Assessment Information COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B. Assessment Information Subject Code: MBA501 Subject Name: Dynamic Strategy and Disruptive Innovation Assessment Title: Stakeholder Analysis and Strategy Development Report Weighting: 30% Total Marks: 30 Page Limit: Due Date: 10 pages Monday of Week 6, 11:55pm AEST . Assessment Description . You are required to watch the YouTube Clip Snapchat's three-part business model with CEO Evan Spiegel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqPHordzhdw You will also need to perform your own research on Snap Inc. You must then prepare a Snap Inc. Stakeholder Analysis & Strategy Program Report using the following headings: A. Snap Inc. Stakeholder View of the Organisation Model Prepare a diagram with Snap Inc. as the central organisation surrounded by the company’s stakeholder groups using the stakeholder view model. B. List of specific Snap Inc. stakeholders for each stakeholder group For each stakeholder group identified in the stakeholder view model research Snap Inc. further and prepare a list identifying and describing the specific stakeholders within each stakeholder group. C. Stakeholder Analysis for four selected stakeholder groups Select four specific stakeholders and analyse their behaviour and motives. Tip: choose a stakeholder from each of the different four stakeholder categories to avoid repeating yourself in sections D and E.Assessment Information COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B. D. Stakeholder category identification and generic strategic programs for each of the four selected stakeholders Identify the stakeholder category that each of the four stakeholders belong to and list the generic strategic programs available for managing each stakeholder. E. Recommended strategic program for each of the four selected stakeholder groups including reasons for recommendations Recommend a specific strategic program for each of the four identified stakeholders that are consistent with one of the generic programs identified in section D.COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B. Criteria F (Fail) 0%-49% P (Pass) 50%-64% CR (Credit) 65%-74% D (Distinction) 75% - 84% HD (High Distinction) 85%-100% Mark Assessment Content (Subject Specific) OUT OF 80 MARKS Strategy Program Report Organisation model Stakeholder view of the organisation model not used to illustrate Snap Inc. and relationships to relevant stakeholder groups Stakeholder view of the organisation model is correctly used but further research would have potentially resulted in the inclusion of more stakeholder groups Accurate depiction of Snap Inc. and relevant stakeholder groups using the basic stakeholder view of the organisation model demonstrated in the workshop Comprehensive mapping of Snap Inc. stakeholder groups and relationships using the stakeholder view of the organisation model. All key stakeholder groups are correctly identified and represented. Demonstrated advanced level understanding of stakeholder view of organisation model. Diagram goes beyond basic model by including stakeholder sub-categories or even specific stakeholders /10 Strategy Program Report Stakeholder identification Few specific stakeholders identified indicating little to no research performed Sufficient list prepared identifying and describing specific stakeholders within in each stakeholder group. Research of specific stakeholders evident from description detail but further work necessary to accurately describe stakeholder and relationship to Snap Inc. Ample list prepared identifying and describing specific stakeholders within in each stakeholder group. Descriptions of stakeholders indicative of accurate research undertaken Broad list prepared identifying and describing specific stakeholders within each stakeholder group. Stakeholder descriptions indicative of careful research undertaken Comprehensive list prepared identifying and describing specific stakeholders within each stakeholder group. Stakeholder description demonstrating thorough research undertaken /15 Strategy Program Report Stakeholder analysis Stakeholder analysis fails to canvass stakeholder behaviour (competitive threat, cooperative potential, actual behaviour), motives (objectives, stakeholders, beliefs, possible coalitions), and stakeholder summary Reasonable treatment of stakeholder behaviour (competitive threat, cooperative potential, actual behaviour), motives (objectives, stakeholders, beliefs, possible coalitions), and stakeholder summary but further detail required to demonstrate understanding of stakeholder analysis principles Inclusive treatment of stakeholder behaviour (competitive threat, cooperative potential, actual behaviour), motives (objectives, stakeholders, beliefs, possible coalitions), and stakeholder summary demonstrating solid understanding of stakeholder analysis principles In depth treatment of stakeholder behaviour (competitive threat, cooperative potential, actual behaviour), motives (objectives, stakeholders, beliefs, possible coalitions), and stakeholder summary demonstrating high level understanding of stakeholder analysis principles Extensive treatment of stakeholder behaviour (competitive threat, cooperative potential, actual behaviour), motives (objectives, stakeholders, beliefs, possible coalitions), and stakeholder summary demonstrating advanced level understanding of stakeholder analysis principles /20 Strategy Program Report Generic programs Inaccurate identification of stakeholder category and little to no relevant explanation of generic strategies Reasonably accurate identification of stakeholder category and generic strategies available for each stakeholder but further explanation of generic strategies required Accurate identification of stakeholder category and generic strategies available for each stakeholder with explanation of generic strategies