MGTM14 Strategic Management and
Foresight
Assignment Brief
Issue Date: Friday, 24th March 2023
Coursework Submission Date: Wednesday, 7th June 2023
Poster Presentation Date: Friday, 9th June 2023
Module Leader: Mohan Namasivayam
Internal Moderator: Adam Foster
1
Introduction:
This module is assessed by two individual assignments, a case study-based coursework
(Assessment 1) and Poster Presentation (Assessment 2). Details of the assessments are as
follows.
Module Learning Outcomes
By the end of this module successful students will be able to do the following:
• Evaluate and apply the key theories and frameworks in strategic management and
organisational foresight.
• Critique the relationship between corporate vision, strategic objectives, intent,
resources, planning, the firm’s environment, and its impact on the firm competitive
advantage.
• Develop a critical understanding of the interactions between different strategies,
business models, emerging digital technologies, organisational foresight, and the
impact of digital and the sustainability agenda on strategy formation and
development
2
Assessment 1 (80% weighting)
Individual coursework with a word guideline of 3000 words (plus or minus 10%) to
meet all the learning outcomes.
This Assessment will cover the two topics below, each equally weighted. You must
answer both topics.
Topic One: Industry Analysis & Strategic Positioning [50 marks]
Emma wants to start a coffee shop in your hometown and grow the business into several
outlets. She plans to position her coffee shop as a local brand that sources sustainable raw
materials.
Undertake a detailed investigation into the industry (industry analysis) and provide Emma
with a critical assessment of the industry. Based on your research, offer critical advice on
how Emma should handle the different forces. What strategic options should Emma
consider, given her strategic intent?
Topic Two: Organisational Structures, Innovation & Globalisation [50 marks]
One of the traditional approaches to organising firms is along the lines of Strategic Business
Units (SBU), allowing each SBU to pursue a business strategy that meets the specific needs
of the markets it is serving. Johnson et al. (2018) highlights the benefits of SBUs. They
argue that decentralising into multiple SBUs allows large corporations to vary their business
strategies according to the different needs of the external markets. SBUs also encourage
accountability as the individual business units are often considered profit centres with their
P&L responsibilities. However, the long-run changes in organisations' characteristics that
were stimulated by technological changes, demographics and globalisation have led to many
organisations adopting more innovative structures to support their strategies (Dunbar and
Starbuck, 2006). Especially in the fast-moving tech sector, firms are designing their systems
to support innovation which is an engine of growth and a source of competitive advantage.
In their article in the Harvard Business Review, Podolny and Hansen (2020) explores how
Apple is organised for innovation. Indeed, Barney (1997) has highlighted the importance
and the role of ‘organisation’. Refer to the VIRO analytical framework that stipulates that for
a firm to achieve a competitive advantage, the firm should have resources that are valuable,
3
rare and inmitatable and should be organised to take advantage of its resources and
capabilities.
Using Apple as a case study (read Podolny and Hansen, 2020 from the link below), critically
discuss how contemporary firms have organised themselves to support their strategy with
a particular focus on innovation in an era of globalisation. Your discussion should show
evidence of your understanding of organisational structural designs, the role of innovation
in firm performance and competitive advantage and the linkages between organisational
structure and innovation.
https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-apple-is-organized-for-innovation
Assessment 2 (20% weighting)
Individual Poster Presentation to meet learning outcomes 1& 3.
Case – The Sumo Group [100 marks]
Sumo is a world-class, award-winning game developer with 15 UK studios in the UK, Europe,
Canada, India and the United States (Sumo Group, 2022). In the UK, Sumo has studios in
Sheffield, Nottingham, Newcastle, Leamington Spa, Warrington, The Chinese Room in
Brighton, and Red Kite Games in Leeds. Sumo Group is one of the UK’s largest creative and
development services providers to the video games and entertainment industries, delivering
full-service visual and development solutions from initial concepts to production and
development and post-release support (Sumo Group, 2020). In January 2022, Tencent, a
Chinese technology and entertainment conglomerate, completed its £900 million acquisition
of Sumo.
The UK has a long history of making world-class video games. With the global games’
audience estimated between 2.2 and 2.6 billion people and the global software
market expected to grow from $137.9 billion in 2018 to an estimated $180.1 billion by the
end of 2021, the opportunities for the UK games industry have never been more significant
(UKIE, 2020). With several incumbents and new entrants vying for a share in this growing
market, for any firm to succeed in this industry, they should understand the future and apply
future-oriented insights to their organisation's strategic activities and decision-making.
Reviewing the relevant industry reports and academic literature generate future-oriented
insights into the industry that SUMO could use in their strategic decision-making process.
You must present your findings in the form of an academic poster.
4
Your poster should include.
1. Key trends within the online games industry that you consider critical drivers for change
for Sumo and why?
2. Other megatrends that might be important for the Sumo Group?
3. A Ten-year scenario for the Sumo Group.
4. Using the identification of megatrends and scenarios, consider the potential impact of
future environmental forces on Sumo’s business in terms of threats and opportunities.
Use words (not more than 300 words) and images to present the message. You may use
complete sentences, bullet points or diagrams but be prepared to give/ discuss your analysis
with your audience. Your poster should also include your key references/sources.
Please note:
All work must adhere to the University regulations on ‘Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism’,
which are provided as an Appendix in your Programme Handbook. I encourage you to use
‘Harvard Referencing Style’ and avoid ‘Plagiarism’.
