Assessment Task Description Assessment 1: Individual Assignment Weighting: 20% Date due: Week 7 Word limit: 1,500 words Purpose: to assess the following Learning Outcomes: a.Examine contemporary...

Assessment Task Description Assessment 1: Individual Assignment Weighting: 20% Date due: Week 7 Word limit: 1,500 words Purpose: to assess the following Learning Outcomes: a.Examine contemporary issues faced by managers in different levels of an organisation b.Explain key management theories that inform contemporary practices c.Research, summarise and critically analyse management issues and justify recommendations based on new knowledge of management theories d.Identify and evaluate social responsibility and ethical issues in business situations Your task: Analyse Case 7 Harley‐Davidson, Inc. in 2018 from Grant (2018), answering the following questions: 1.What are the key features of Harley‐Davidson’s external environment? 2.What are Harley‐Davidson’s strategic resources? 3.Why is Harley‐Davidson competitive in this environment? 4.What do you recommend? Report structure: • Title page: name of the case, student name, date of submission • Executive Summary: key findings • Table of Contents: with section numbers and headings • Introduction: summarise the case and point out the important case facts • Key Management Challenge: identify the symptoms and problems • Case Analysis: identify and apply relevant management theories and address root causes of identified issues • Recommendations: deriving from the above analysis • Full 'in-text' referencing: citing at least three academic sources in addition to your text book • Reference list: using the A.P.A. referencing style Submission: All work must be submitted via Turnitin by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page. The assignment must be in Ms Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using APA referencing style. The final report submission needs to be submitted before the due date. This is an individual assignment, and only one submission is allowed. If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted. You must submit this application three working days prior to the due date of the assignment. Marking criteria: Marking criteria is shown in following table. Marks are allocated as follows: Marking Rubric Criteria/ GradesHigh Distinction (HD) [Excellent] 80-100%Distinction (D) [Very Good] 70%-79%Credit (C) [Good] 60%-69%Pass (P) [Satisfactory] 50%-59%Fail (N) [Unsatisfactory] Criteria 1: Introduction (10%)Excellent, concise and well constructed assessment of the company’s need for the report, this type of analysis and how it will be conducted. May include reference to the literature. Brief and well written explanation of the natural business, purpose of the assignment and what is to follow in the report. Good overview of the company and outline of the assignment or discussion of its purpose. Brief introduction to the organisation/or the assignment. No introduction or did not introduce the purpose of the assignment. Criteria 2: Key features of external environment (20%) Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and apply the external environment analysis frameworks discussed in the unit. Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically but did not make extensive use of external environment analysis frameworks discussed in the unit. Demonstrated ability to think critically and applied some of the external environment analysis frameworks discussed in the unit. Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not completely use external environment analysis frameworks discussed in the unit. Did not demonstrate ability to think critically or appropriately apply the external environment analysis frameworks discussed in the unit. Criteria 3: Strategic resources (20%)Thorough analysis of evidence in case using the VIRO framework and definitions of strategic resources presented in the unit. Argument is mostly consistent with good reference to key points in proceeding analysis and reference to the literature.Argument is mostly consistent with some reference refence to key points in proceeding analysis, but limited or no reference to the literature. Passable argument with little or no reference refence to key points in proceeding analysis and no reference to the literature. Does not identify any justified arguments. Criteria 4: Why company is competitive in this environment (15%) Discussion is based on preceding analysis, supported by the literature, clear and easy to follow with strong arguments. Argument is mostly consistent with good reference to key points in proceeding analysis and reference to the literature.Argument is mostly consistent with some reference refence to key points in proceeding analysis, but limited or no reference to the literature. Passable argument with little or no reference refence to key points in proceeding analysis and no reference to the literature. Argument is confused and disjointed. Criteria 5: Recommendations (15%)At least three recommendations which compared the external environment and the resource is identified too creatively argue appropriate improvement actions at the strategic level. One or more solid recommendations which are argued, to some extent to both the internal and external environments. Several good recommendations which relate adequately to either the resource is or the external environment.Logical recommendations, but little or no supporting argument based on the preceding analysis No recommendations or recommendations with no connection to previous analysis. Criteria 6: Conclusion (10%)Thoughtful and constructive extension to recommendations Summary of key recommendations and findings with some interconnecting observations. Good summary of key recommendations and findings. Brief summary of key recommendations. Conclusion missing or not adding any value to report. Criteria 1: Referencing (10%)Clear style with excellent range of references and sources.Clear referencing style Generally good referencing style/ limited references Some referencing inconsistencies/ few references Lacks consistency with significant errors/ no references