required demonstrating solid understanding of underlying principles Highly accurate identification of stakeholder category and generic strategies available for each stakeholder with explanation of generic strategies required demonstrating high level understanding of underlying principles Precise identification of stakeholder category and generic strategies available for each stakeholder with explanation of generic strategies required demonstrating high advanced level understanding of underlying principles /15COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B. Strategy Program Report Recommendations Recommendations inconsistent with stakeholder analysis indicating poor understanding of strategic program development principles Recommendations consistent with stakeholder analysis demonstrating reasonable understanding of strategic program development principles Strategic program recommendations closely aligned with stakeholder analysis demonstrating solid understanding of strategic program development principles Practical and effective strategic program recommendations indicative of high level understanding of strategic program development principles Insightful and innovative strategic program recommendations demonstrating advanced level understanding of strategic program development principles /20 Structure Format and Presentation (Consistent across all courses) OUT OF 20 MARKS Answer clearly and logically presented Serious lack of organization. Body paragraphs do not refer back to or relate to main arguments. Writing is formulaic, i.e. “in conclusion,” “another example is….” Writing style could be more effective. Organization is hard to follow; there is little progression of ideas. Little or no transitions between paragraphs. Need to more effectively weave main arguments throughout and relate body paragraphs. Paragraphs are generally well organized. Better transitions needed. The progression of ideas could be more thoughtful. Paragraphs relate back to main arguments to prove argument. Ideas & arguments are well structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Sound transitions between paragraphs. Major arguments are effectively made. Ideas & arguments are effectively structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Excellent transitions between paragraphs. Concluding comments leave the reader thinking. Major arguments are effectively woven throughout everybody paragraph, with ideas always related back to main arguments. /4 Appropriate theory and research used to answer question posed The critique does not have appropriate structure and lacks direction. No significant observations made from appropriate theory and research. Poor writing and expression of arguments. Reasonable critique which examines the relevant issues and makes reasonable observations made from appropriate theory and research. Reasonable writing and expression of arguments. Good critique examines the relevant issues and makes good observations from appropriate theory and research. Good writing and expression of arguments. A very good critique considered all the relevant issues and made important observations made from appropriate theory and research. Very good writing and expression of arguments. Fully considered all the relevant issues and made significant observations made from appropriate theory and research. Excellent writing and expression of arguments. /4 Correct academic writing style used, including correct spelling, grammar and punctuation Needs more sentence variety. Little or no thought given to diction. Tone or language is conversational. Contains much informal language. Uses “I” or “you.” Contains many examples of unclear or awkward phrasing. Needs more sentence variety. Attention needed with diction. Contains informal language or conversational tone, or uses “I” or “you.” Unclear or awkward sentence phrasing. Sentence variety is adequate. Tone is appropriate. Diction is clear, but could be more effective. Language is academic, and writing is clear and effective. Very little or no unclear or awkward phrasing. Sentence variety is effective and good. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is appropriate and effective. Language is academic. Writing is clear, and concise. Sentence variety is effective and sophisticated. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is sophisticated and effective. Language is academic. Writing is clear, concise, and strong. /4 Format of answer consistent with question requirements and KBS guidelines No efforts made to follow submission and editing, spacing, etc requirements. Meets most editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. Some requirements not met. Meets editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. Meets almost all editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. Meets all editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing requirements. /3 In-text referencing and reference list follows Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines Inappropriate referencing. Not in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Reasonably appropriate referencing, generally in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Good referencing, largely inline with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Very good referencing, 100% in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. Excellent/appropriate referencing, 100% in-line with requirements of Harvard style and consistent with KBS guidelines. /3 Word count is within + / - 10% of requirement Word count is within + / - more than 15% of requirement Word count is within + / - 15% of requirement Word count is within + / - 10% of requirement Word count is within + / - 5% of requirement Word count is within + / - 0% of requirement /2COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B. Assessment Marking Rubric Comments: /80 /20 /100