We write, we don’t plagiarise! Every answer is different no matter how many orders we get for the same assignment. Your answer will be 100% plagiarism-free, custom written, unique and different from every other student.
I agree to receive phone calls from you at night in case of emergency
Please share your assignment brief and supporting material (if any) via email here at: firstname.lastname@example.org after completing this order process.
Important Note: Your order at Assignment Bank is protected by Consumer Law UK; also, we use 3rd party merchant support “PayPal” for all online transactions to provide you with the most protected online buying experience.
0% Plagiarism Guaranteed & Custom Written
PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context 2020/1
Case Study: Bringing External Innovation inside – Evidence from Multinational Corporations (MNCs)
Word Count: 3,000 words maximum
which are provi ded as an A ppendix in y our Programm e Handbook . You are encouraged to use ‘Harvard Referencing Style’ andavoid ‘Plagiarism’.
A copy of y our T urniti n© originality report, generated via Canvas, m ust be submi tted in conjunction withyour assignment.
Your task is to carry out a critical analysis and evaluation of the strategies adopted by Multinational Corporations ( MNCs) operati ng in an i ndustry and country of your choice, using information available to thepublic e.g. companyannualreports in pdf andothermaterials researched. You wi ll be ex pec ted to select and apply appropriate theori es, techniques and models studied duringthe module whilst having regardto the practicalaspects of strategy development.
Yo ur a ssig nment should be presented in a business repo rt fo rma t a nd sho uld be 3 ,00 0 wo rds ma ximum (ex cluding ex ecutive summa ry/a bstra ct, references and releva nt a ppendices). The report should include a title pa ge a nd a bstra ct a nd be fully a nd co nsistently referenced, using Ha rv ar d Refer enci ng style. Yo u must submit an electro nic versio n of the repo rt Online via the University’s A ssig nment Spa ce ‐ this sho uld be clearly labelled with your name, your course and the name of the case study.
In the event of failing this individual assignment, normal referral / deferral procedures will apply. This assignment carri es a weighting of 100%. The assessment will foc us on the level of ANALYSI S carri ed out. T hat i s, the applicati on of THEORETICAL CONCEPTS studi ed in the module to the ‘practical’ case study presented. In other words, y ou should proceed beyond a DESCRIPTI ON of the com pany and i ts acti ons. Y ou should be analysi ng ‘w hy’ rather then desc ribi ng ‘w hat’. T he assignment willbe assessedandmoderated by twomembers of staff inaccordance with the marks allocated to each of the questions detailed below. Demonstrate critical understanding and application of relevant strategic management and leadership principles that support organisational values and impact on organisational direction.
Open innovation is about combining internal and external resources and acting on the opportunities this creates. More and more MNCs prove this to be a strong value proposition and cannot afford to lose out on the opportunities created by this combination. Open innovation has the ability to create long term advantages in management or organizational innovation rather than just product or service innovation. Once a MNC gets ahead of its competitors and becomes the preferred partner of choice within its industry, this often turns out to be a longer term advantage. It is hard for competitors to copy and thus neutralize the benefits that open innovation leadership can bring
Read the Annual R eports of a MNC operating in an industry and country of your choice; and carry out appropriate analy ses of the global corporate strategi es adopted by the MNC and its closest competitors, in response to the questions below. You are encouraged to use relevant data/information from company websites.
Briefly distinguish between ‘Open’ and ‘Closed’ Innovation. Using information from the most recent Annual Report of the MNC of your choice, critica lly evalua te the impact of ‘factor endow m ent’ , ‘related and supporting industries’, ‘demand conditions’, ‘strategy, structure, and rivalry’, ‘government’, and ‘chance’ on the MNC’s approach to external innovation and competition.
