Assignment help
Join our 150К of happy users
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
MBA7061 Disruptive innovation Assessment Help
MBA7061 Strategy
Assessment Brief
Key dates and details
| Assessment Type: | Presentation and Viva Voce |
| Assessment Title (weighting): | Assessment 2- Disruptive innovation - 30% (Presentation - Individual) |
| Word Count | Presentation and Viva Voce |
| Learning Outcomes: | 1 |
| Submission Date: | MBA7061 - Assignment 2- Oral Assessment – w/c 9th Dec 2024 (Upload file by 13th Dec 24 via turnitin @23:59hrs ) |
Assignment Task
This assignment involves preparing a Presentation and Viva Voce on Disruptive Innovation.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
This assignment has been prepared to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcome:
| LO1 | Demonstrate a systematic and critical understanding of traditional and contemporary approaches to strategy, strategic planning, and implementation, the importance of competitive advantage, and the strategic role of disruptive innovation. |
Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI) Applications in this Assessment
| AI Status | Application | Notes |
| Category A | No GAI tool is permitted. | While grammar and/or spell checkers may be used to correct individual words and sentences, the use of GAI is not allowed. This is because the learning outcomes require you to produce original assessment work without any GAI assistance Any GAI generated content which is presented as your own original work and is not acknowledged will be assessed for academic misconduct. |
Background
Throughout the module we will be examining a variety of strategy issues using a variety of research materials. Strategy in the context of contemporary business world will be explored, which includes an examination of global economic systems, instability, circular economy, new business practices, disruption, and business model innovation. Traditional and contemporary approaches to strategy, strategic thinking, and stakeholder engagement will be touched upon. Corporate, business, functional and network strategies will also be considered.
This assignment will encourage the students to apply the learning from the module to a topic and will be submitted in the form of a presentation and Viva Voce.
Description of the assessment
Select ONE “Disruptive innovation” example discussed in the class (or from your own independent research) and present a strategic analysis of chosen Disruptive innovation.
In this presentation, you are required to
1.Introduce and demonstrate critical understanding of “disruptive innovation” concept and relate it to our chosen example.
2.How can a business maintain its competitive advantage while scaling? Is there a risk of diluting the brand?
3.How do you ensure that your workforce evolves with the company as it grows? What are the key strategies for managing talent and skills gaps?
The presentation must:
1.Use Microsoft PowerPoint or other suitable presentation software.
2.A Viva Voce-based investigation will accompany the presentation (Q&A session after the presentation).
3.Maximum 20 minutes. ( including Q&A)
4.Provide the full Harvard reference within the reference page for each item used, and the correct Harvard ‘shortened’ reference within the presentation.
5.Include both direct and indirect citations from a wide variety of sources. Include between fifteen to twenty sources. As a MINIMUM the Reference List should include four refereed academic journals and five academic books.
6.Make use of relevant core texts and research items from within the module.
7.Your cover page would be the first page of your presentation. Include Student ID number, module name, tutor name, academic year/cohort/group.
Marking Criteria: (presentation feedback template at the end)
Disruptive innovation – 20%
Strategic analysis-20%
Impacts -20%
Presentation (Visual) – 10%
Presentation (Oral) and Q&A – 15%
Research and References –15%
Minimum Secondary Research Source Requirements for both assignments:
Level HE7 - It is expected that the Reference List will contain between fifteen to twenty sources. As a MINIMUM the Reference List should include four refereed academic journals and five academic books. You must reference all information in the presentation, using the Harvard Referencing Guide.
Important and helpful information
Late work will be subject to the penalties:
Up to 7 calendar days late = 10 marks subtracted but if the assignment would normally gain a pass mark, then the final mark to be no lower than the pass mark for the assignment.
More than 7 calendar days late = This will be counted as non-submission and no marks will be recorded.
Late submission of assessments on refer and those which are graded Pass/Fail only, is not permitted. Students may request an extension to the original published deadline date as described below.
Please refer to the Module Guide for information regarding indicative reading, guidelines for the preparation and submission of assignments, and the assessment criteria.
Submission, Assessment & Feedback
Electronic copies of assignments should be submitted via ‘Turn-it-in’. Please ensure you follow the instructions provided by your module tutor and on the assessment brief.
Written feedback in the form of annotations onto your electronic submission and summary comments will be provided within three working weeks of the submission deadline, together with your internally moderated grade for the assignment.
This assessment satisfies the learning outcomes as specified in your module guide. The pass mark for this assignment is 50%.
