F_Bus Individual Report (40%)

Submission Deadline: Midnight, 23:59, Sunday 1st December 2019

You will need to choose a company from the list below.

List of Companies

John Lewis Arcadia group

Dyson UK Merlin Entertainment

Virgin Atlantic Unilever

NB: Some of the above companies have subsidiaries, so take care in your research to ensure you focus on one

particular area.

You are required to conduct an analysis of environmental factors relevant to your chosen company and

how the company responds to these environmental factors, which may be subject to change.

You will be expected to conduct external environmental analysis (PEST), Micro analysis (Customers,

competitors and suppliers analysis) and internal analysis (SWOT).

Based on the SWOT analysis, you are expected to make recommendations for the company.

The report will demonstrate your understanding of the PEST, Micro analysis and SWOT. You will apply the

models to evaluate the company and present an analysis making reference to both internal and external

factors. The learning outcomes to be assessed are:

• Recognise and evaluate the general objectives of business and the context in which it operates

• Discuss the nature, characteristics, advantages and disadvantages of different forms of business and

organisational structure

• Appreciate how effective development of the marketing process and be used as a source of competitive

advantages

2

The Report Structure

-You are required to provide a report that includes the following sections:

1. Executive Summary

The main focus of the summary is to explain the purpose of the report, key findings and main recommendations. Keep it very short. The summary should briefly introduce the target company. The suggested format is as follows:

1.1 Background: a brief paragraph introducing the target company and its products. Ensure you include brief

discussions of the structure, sector and nature of the business.

1.2 Key findings: a brief summary (not bullet points) of the key strengths and weaknesses that have emerged from

your report, as well as opportunities and threats.

1.3 Main Recommendations: a summary of the main recommendations based on the analysis.

It is recommended that you do not complete points 1.2 and 1.3 until you have completed the whole report.

2. The Macro External Environment Analysis (PEST)

-Identify and analyse the macro external environment using PEST analysis.

PEST analysis looks into environmental forces that influence the company or its products. It is exploring the impact

of environmental forces (Political, Economic, Social, and Technological) on the company. See the figure below.

The importance of each force may vary from company to company. You need to discuss the relative impact of

different environmental forces and how they influence the company.

3. The Micro External Environment Analysis

This section should include assessment and analysis of the relevant micro external environmental forces (for example,

customers, market intermediaries, suppliers, the public and competitors).

3

4. The Internal Environment Analysis (SWOT)

This section will demonstrate analysis of relevant internal environmental factors which have impact on the

company’s advantage.

5. Conclusions

Your conclusions should be brief, and to the point, following on from the analysis and evaluation you have presented

in the main body. You should NOT be introducing any new facts or evidence at this stage. It is acceptable to present

an argument based on the evidence and the conclusions you draw from it.

6. Recommendations

You are expected to make recommendations for your company, based on your evaluation and conclusions, which

you think will help it to succeed in the context of the current environment.

7. References

You are expected to follow American Psychological Association (APA) referencing guide. See F_Bus teaching

materials on MOLE.

Submission Instructions

 The report should be between 2,200-2,500 words, excluding references, bibliography and any table.

 The report should be word-processed using font 12 with 1.5-line spacing.

 The list of references should reflect a variety of sources. 

 The USIC Referencing Guide (APA) must be used. Relevant web sites can be used .

 You SHOULD NOT use UK Essays or Wikipedia as a source.

 You MUST submit the Report (Word Format) through Turnitin by midnight, 23:59, Sunday 1st

December, 2019

4

Distribution of Marks and Marking Criteria

Sections Marks

Summary

 Background  Key findings  Main Recommendations

10

Environmental Analysis

 Macro external environmental scanning – (25%)  Micro external environmental scanning – (15%)

40

SWOT and Recommendations

 Internal environmental scanning and SWOT – (30%)  Conclusion and Recommendations – (10%)

40

Structure (Sections of the report)

 Organisation: PEE Structure, linking words, etc.  Use of Language  Referencing: APA Referencing Guide

10

Total marks for individual report 100

6

Executive summary (10 marks) Environmental analysis (40 marks) SWOT, Conclusions and recommendations (40 marks) Structure and presentation (10 marks)

80% + A concise and succinct summary that is attention-grabbing for the reader, propelling them to read the remainder of the report. Key points are not simply a repetition of the report text. The summary uses appropriate subject based language. Recommendations are well- articulated and link explicitly and coherently to the key findings.

A full and comprehensive picture of the macro, micro and internal environment is created identifying important and relevant factors that critically affect the performance of the company or success of the product. Work is well-researched and appropriately substantiated by relevant academic sources and where information is not available this is made clear and an explanation provided.

The SWOT analysis fully explores and identifies the impact of these forces on the company and is presented as an integrated element of this section of the report. All data is critically evaluated and arguments are fully developed and presented in a coherent manner.

Conclusions are logical and concisely expressed. No new points are introduced.

Recommendations are well articulated, deliberately prioritised and succinct. They correlate explicitly to the analysis and evaluation of environmental forces. Recommendations address the need for change and/or maintenance of the status quo as appropriate, with explanation.

Citations and referencing are consistent and accurate and comply with the USIC Referencing Guide. All in- text citations are included in the Reference list. There is evidence of exceptionally effective academic skills and written and visual communication appropriate to the level of task, audience and discipline. Very well organised report with clear division into relevant sections in logical and coherent sequence. All headings accurately signal the section content.

70-79%

A stimulating summary that is concise and written clearly in a way that encourages the reader to continue to the remainder of the report. Key findings are recorded in a logical sequence, using appropriate subject based language. Recommendations are explicitly associated with the findings.