Critically a ssess the merits a nd demerits of meeting the ‘dema nd fo r interna tionalisatio n’ a nd the ‘demand fo r lo calisa tio n’ simulta neo usly. Which of these two dema nds wo uld yo u reco mmend tha t yo ur cho sen M NC sho uld a do pt in o rder to max imise its co rpo ra te pro fita bility thro ug h lo w‐co st lea dership or pro duct differentiation or focus – give two key reasons for your choice.
Using yo ur understa nding of ‘o rg a nisa tio na l purpo se’, ‘co rpo ra te pro fita bility’ a nd ‘co rpora te so cia l respo nsibility’, critica lly eva lua te the a bility of the C E O a nd Senio r ma nag ement tea m in yo ur cho sen M NC’s to simulta neo usly a chieve co rpo ra te profita bility a nd co rpo ra te so cial respo nsibility o bjectives crucial for the MNC’s survival and growth.
Yo u a re expected to demonstra te critical understa nding a nd a pplica tio n of relevant stra teg ic management and leadership principles that suppo rt organisa tiona l values and impact on organisa tio nal directio n.
[30 % marks]
In250‐300 words reflect on the impact ofthis assessmenton your understanding oftheMultinational co rpo ra tio ns (M NC s) o pera ting in an industry and co untry of yo ur cho ice, inserting reflectio ns on crisis management, suggesting how to plan prior to a rapid unexpected event such as coronavirus, and hig hlig hting the k ey benefits a nd limita tio ns of crisis ma nag ement, in crea ting a culture fo r sustaining corporate profitability. [10 % marks]
Fo r further informa tio n rega rding A ssessment Reg ula tio ns, ex tenua ting circumsta nces or ex tensio ns a nd a ca demic integ rity, plea se refer to yo ur Prog ra mme Ha ndbo ok on the University of Sunderland in Lo ndo n information page on Canvas.
De Wit, B. (2017) – Strategy: An International Perspective, 6th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.
De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2014) Strategy Process, Content, and Context International Perspective, 5th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.
Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2005) Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases, 7th Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Lasserre, P. (2018) Global Strategic Management , 4th Edition, London: Palgra ve McMilla n. Lynch, R.(2006) Corporate Strategy, Fourth Edition, Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Lynch, R. (2018) Strategic Management, 8th Edition, London: Pearson.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J. (1998) Strategy Safari, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall Mintzberg, H., Ahlstra nd, B. and Lampel, J. B. (2008) Strategy Safari: The complete guide through the
wilds of strategic management, 2nd Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall
Websites & PDF documents: https://hbr.org/ Harvard Business Revie
https:// www.m ckinsey.co mMcKinsey Consultancy. www.economist.com The Economist
www.ft.com The Financial Times
Please refer to the PGBM156 module guide on Canvas.
Please access your reading list from the library website. To access it, please go to https://moduleresources.sunderland.ac. uk/ andsearchfor yourmodule.
Yo ur submissio n link s will beco me a va ila ble a pprox ima tely 4 week s prio r to yo ur submissio n dea dline, along with detailed instructions on how to submit your assignment.
Yo u will be ma rk ed in a cco rdance to the University of Sunderla nd a ss ess m ent cr iter ia a tta ch ed belo w. The a ssessment criteria co vers; Releva nce, Kno wledg e, A na lysis, A rg ument a nd Structure, C ritica l Evaluation, Presentation, Reference to Literature.
PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context 2020/1
Argument and Structure
Reference to Litera ture
The wo rk ex a mined is ex empla ry a nd pro vides clea r evidence of a co mplete g ra sp of the k no wledg e, understa nding a nd skills a ppro pria te to the L evel o f the qua lifica tion. There is a lso unequivocal evidence sho wing tha t a ll the lea rning outco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t Level a re fully sa tisfied. At this level it is ex pected tha t the wo rk will be exempla ry in all the ca tego ries cited a bo ve. It will demo nstra te a pa rticula rly co mpelling eva lua tio n, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
The work examined is excellent and demo nstra tes comprehensive knowledg e, understa nding and skills appropria te to the Level of the qualifica tio n. There
is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outco mes and responsibilities appro pria te to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the catego ries cited above or by demons tra ting particula rly compelling evaluatio n and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and some evidence of originality
70 – 75%
The wo rk exa mined is of a hig h sta nda rd a nd there is evidence of co mprehensive kno wledg e, understa nding a nd sk ills a ppro pria te to the L evel of the
qualificatio n. There is clea rly a rticula ted evidence demo nstra ting tha t a ll the lea rning o utco mes and respo nsibilities a ppropria te to that level a re sa tisfied At this levelit is expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or bydemonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
60 – 69%
Directly releva ntto
Well written, with
Critical appraisalo f
the requirements of theassessment
knowledge of relevantmaterial, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and
analysis – clear and orderly presentation
focussed argument which is clear and logically structured.
or independent thinking; and begins to formulate an independent
positio n inrela tio n
to theory and/or
standa rd spelling and gramma r, in a readable stylewith acceptable format
up‐to‐date and/or appropriate literature.
Recognition of different
good useofawide range of sophisticated source material.
50 – 59%
Some attempt to address the
knowledge of afair
Genera lly co herent and logically
May contain some distinctive or
Competently written, with only
Uses a good variety of litera ture which
requirem ents of the
assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages
range of relevant
material, with intermittent evidence of an apprecia tion of its significance
has a clear purpo se
structured, using an
appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s)
thinking; may begin toformulate an independent positio n inrela tio n to theory and/or
minor lapses from
standard grammar, with acceptable format
includes recent texts and/or appropriate literature, including a substantive
Competent use of source materia l.
40 – 49%
Some attempt to
A simple basic style
Evidence of use of
of the subject but
treatment, but may
but with significant
requirem ents of the assessment but there are instances
addressing a limited range of material
be prone to description, or to narrative, which
coherent argument, butmay suffer loss of focus and
coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical
conformity to one
deficiencies in expression or format that may
pose obstacles for
literature which goes beyond that referred to by the
analytica lpurpo se
issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical
mode(s) couched in
or more standard views of thetopic
only uses a single source to suppo rt a point.
35 – 39%
Relevance tothe requirem ents of the assessment may be very
A limited understa nding ofa narrow range of material
Largelydescriptive or narrative, with little evidenc e of analysis
A basic argument is evident, but mainlysuppo rted by assertion and
Some evidence of a viewstarting tobe formed but mainlyderiva tive.
Numerous deficiencies in expression and presenta tion; the
Ba rely a dequa te use of literature. Over relianceo n
intermit tent, and may be reducedto
its vaguest and
there may be a lack of clarityand
writer mayachiev e clarity (if at all) only
by using a simplistic
materia l provided by the tutor.
least challenging terms
or repetitio us style
The evidenc e provided shows that the majority of the learning outco m es and respo nsibilities appropria te to that Level are satisfied – for compensa tion consideration
30 – 34%
The wo rk exa mined pro vides insufficient evidence of the kno wledg e, understa nding and skills a ppropria te to the Level of the qualifica tio n. The evidence
provided shows that someof the learningoutcomes and responsibilities appropriate to thatLevelaresatisfied. The work willbe weakinsome of theindicators.
The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Levelof the qualifica tio n. The evidence sho ws tha t few of the lea rning o utco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t L evel a re sa tisfied. The wo rk will be weak in several of the indicators.
The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Levelof the
qualifica tio n. The evidence fails to sho w tha t a ny of the lea rning outco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t L evel a re sa tisfied. The wo rk will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.
CaseStudy:BringingExternalInnovationinside–Evidence from Multinational Corporations(MNCs)
1. Demonstrate critical understanding and application of relevant strategic management and leadership principles that support organisational values and impact on organisational direction.
2. Understand the holistic nature of strategy and the relationship bet ween strategic management and leadership and apply analytical techniques to solve complex problems in real lifeorganizations.