MBA7061 Strategy – AS2
PRESENTATION FEEDBACK TEMPLATE
Programme: MBA/MSc IM Academic Area/Partner Centre: Regent College
| Student Number/Name: |
Marking Tutor:
|
| Presentation Date: |
| Disruptive Innovation Area: |
| Relevant Learning Outcomes | Achieved? Y/N |
| LO1 - Demonstrate a systematic and critical understanding of traditional and contemporary approaches to strategy, strategic planning, and implementation, the importance of competitive advantage, and the strategic role of disruptive innovation. | |
| Marking Criteria | Marks scored against % | Comments | |
Disruptive innovation – 20%
|
| ||
Strategic analysis-20%
|
| ||
Impacts -20%
|
| ||
Presentation (Visual) – 10%
| |||
Presentation (Oral) and Q&A – 15%
| |||
| Research and References –15% | |||
| TOTAL grade | |||
| Overall Comments | Areas for Further Development | ||
| |||
| % | Disruptive Innovation 20% | Strategic Analysis 20% | Impacts 20% | Presentation (Oral and Q&A) 15% | Presentation (Visual) 15%
| Research/Referencing 10% | ||
| DISTINCTION | Exceptional Quality | 85-100% | Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief. Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Insightfully interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an exceptional critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates distinctive, insightful and creative solutions to complex problems. Produces exceptional work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%)
Exceptionally well written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief. Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Insightfully interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an exceptional critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates distinctive, insightful and creative solutions to complex problems. Produces exceptional work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%)
Exceptionally well written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief. Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Insightfully interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an exceptional critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates distinctive, insightful and creative solutions to complex problems. Produces exceptional work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%)
Exceptionally well written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
Exceptionally appropriate eye contact, tone, volume and body language
Articulation and explanation (3%)
Exceptional articulation and explanation of all points and arguments
Engagement (3%)
Exceptionally engaging
Q&A (3%)
Exceptional handling of questions
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
Exceptional confident delivery without using the notes |
Exceptional presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP).
|
Sources accurately cited in the text.
An extensive range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style. |
| Excellent Quality | 70-84% | Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an excellent knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Expertly interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an excellent critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates insightful and creative thinking solutions to complex problems. Produces excellent work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%) Excellently written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an excellent knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Expertly interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an excellent critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates insightful and creative thinking solutions to complex problems. Produces excellent work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%) Excellently written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Expertly addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an excellent knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Expertly interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents an excellent critique of key research material resulting in clear, original and illuminating conclusions. Demonstrates insightful and creative thinking solutions to complex problems. Produces excellent work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Coherently articulated and logically structured.
An appropriate format is used. Written English (4%) Excellently written Style is clear, resourceful and academic.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
Excellent utilization of eye contact, tone, volume and body language
Articulation and explanation (3%)
Excellent articulation and explanation of all points and arguments
Engagement (3%)
Extremely engaging
Q&A (3%)
Excellent handling of questions at the end of the presentation
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
Highly confident delivery with no or very little use of notes | Excellent presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of figures, tables, plates (FTP).
| Sources accurately cited in the text. A wide range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style. | |
| MERIT | Good Quality | 60-69% | Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief well.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a sound knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Comprehensively interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding
Argument/Analysis (4%) Presents a cohesive critique of key research material resulting in clear and original conclusions. Demonstrates creative solutions to complex problems. Produces superior work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area
Structure (4%)
For the most part coherently articulated and logically constructed.
An appropriate format is used.
Written English (4%)
Well written with
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief well.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a sound knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Comprehensively interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding
Argument/Analysis (4%) Presents a cohesive critique of key research material resulting in clear and original conclusions. Demonstrates creative solutions to complex problems. Produces superior work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area
Structure (4%)
For the most part coherently articulated and logically constructed.
An appropriate format is used.
Written English (4%)
Well written with
| Relevance (4%)
Directly relevant to title/brief.
Addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief well.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a sound knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Comprehensively interprets appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates originality in conceptual understanding
Argument/Analysis (4%) Presents a cohesive critique of key research material resulting in clear and original conclusions. Demonstrates creative solutions to complex problems. Produces superior work that makes a contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area
Structure (4%)
For the most part coherently articulated and logically constructed.
An appropriate format is used.
