industries change”, Harvard Business Review, October

Mintzberg, H; Waters J. A. 1985. Of Strategies, Deliberate and Emergent, Strategic Management Journal, 6: 257 – 272
Pascale, R. T. (1990) “The Honda Effect” California Management Review, Vol. 38, No. 4, 81 -91
Porter, M (1985) “Competitive Strategy” in Strategy: Process, Content, Context (de Wit, B and Meyer, R, editors) 2nd Edition Thompson Business Press

Porter, M.E. (1987) “From Competitive Advantage to Corporate Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, May – June

Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (2000), Going Global. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78    Issue 2, p132, 10p

Porter, M. E. (2001) Innovation: Location Matters. Sloan Management Review, Vol. 42 Issue 4, p28, 9p

Hofstede, G. (1993), Cultural constraints in management theories. Academy of Management Executive,Vol. 7 Issue 1, p81, 14p

Assessment Criteria:
Level 7 modules in strategy will be marked using the following criteria:

The generic assessment criteria are described in the module handbook as follows: “Please remember good answers to questions about organisation strategy demonstrate:
•    An understanding of the facts and their limitations
•    The application of appropriate tools and theories to analysis
•    The supporting of recommendations with explanation and evidence.
•    An understanding of implementation techniques and their limitations
There are no unique right answers.  We are looking for responses that demonstrate your ability to apply theory logically and creatively.”

The questions in this case study require some of these criteria to be met.  Specific guidance on assessment is given in each of the questions asked. You are also

referred to the learning outcomes for the module.

Fail:
•    The answer will lack the structure, content and use of appropriate terminology that would be expected from a student able to conduct a disciplined analysis

using strategic theories and show the ability to apply those theories and models to cases or in “live” situations.
•    The answer will not demonstrate ability for independent thought and is therefore unlikely to contextualise specific theories/models within the wider strategy

literature. It may “list” some theories/concepts that might, or might not, apply.
•    The answer will not balance academic theory and its practical application.
•    There will be little, if any, evidence of the student having “read around” the subject matter.  As such the piece will contain few, if any, academic references

or, if it does, sources are unlikely to be consistently and/or accurately cited and referenced using Harvard.
•    The answer may be inconsistent in approach as well as content – sometimes minor areas, or inappropriate theories, might be discussed at length while relevant

or seminal theories are omitted altogether.  Indeed it may not be clear exactly which theoretical area or practical problem the student is analysing.
•    Any conclusions to resolve the practical problem discussed will not result from a disciplined analysis of that problem.
•    Will not demonstrate understanding of the limitations inherent in the available data or gaps in the data.
•    Any answer containing plagiarism will be failed (see plagiarism guidelines below).

Pass:
•    Sufficient issues are addressed in order to distinguish between rote learning students and those students with the ability to generate a required level of

independent thought processes but which is inadequate to achieve a merit or distinction due to inconsistency or due to insufficient understanding.
•    The answer will use a structure and terminology that shows an ability to undertake disciplined analysis of the issues presented.
•    Content and structure indicates some ability to evaluate and analyse and make logical conclusions about strategic issues that interweave practice with theory.
•    In pass answers some aspects of the analysis may be covered more extensively than others that indicate a less insightful critique of particular concepts.
•    Uses some but limited academic referencing.
•    Will understand the limitations inherent in the available data or gaps in the data.
•    A satisfactory grasp of the requirements necessary to conduct an analysis of practical strategic management issues; an ability to critique some relevant

concepts.
•    The answer will make some clear and logical conclusions to the problems posed.

Merit:
Apart from the attributes of a PASS paper, these papers will have the following features:
•    Evidence of critical analysis and evaluation of a wide range of issues and strategies to demonstrate extensive reading, and application of theoretical

concepts.
•    Clear understanding of the theory related to the relevant aspects of strategic management being examined.
•    There will be a consistent level of analysis and critique applied throughout.
•    A balanced overview of the topic, incorporating practical application of theory resulting in well thought out and clearly articulated conclusions.
•    Use of relevant academic references demonstrating a wider understanding of the issues than just those addressed in formal studies.