3. Demonstrate knowledge of the strategic decision making process through critical analysis of how strategic decision making enables an organisation to relate to changes in its international businessenvironment.
4. Critically evaluate and monitor the business mission, vision, objectives and policies of internationalorganisations.
5. Use critical reflective skills to reflect on the impact of their understanding on the strategic problem solvingprocess.
AcopyofyourTurnitin©originalityreport,generatedviaCanvas,mustbesubmittedin conjunction withyourassignment.
Your task is to carry out a critical analysis and evaluation of the strategies adopted by MultinationalCorporations(MNCs)operatinginanindustryandcountryofyourchoice,using information available to thepublic e.g. companyannualreports in pdf andothermaterials researched.Youwillbeexpectedtoselectandapplyappropriatetheories,techniquesand modelsstudiedduringthemodulewhilsthavingregardtothepracticalaspectsofstrategy development.
Yourassignmentshouldbepresentedinabusinessreportformatandshouldbe3,000wordsmaximum (excludingexecutivesummary/abstract,referencesandrelevantappendices).Thereportshouldinclude atitlepageandabstractandbefullyandconsistentlyreferenced,usingHarvardReferencingstyle.You mustsubmitanelectronicversionofthereportOnlineviatheUniversity’sAssignmentSpace‐thisshould be clearly labelled with your name, your course and the name of the casestudy.
Intheeventoffailingthisindividualassignment,normalreferral/deferralprocedureswillapply. This assignmentcarriesaweightingof100%.TheassessmentwillfocusonthelevelofANALYSIS carriedout.Thatis,theapplicationofTHEORETICALCONCEPTSstudiedinthemoduletothe ‘practical’casestudypresented.Inotherwords,youshouldproceedbeyondaDESCRIPTIONof thecompanyanditsactions.Youshouldbeanalysing‘why’ratherthendescribing‘what’.The assignmentwillbeassessedandmoderatedbytwomembersofstaffinaccordancewiththe marksallocatedtoeachofthequestionsdetailedbelow.
• the coherence and depth of the analysis of thoseissues
• the use of relevant evidence, from material provided and personal research to supportany statementsmade
• the breadth and depth of researchundertaken
• the soundness of arguments put forwardPresentation
• the summary ofarguments
• report layout andformat
• the appropriateness of length
• the quantity and accuracy ofreferencing
Open innovation is about combining internal and external resources and acting on the opportunities this creates. More and more MNCs prove this to be a strong value proposition and cannot afford to lose out on the opportunities created by this combination. Open innovation has the ability to create long term advantages in management or organizational innovation rather than just product or service innovation. Once a MNC gets ahead of its competitors and becomes the preferred partner of choice within its industry, this often turns out to be a longer term advantage. It is hard for competitors to copy and thus neutralize the benefits that open innovation leadership can bring.
ReadtheAnnualReportsofaMNCoperatinginanindustryandcountryofyourchoice;andcarry outappropriateanalysesoftheglobalcorporatestrategiesadoptedbytheMNCanditsclosest competitors, in response to the questions below. You are encouraged to use relevant data/information from companywebsites.
Briefly distinguish between ‘Open’ and ‘Closed’ Innovation. Using information from the most recent Annual Report of the MNC of your choice, critica lly evalua te the impact of ‘factor endow m ent’ ,
‘related and supporting industries’, ‘demand conditions’, ‘strategy, structure, and rivalry’, ‘government’, and ‘chance’ on the MNC’s approach to external innovation and competition.
Criticallyassessthemeritsanddemeritsofmeetingthe‘demandforinternationalisation’andthe‘demand forlocalisation’simultaneously.Whichofthesetwodemandswouldyourecommendthatyourchosen MNCshouldadoptinordertomaximiseitscorporateprofitabilitythroughlow‐costleadershiporproduct differentiationorfocus–givetwokeyreasonsforyourchoice.