Written English (4%)
Well written with
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
Good use of eye contact, tone, volume and body language
Articulation and explanation (3%)
Good articulation and explanation of most points and arguments
Engagement (3%)
Engaging
Q&A (3%)
Good handling of questions
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
Most confident delivery with little use of notes | Very good presentational style & layout, appropriate to the type of assignment. Effective inclusion of FTP. | Sources accurately cited in the text. A range of contemporary and relevant references cited in the reference list in the correct style. |
| PASS | Satisfactory Quality | 50-59% | Relevance (4%)
Generally addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Minor irrelevance in places.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an adequate knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Some minor omissions. Satisfactorily interprets some appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents some critique of key research material resulting in original conclusions. Loss of focus in places. Demonstrates some creativity in solving complex problems. Produces satisfactory work that makes some contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Adequate attempt at articulation and logical structure.
An acceptable format is used.
Written English (4%)
Competently written with minor lapses in spelling and grammar.
Style is legible and mainly academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Generally addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Minor irrelevance in places.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an adequate knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Some minor omissions. Satisfactorily interprets some appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents some critique of key research material resulting in original conclusions. Loss of focus in places. Demonstrates some creativity in solving complex problems. Produces satisfactory work that makes some contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Adequate attempt at articulation and logical structure.
An acceptable format is used.
Written English (4%)
Competently written with minor lapses in spelling and grammar.
Style is legible and mainly academic.
| Relevance (4%)
Generally addresses the assumptions of the title and/or the requirements of the brief.
Minor irrelevance in places.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates an adequate knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Some minor omissions. Satisfactorily interprets some appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some originality in conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%)
Presents some critique of key research material resulting in original conclusions. Loss of focus in places. Demonstrates some creativity in solving complex problems. Produces satisfactory work that makes some contribution to the development of knowledge and understanding in the subject area.
Structure (4%) Adequate attempt at articulation and logical structure.
An acceptable format is used.
Written English (4%)
Competently written with minor lapses in spelling and grammar.
Style is legible and mainly academic.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
Satisfactory use of eye contact, tone, volume and body language
Articulation and explanation (3%)
Satisfactory articulation and explanation of at least forty percent of points and arguments
Engagement (3%)
Satisfactory engagement
Q&A (3%)
Satisfactory handling of questions (replied at least 40% of the questions correctly)
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
Delivery lacks confidence and heavy reliance on notes or scripts in the presentation | The presentational style & layout is largely correct for the type of assignment.
Inclusion of FTP but lacks selectivity. | Key contemporary and relevant academic sources are drawn upon.
Most sources are accurately cited in the text and reference list/bibliography. Minor weaknesses evident. |
| FAIL | Borderline Fail | 45-49% | Relevance (4%)
Some implications of issues explored.
Some irrelevant and/or superficial arguments.
Knowledge (4%)
Some omissions evident in knowledge of theory and practice at this level. Insufficient understanding of appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some conceptual understanding in places.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A limited amount of critique of key research material with description in places. Lacks creativity. Some original conclusions.
Structure (4%)
Limited attempt at articulation and problems with structure.
Some formatting errors.
Written English (4%)
Intermittent lapses in grammar and spelling.
Style hinders clarity in places and is not academic throughout.
| Relevance (4%)
Some implications of issues explored.
Some irrelevant and/or superficial arguments.
Knowledge (4%)
Some omissions evident in knowledge of theory and practice at this level. Insufficient understanding of appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some conceptual understanding in places.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A limited amount of critique of key research material with description in places. Lacks creativity. Some original conclusions.
Structure (4%)
Limited attempt at articulation and problems with structure.
Some formatting errors.
Written English (4%)
Intermittent lapses in grammar and spelling.
Style hinders clarity in places and is not academic throughout.
| Relevance (4%)
Some implications of issues explored.
Some irrelevant and/or superficial arguments.
Knowledge (4%)
Some omissions evident in knowledge of theory and practice at this level. Insufficient understanding of appropriate concepts and theoretical models. Demonstrates some conceptual understanding in places.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A limited amount of critique of key research material with description in places. Lacks creativity. Some original conclusions.
Structure (4%)
Limited attempt at articulation and problems with structure.
Some formatting errors.
Written English (4%)
Intermittent lapses in grammar and spelling.
Style hinders clarity in places and is not academic throughout.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
Lack of appropriate use of eye contact, tone, volume and body language
Articulation and explanation (3%)
More than 60% of the Points and arguments not clearly or appropriate articulated
Engagement (3%)
Not engaging for more than 60% of the presentation
Q&A (3%)
Poor handling of questions at the end of the presentation
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
Delivery lacks confidence and reliance on notes or scripts all the time. | Some weaknesses in the presentational style & layout.
