Strategic Management

Strategic Management

Individual Assignment (2014 -15)
Learning outcomes

•    Evaluate case studies in strategy direction, strategy implementation and strategic management.
•    Discuss the strategic directions that can be chosen by organisations through the application of relevant theoretical concepts.
•    State the need for strategic alternatives and their selection.

Coursework: Case Study based on key reading – HIKMA, a Jordanian Pharmaceuticals Company-By Anchor and Haloub, 2014


Using relevant analytical models, critically evaluate the strategic development of HIKMA, paying particular attention to its expansion strategy. Your analysis must include justification and critical evaluation of the models selected as well as course(s) of action that you think HIKMA should take to grow their business. Your recommendations must be well founded and should clearly relate to your analysis.

Suggested structure and approximate weighting of marks

Part 1:  Introduction 150 words

Part 2: Analysis of current strategic issues, justification and evaluation of the choice of analytical models- (20%)   500-600 words
In the first instance, please identify what you consider as key strategic issues associated with HIKMA’s expansion strategy .These maybe opportunities or threats facing HIKMA. We suggest not more than 4 strategic issues. You will then need to identify and select relevant analytical model (s ) that will underpin your analysis. Please ensure that these are justified and critically evaluated in this section. Critical evaluation means discussing advantages and disadvantages of the selected model (s). Examples of analytical models include PESTEL, P’s 5 forces, Value Chain, Ansoff’s matrix, etc. This means focussing on their application as well as advantages and disadvantages. We would expect you to provide relevant references from literature to support your analysis. For example, if the Value Chain is one of your selected models, you should define and evaluate its advantages and disadvantages as an internal analysis model.
Please note that you may use any models that you find relevant to conduct the strategic analysis of HIKMA. However ideally you should avoid using more that 3 models as this would affect clarity and focus of your analysis.
You can have a separate introduction to the assignment if you wish but this needs to be very brief – Remember the word count!

Part 3: Critical analysis of expansion strategy and application of the chosen model (s)- (60%)   1500-1600 words
This is the most important part of the assignment, constituting 60% of the total marks. Please note that this section should demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation. Here, we expect you to apply the relevant model (s) that you identified in part 1 to HIKMA. For example, if you have selected the Value Chain in part 1, you could then apply the model in this section, illustrating how the components of these models help us to gain insight into the
key strategic issues you identified in part 1. Remember that you need to be more analytical here – i.e. not just highlighting the components of these models without applying them to the organisation. You therefore need to demonstrate deeper analytical work.

Part 4: Recommendation and Conclusion- (20%)   500 words
We expect you to recommend strategic options or directions that HIKMA should take. You could use one of your selected models selected models here. For example, Ansoff’s matrix looks at potential strategic options at corporate level , e.g. diversification, market penetration etc – Or you could consider Porter’s generic strategies which focus on competitive options available. However, you must ensure that any model used in this section has been introduced and evaluated in part 1 of your work.

Question- Will I lose marks if I don’t use a model in this section?- NO , we expect you recommendations and conclusions to be well founded and clearly linked to the analysis in the main body of your work.

REMEMBER that this is just an EXAMPLE of the structure of the assignment. The choice of relevant models is entirely yours.

Essential: the work should demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation. There should be an evidence of a wider reading (not only textbooks and the company websites but also academic journals).

Marking Scheme (generic)
Criteria    100%    70+    60-69    50-59    40-49    Below 40 (Fail)
Generic communication    5%    The answer is excellent in structure, clarity and presentation    The answer is well structured. The content is clear and well presented.    The answer is of an acceptable standard in clarity, structure and presentation.     The answer has fallen below expectations in clarity, structure and presentation.    Poor answer in terms of structure and presentation.
Knowledge and understanding    30%    Excellent research skills demonstrated in a clear understanding of relevant theories/concepts    Good research skills used to show knowledge and understanding of relevant concepts     An acceptable level of understanding of the concepts of strategy selection and  implementation shown    The level of research and knowledge/understanding has fallen below expectations    Lack of evidence of research on lacks knowledge of relevant concepts
Analysis    30%    All relevant theoretical concepts applied effectively    A good selection of frameworks applied competently    An acceptable level of theoretical frameworks used, but not always applied well.    The analytical content has fallen below expectation. Text tends to be descriptive.    Little or no evidence of analysis.
Synthesis, creativity, evaluation    25%    Shows ability to integrate theory and practice. Conclusions and recommendations based on sound evaluation and logic.     Good link between theory and practice. Conclusions and recommendations well founded    An acceptable level of evaluation in evidence. Satisfactory conclusions and recommendations    Evaluation has fallen below expectations. Conclusions and recommendations thin and not well-substantiated.     Little or no evidence of evaluation
Referencing    10%    Comprehensive range of references used to support arguments    Good range of references used to support arguments    An acceptable range of references used to support arguments    Use of references fallen below expectations    No additional to the main textbook references
TOTAL    100%