Using yourunderstandingof‘organisationalpurpose’,‘corporateprofitability’and‘corporate social responsibility’,criticallyevaluatetheabilityoftheCEOandSeniormanagementteaminyourchosen MNC’stosimultaneouslyachievecorporateprofitabilityandcorporatesocialresponsibilityobjectives crucial for the MNC’s survival andgrowth.
Youareexpectedtodemonstratecriticalunderstandingandapplicationofrelevantstrategicmanagement andleadership principlesthatsupport organisationalvaluesandimpact onorganisationaldirection.
In250‐300 words reflect on the impact ofthis assessmenton your understanding oftheMultinational co rpo ra tio ns (M NC s) o pera ting in an industry and co untry of yo ur cho ice, inserting reflectio ns on crisis management, suggesting how to plan prior to a rapid unexpected event such as coronavirus, and hig hlig hting the k ey benefits a nd limita tio ns of crisis ma nag ement, in crea ting a culture fo r sustaining corporate profitability.
ForfurtherinformationregardingAssessmentRegulations,extenuatingcircumstancesorextensionsand academicintegrity,pleaserefertoyourProgrammeHandbookontheUniversityofSunderlandinLondon information page onCanvas.
Lasserre,P.(2018)GlobalStrategicManagement,4thEdition,London:PalgraveMcMillan. Lynch, R.(2006) CorporateStrategy, Fourth Edition, Financial Times Prentice Hall.
Websites & PDF documents: https://hbr.org/Harvard Business Review
https:// www.mckinsey.co mMcKinsey Consultancy. www.economist.comThe Economist
www.ft.comThe Financial Times
Please access your reading list from the library website. To access it, please go to https://moduleresources.sunderland.ac. uk/andsearchfor yourmodule.
Yoursubmissionlinkswillbecomeavailableapproximately4weekspriortoyoursubmissiondeadline, along with detailed instructions on how to submit yourassignment.
YouwillbemarkedinaccordancetotheUniversityofSunderlandassessmentcriteriaattachedbelow. Theassessmentcriteriacovers;Relevance,Knowledge,Analysis,ArgumentandStructure,Critical Evaluation, Presentation, Reference toLiterature.
Theworkexaminedisexemplaryandprovidesclearevidenceofacompletegraspoftheknowledge,understandingandskillsappropriatetotheLevelof thequalification.ThereisalsounequivocalevidenceshowingthatallthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelarefullysatisfied. Atthislevelitisexpectedthattheworkwillbeexemplaryinallthecategoriescitedabove.Itwilldemonstrateaparticularlycompellingevaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation ordiscourse.
isalsoexcellentevidenceshowingthatallthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatlevelarefullysatisfied.Atthislevelitisexpected thattheworkwillbeexcellentinthemajorityofthecategoriescitedaboveorbydemonstratingparticularlycompellingevaluationandelegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and some evidence oforiginality
qualification.Thereisclearlyarticulatedevidencedemonstratingthatallthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatlevelaresatisfied Atthislevelitisexpectedthatthestandardoftheworkwillbehighinthemajorityofthecategoriescitedaboveorbydemonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation ordiscourse.
thinking; may begin toformulate an independent position inrelation to theory and/or
requirementsofthe assessment but there areinstances
coherent position onlyinbroadterms and inuncritical
literature which goes beyond that referred to bythe
Relevance tothe requirementsofthe assessment may be very
Barelyadequate use ofliterature. Over relianceon
writer mayachiev e clarity (if at all)only
by using asimplistic
material provided by thetutor.
Theworkexaminedisunacceptableandprovideslittleevidenceoftheknowledge,understandingandskillsappropriatetotheLevelofthe qualification.TheevidenceshowsthatfewofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied.Theworkwillbe weak in several of theindicators.
qualification.TheevidencefailstoshowthatanyofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied.Theworkwillbe weak in the majority or all of theindicators.
Get all these features for £83.00 FREE
View our samples written by our professional writers to let you comprehend how your work is going to look like. We have categorised this into 3 categories with a few different subject domains