Some inappropriate use of FTP. | Limited number of contemporary and relevant sources cited. Weaknesses in referencing technique. |
| Fail |
30-44%
| Relevance (4%)
Significant degree of irrelevance to the title and/or brief.
Issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates weaknesses in knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Limited understanding and application of concepts.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A basic argument is presented, but too descriptive or narrative in style. Limited originality and creativity. Conclusions are not clearly stated.
Structure (4%) Poorly structured. Lack of articulation. Format deficient. Written English (4%) Deficiencies in spelling and grammar make reading difficult in places.
Simplistic or repetitious style impairs clarity.
| Relevance (4%)
Significant degree of irrelevance to the title and/or brief.
Issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates weaknesses in knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Limited understanding and application of concepts.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A basic argument is presented, but too descriptive or narrative in style. Limited originality and creativity. Conclusions are not clearly stated.
Structure (4%) Poorly structured. Lack of articulation. Format deficient. Written English (4%) Deficiencies in spelling and grammar make reading difficult in places.
Simplistic or repetitious style impairs clarity.
| Relevance (4%)
Significant degree of irrelevance to the title and/or brief.
Issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms.
Knowledge (4%) Demonstrates weaknesses in knowledge of theory and practice for this level. Limited understanding and application of concepts.
Argument/Analysis (4%) A basic argument is presented, but too descriptive or narrative in style. Limited originality and creativity. Conclusions are not clearly stated.
Structure (4%) Poorly structured. Lack of articulation. Format deficient. Written English (4%) Deficiencies in spelling and grammar make reading difficult in places.
Simplistic or repetitious style impairs clarity.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
No use of eye contact and body language, tones and volumes are incorrectly employed.
Articulation and explanation (3%)
More than seventy percent of the Points and arguments not clearly or appropriate articulated
Engagement (3%)
Not engaging at all
Q&A (3%)
Not replying to the questions or answers given incorrectly for more than seventy percentage of the questions asked.
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
No confidence and rely on notes all the time | For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking.
FTP ignored in text or not used where clearly needed. | Inappropriate sources and poor referencing technique. | |
<30%
| Relevance (4%) Relevance to the title and/or brief is intermittent or missing.
The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a lack of basic knowledge of either theory or practice for this level, with little evidence of conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%) Severely limited arguments. Descriptive or narrative in style with no evidence of critique and originality or creativity. Conclusions are sparse.
Structure (4%)
Unstructured. Lack of articulation.
Format deficient.
Written English (4%)
Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in grammar, spelling, expression and style.
| Relevance (4%) Relevance to the title and/or brief is intermittent or missing.
The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a lack of basic knowledge of either theory or practice for this level, with little evidence of conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%) Severely limited arguments. Descriptive or narrative in style with no evidence of critique and originality or creativity. Conclusions are sparse.
Structure (4%)
Unstructured. Lack of articulation.
Format deficient.
Written English (4%)
Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in grammar, spelling, expression and style.
| Relevance (4%) Relevance to the title and/or brief is intermittent or missing.
The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms.
Knowledge (4%)
Demonstrates a lack of basic knowledge of either theory or practice for this level, with little evidence of conceptual understanding.
Argument/Analysis (4%) Severely limited arguments. Descriptive or narrative in style with no evidence of critique and originality or creativity. Conclusions are sparse.
Structure (4%)
Unstructured. Lack of articulation.
Format deficient.
Written English (4%)
Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in grammar, spelling, expression and style.
| Eye contact, tone, volume and body language (3%)
No use of eye contact and body language, tones and volumes are incorrectly employed.
Articulation and explanation (3%)
More than eighty percent of the Points and arguments not clearly or appropriate articulated
Engagement (3%)
Not engaging at all
Q&A (3%)
Not replying to the questions or answers given incorrectly for more than eighty percentage of the questions asked.
Confidence and use of notes (3%)
No confidence and rely on notes all the time | For the type of assignment the presentational style &/or layout is lacking. FTP as above. | An absence of academic sources and poor referencing technique. |
Send Your assignment brief
Share your assignment brief and after Checking assignment requirement expert Will share the quote
Get Quote and pay
Once quote is sent, you can make Payment through secure option after which our team will start work
Get Assignment
Our team will Deliver the work you can share If any feedback