Distinction:
Apart from the attributes of a MERIT paper, these papers will have the following features
•    Structure and content that distinguishes them as being well rounded in both structure and content with practical and theoretical aspects of the paper being

more balanced and with conclusions put forward based on sound theory and data..
•    Strong evidence of having read extensively around the chosen topic with extensive referencing of the key theories and arguments proposed and which encompasses

the creative application of academic knowledge in such a way that it may well lead to the extension of such academic knowledge.
•    Consistency in the arguments used to evaluate and critically analyse the strategies and theories reviewed as well as in the utilisation of basic analytical

tools.
•    Will be able to discuss data limitations and the consequences of those limitations to the analysis being undertaken.
•    Demonstrates a more sophisticated understanding of theoretical concepts and their wider context than that of a “merit” paper, but which clearly and

methodically stays focused on the issues at hand.

%    Marking Criteria

80+
Demonstrates a high degree of perception and originality.  Is factually faultless and comprehensive in coverage of the salient points.  Shows complete comprehension of

material and exceptional insight in interpretation/analysis/evaluation. Evidence of extensive appropriate wider reading and independent research. Arguments supported

by examples/evidence/case studies. Structure/grammar/referencing outstanding.
75-79    Demonstrates perception and originality. Factually sound and comprehensive in coverage of salient points.  Shows considerable understanding of relevant

material.  Outstanding interpretation/analysis/evaluation.  Evidence of considerable wider reading and independent research.  Relevant use of examples/evidence/case

studies.  Structure/grammar/referencing outstanding.
70-74    Demonstrates some perception and originality. Is factually sound and covers most salient points.  Shows a high level of understanding of relevant material with

excellent interpretation/analysis/evaluation of the material.  Evidence of considerable wider reading and independent research.  Relevant use of examples/evidence/case

studies. Structure/grammar/referencing outstanding.
65-69    A comprehensive answer but with limited insight or originality. Demonstrates a firm understanding of the material with no significant errors or inaccuracies.

Interpretation/analysis/evaluation very good.  Relevant use of examples/case studies. Evidence of appropriate wider reading and independent research.

Structure/grammar/referencing of a high standard.
60-64    A very good answer but with little evidence of insight or originality. Demonstrates a firm understanding of the material with few errors, inaccuracies or

omissions.  Interpretation/analysis/evaluation good.  Relevant use of examples/case studies. Evidence of appropriate wider reading and independent research.

Structure/grammar/referencing of a high standard.
55-59    A good answer but with very little evidence of insight or originality. Demonstrates understanding of the material but may have some errors, inaccuracies or

omissions.  Interpretation/analysis/evaluation generally good.  Use of examples reasonable.  Evidence of appropriate wider reading and independent research.

Structure/grammar/referencing of a good standard.
50-54    A good answer but with no evidence of insight or originality.  Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the material but with some errors, inaccuracies or

omissions.  Interpretation/analysis/evaluation present but not highly developed.  Some use of appropriate examples/case studies.  Reliance on lecture notes evident.

Limited evidence of reading beyond basic module texts.  Structure/grammar/referencing of a moderate standard.
45-49    A competent answer demonstrating satisfactory understanding of the material but with errors, inaccuracies or omissions.  Interpretation/analysis/evaluation

weak.  Little use of appropriate examples.  Significant reliance on lecture notes.  Only basic texts consulted.  Some statements unsubstantiated.

Structure/grammar/referencing of a moderate/weak standard.
40-44    A competent answer demonstrating only a basic understanding.  Material mostly relevant but with errors, inaccuracies & omissions.  Some

interpretation/analysis/ evaluation but shallow and poorly substantiated.  Limited use of relevant examples & citations. Significant reliance on lecture notes.  Only

basic texts consulted.  Structure/grammar/referencing of a moderate/weak standard.
30-39    Some relevant material but with major omissions and inaccuracies.  Limited in understanding.  Interpretation/analysis/evaluation weak and unsubstantiated.

Poor use of relevant citations.  Very little evidence of any reading.  Structure/grammar/referencing poor.
20-29    Largely irrelevant.  Only partial understanding of the question.  Very weak interpretative/analytical/evaluative skills.  Lacking in material to answer the

question.  Considerable errors and inaccuracies.  Structure/grammar/referencing very poor.
0-19    Almost totally irrelevant.  The bulk of the answer is a misunderstanding of the question.  Extremely limited interpretative/analytical/evaluative skills.

Unacceptably brief/or unacceptably verbose.  Mostly inaccurate and erroneous.  Structure/grammar/referencing very poor.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