You have to submit an electronic copy of the coursework and the poster in pdf format or
Microsoft Word file on CANVAS before the appointed date/time.
Assessment Criteria
The assessment will focus on the level of ANALYSIS carried out. The application of
THEORETICAL CONCEPTS studied in the module to the ‘practical’ case study presented. In
other words, you should proceed beyond a DESCRIPTION of the company and its actions.
You should be analysing ‘why’ rather than describing ‘what’.
Academic Rigour
● your ability to isolate the key strategic issues
● the coherence and depth of the analysis of those issues
● the ability to analyse the strategic context within which companies operates
5
● the ability to critically review and evaluate strategic decisions made by companies
Methodology
● the use of relevant evidence, from material provided and personal research to
support any statements made
● the appropriateness of the methods used and theoretical models and frameworks
applied
● the breadth and depth of research undertaken.
● Evaluation of data
● the ability to make sound recommendations or conclusions arising from the analysis.
● the soundness of arguments put forward.
Presentation
● the summary of arguments
● report layout and format
● use of illustrative material and evidence to support arguments
● the appropriateness of length
● the quantity and accuracy of referencing
References
PwC, 2020. Entertainment & Media in the UK set for solid growth. [Online] Available at:
https://www.pwc.co.uk/industries/entertainment-media/insights/entertainment-media-
outlook.html [Accessed 20th March 2020]
Sumo Group, 2020. About Sumo Group. [Online] Available at:
https://www.sumogroupplc.com/about/overview/ [Accessed 20th March 2020]
Sumo Group, 2022. About Sumo Group. [Online] Available at: https://www.sumogroupltd.com/
[Accessed 20th March 2022]
The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment, 2020. The Games Industry in Numbers [Online]
Available at: https://ukie.org.uk/research [Accessed 20th March 2020]
0
Generic Assessment Criteria – Postgraduate: PGBM135 – Global Strategy and Foresight
Categories
Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and
Structure
Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature
P
a
s
s
86 –
100%
The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the
qualification. There is also unequivocal evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level
it is expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of
argument, interpretation or discourse.
76-85% The work examined is excellent and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also
excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will
be excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or
discourse and some evidence of originality.
70 –
75%
The work examined is of a high standard and there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification.
There is clearly articulated evidence demonstrating that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied. At this level it is
expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance
of argument, interpretation or discourse.
60 –
69%
Directly relevant
to the
requirements of
the assessment
A substantial
knowledge of
relevant material,
showing a clear
grasp of themes,
questions and
issues therein
Comprehensive
analysis - clear
and orderly
presentation
Well supported, focussed
argument which is clear
and logically structured.
Contains distinctive
or independent
thinking; and begins
to formulate an
independent position
in relation to theory
and/or practice.
Well written, with
standard spelling
and grammar, in a
readable style with
acceptable format
Critical appraisal of up-to-
date and/or appropriate
literature. Recognition of
different perspectives.
Very good use of a wide
range of sophisticated
source material.
50 –
59%
Some attempt to
address the
requirements of
the assessment:
may drift away
from this in less
focused passages
Adequate
knowledge of a fair
range of relevant
material, with
intermittent
evidence of an
appreciation of its
significance
Significant
analytical
treatment which
has a clear
purpose
Generally coherent and
logically structured, using
an appropriate mode of
argument and/or
theoretical mode(s)
May contain some
distinctive or
independent
thinking; may begin
to formulate an
independent position
in relation to theory
and/or practice.
Competently
written, with only
minor lapses from
standard grammar,
with acceptable
format
Uses a good variety of
literature which includes
recent texts and/or
appropriate literature,
including a substantive
amount beyond library
texts. Competent use of
source material.
40 –
49%
Some correlation
with the
requirements of
the assessment
but there are
instances of
irrelevance
Basic
understanding of
the subject but
addressing a
limited range of
material
Some analytical
treatment, but
may be prone to
description, or to
narrative, which
lacks clear
analytical
purpose
Some attempt to
construct a coherent
argument, but may suffer
loss of focus and
consistency, with issues
at stake stated only
vaguely, or theoretical
mode(s) couched in
simplistic terms
Sound work which
expresses a coherent
position only in broad
terms and in
uncritical conformity
to one or more
standard views of the
topic
A simple basic
style but with
significant
deficiencies in
expression or
format that may
pose obstacles for
the reader
Evidence of use of
appropriate literature
which goes beyond that
referred to by the tutor.
Frequently only uses a
single source to support a
point.
1
F
a
i
l
35 –
39%
Relevance to the
requirements of
the assessment
may be very
intermittent, and
may be reduced
to its vaguest and
least challenging
terms
A limited
understanding of a
narrow range of
material
Largely
descriptive or
narrative, with
little evidence of
analysis
A basic argument is
evident, but mainly
supported by assertion
and there may be a lack
of clarity and coherence
Some evidence of a
view starting to be
formed but mainly
derivative.
Numerous
deficiencies in
expression and
presentation; the
writer may achieve
clarity (if at all)
only by using a
simplistic or
repetitious style
Barely adequate use of
literature. Over reliance
on material provided by
the tutor.
The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
30 –
34%
The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided
shows that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.
15-29% The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The
evidence shows that few of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
0-14% The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The
evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of
the indicators.
Source: AQH-F6-15 Guidelines on Generic Assessment Criteria,