A comprehensive picture of the macro,

micro and internal environment is created identifying a majority of relevant factors that critically affect the performance of the company or success of the product. Work is well-researched and appropriately substantiated by relevant academic sources and where information is not available this is made clear and an explanation provided

The SWOT analysis identifies and discusses the impact of these forces on the company and is interwoven in the investigation of environmental forces. All data is critically evaluated and arguments are well-developed and presented in a coherent manner.

Conclusions are logical and clearly expressed. No new points are introduced.

Recommendations are well articulated, indicate some consideration of priority and are succinct. They correlate well to the analysis and evaluation of environmental forces. Recommendations address the need for change and/or maintenance of the status quo as appropriate, with explanation.

Citations and referencing are consistent and accurate and comply with the USIC Referencing Guide. All in- text citations are included in the Reference list. Evidence of effective academic skills, writing style and register. Consideration of audience.

Very well organised report with clear division into relevant sections in logical and coherence sequence. All headings accurately signal the section content.

7

Executive summary (10 marks) Environmental analysis (40 marks) SWOT, Conclusions and recommendations (40 marks) Structure and presentation (10 marks)

60-69% Although a little discursive the executive summary motivates the reader to continue. The summary of findings is complete and presented clearly, using appropriate subject based language. Recommendations are easily understood and connect well with the evaluation.

A wide-ranging picture of the macro, micro and internal environment is created covering a good range of factors that critically affect the performance of the company or success of the product. There is evidence of thorough research substantiated by relevant academic sources. Where information is not available this is made clear.

The SWOT analysis identifies the impact of these forces on the company and is included in the investigation of environmental forces. A good attempt has been made to analyse and evaluate information. The evaluation is well argued with appropriate evidence and conclusions given.

Conclusions are clearly expressed. No new points are introduced.

Recommendations are well articulated, and show a reasonable attempt at identifying priority. Recommendations are related to the analysis and evaluation of environmental forces. Recommendations primarily address a need for change.

Citations and referencing follow the USIC Referencing Guide with minimal error. All in-text citations may not be included in the Reference list. Good application of communication skills. Verbal and written communication demonstrates ability to articulate and present understanding of subject knowledge well. Uses language and academic style appropriate to the task. The prescribed format has been followed.

50-59%

The executive summary is discursive but interesting. The summary is complete, incorporating all the key findings included in the main body of the report. Language is generally appropriate to subject. Wording of the recommendations provides a link to the findings.

A broad picture of the macro, micro and internal environment is created covering a sufficient range of factors that critically affect the performance of the company or success of the product to facilitate analysis. There is evidence of research substantiated by relevant academic sources. A lack of information may not be made explicit.

The SWOT analysis notes the impact of these forces on the company and is included in the investigation of environmental forces. Good understanding of the model has enabled the student to attempt analysis and evaluation of the information.

Conclusions are evidently drawn from the analysis and evaluation but may not be expressed succinctly. Recommendations are appropriate and show understanding of the context. They can be mapped to elements of the analysis but reflect a simplistic level of evaluation.

Citations and referencing follow the USIC Referencing Guide with some errors. Some in-text citations may be missing from the Reference list.

Overall, academic practice shows ability to communicate reliably. The prescribed format has been broadly followed.

8

Executive summary (10 marks) Environmental analysis (40 marks) SWOT, Conclusions and recommendations (40 marks) Structure and presentation (10 marks)

40-49% The executive summary includes all structural elements. Language is generally appropriate to subject. Key findings may not comprehensively reflect the findings but are almost complete. The relationship between the recommendations and findings is evident but not made explicit.

A simple picture of the macro, micro and internal environment is offered covering a range of factors that affect the performance of the company or success of the product. There is evidence of enough research to meet the minimum requirements for range of sources. A lack of information may not be made explicit.

The SWOT analysis notes the impact of these forces on the company but may be included as a distinct section. Sufficient understanding of the model is demonstrated to attempt basic analysis of the information. Conclusions are present but are limited by the level of analysis and evaluation. Recommendations are suitable and show sufficient understanding of the context.

Citations and referencing generally follow the USIC Referencing Guide but may be inconsistent despite an understanding of conventions. Quality of writing is sufficient to articulate intention and understanding. The prescribed format has been broadly followed.

Below

30-39%

(Fail)

The executive summary does not follow the required format. Language lacks clarity and does not provide interest to the reader. The summary of findings is inadequate and rambling. Recommendations are minimal and bear little relationship to the findings.

A minimal identification of environmental factors most of which are irrelevant. There is little evidence of research which is manifested in personal opinion or unsubstantiated statements. Arguments are weak and underdeveloped. There is little analysis and no evaluation.

Conclusions are simplistic and some new information may be included. Recommendations may be weak, missing or irrelevant.

There are many errors in citations and referencing which suggest a lack of understanding of the principles and conventions of academic practice. A large majority of the in-text citations are missing in the final references. Final references are not uniform. There are many omissions, errors and mistakes. The prescribed format has been loosely followed.

0 – 29% No reasonable effort has been made to follow guidance. The summary is incoherent, reflecting inadequate engagement with the task. Few or no recommendations are included.

Absent, confused or incorrect evaluation or interpretation. Does not explore ideas or information. No evidence of analysis. Unsubstantiated opinions.

Conclusion repeats earlier content or is missing. Recommendations are weak, missing or irrelevant.

There is a significant lack of understanding of the principles and conventions of academic practice. Little or no attempt has been made to comply with the USIC Referencing Guide. There is a lack of structure to the report which detracts from the content.