Explain how successful you think Brewdog is, and discuss the strategic reasons behind that success.
Is there any useful research tool available to me?
Apart from the excellent Bloomberg Suite in CCE1, we also recommend using the FAME Database (Financial Analysis Made Easy) which is available to Northumbria students via the Library’s NORA Service. Our library pays an annual subscription for this facility. The following should help get you started:
Enter “Financial Analysis Made Easy” as a search term in NORA.
Select the database.
Search on the company name and you will find that initially the companies are local to the user’s IP. (i.e. UK firms if you are in Newcastle). However, you can navigate your way upwards through to the parent companies. This will probably take you to a sister database called OSIRIS. Our subscription covers this as well. Look for the Parent Organisation in FAME (often shown as “INC.” for US Companies, and this should give you a clickable link into OSIRIS (the sister database).
You can investigate the financials of the Corporate (top) Level of your target company. Either stay at that level for all of your analysis, or step down to a particular Division (or SBU).
Benchmarking data can be seen by configuring the view for “Peer Report”. For very large group companies the Peer Report returns of FAME/OSIRIS may be much more useful at the Divisional (SBU) level (so look at both).
The AVC + VRIN (for Section 4) can be done at Corp or Divisional (SBU) level.
Leadership information will inevitably be at the Corporate Level (so you need to show linkage if you chose to analyse mainly at the SBU level, i.e. explain how Corporate Leadership impinges on the chosen Division).
In Section 6 you will have to choose a strategic topic for deeper analysis (6A Business Competitive Strategy is at the SBU level, the other four choices, 6B, 6C, 6D, 6E are probably more appropriate at Corporate Level).
Make your recommendations in Section 7 (e.g. by using SAFe criteria for your evaluation). Don’t forget to comment about Sustainability. Underpin your recommendations with reference to your analysis and evidence in previous sections (by page number).
If you have focused upon an SBU (Division), make sure that your recommendations will be acceptable to other divisions of the corporation.
Remember, that although this is a powerful research tool, it is focused on financial metrics. In this module we are exploring how too narrow a viewpoint of business success can be a strategic mistake! What other measures should be considered to get a balanced view, and how are academics arguing about this?
3. If the organisation is a huge multinational can I analyse just one SBU / Division?
Yes.
The best approach is to concentrate on one Division (or Strategic Business Unit) this could be trading internationally in one set of goods or services. Please remember that this assignment must have multiple connections between sections. This means that you must link the Leadership to your analysis. This inevitably means analysis of the top echelon of the organisation (i.e. Corporate Level). So your recommendations for the company can be devoted to one division (SBU), but there must be linkage to the Leadership in your analysis. If you’re adopting this approach, your AVC only needs to be detailed at the Strategic Business Unit (SBU) or Divisional level, but should also make reference to the rest of the company (without any detail). This makes the AVC simpler (with off-page arrows suggesting ‘more over there’, but unspecified and not shown). Remember it is the locations of Core Capability that really need to be shown on the AVC the rest is just providing relational background.
You must also make sure that your recommendation is not “sub-optimal“, i.e., it would make enormous sense for the SBU, but it would be disruptive or unacceptable to the rest of the company. Remember that you have additional stakeholders to consider if you recommend at the SBU level … the Senior Management of each of the other SBUs!
If the organisation is a huge multinational can I analyse its operation in just one country?
No.
This is very unwise for a large multi-national business or global corporation.
We have most of the concerns mentioned in Q.5 above (like Leadership-Strategy linkage and sub-optimal solutions), but also it could bring in additional factors if the country in question is relatively unique. For instance, we suggest that you use the textbook’s framework of Suitability, Acceptance and Feasibility for evaluating your strategic recommendations. This could get very complex if you are trying to analyse at the National Level (where resistance could also be applied from other parts of the international organisation or there are local specific issues like BREXIT which will not be a major concern for a huge organisation with a global reach).
There will probably be more scope for your strategic analysis if you focus on the International Level for the entire organisation or a specific Division (or SBU) of a Corporation operating in the majority of countries.
Far better to base your analysis on say the international operations of just the Robotics Division of Corporation X (rather than how the Corporation X does business in Country Y.)
Analysing a New Division (SBU)
It is perfectly feasible to address what is effectively a “start-up division” of a corporate. You just have to be a bit more comfortable with a higher level of ambiguity and speculation.
You must keep the reader informed of when you are stepping up to the corporate level to make a point. The focus of your analysis is on the new emerging division, but you will need to hop between corporate and divisional level a bit more than usual.
This exercise is easier than trying to conduct this type of analysis on a brand-new start- up. The corporation will probably have certain competences, resources and capabilities that can be deployed into a new division. The marketplace might be new, but the corporation with a significant dynamic capability might be able to make a ‘power move’ from an almost standing start.
The following is a breakdown of some of the tactics you need to employ for each section of the assignment …
Section Two – Measures
It is OK to just state that there are no past official figures available for the division. You could state the corporate financials as an overview. Don’t attempt finish this section until you have got to section 7 Recommendations. You may well be able to suggest one or more key measures for a division about to compete in a sector new to the corporation. There may be some clues with the existing players regarding this, but don’t make this all about them. Rather than concentrating on competitors, focus on speculative but informed articles about this emerging situation in the corporation. This way you can demonstrate your ability to purposefully measure an emerging situation for a corporation. You might find that developing a Strategy Canvas for players in this marketplace might help to consolidate some strong recommendations about how the new division might compete effectively …
Section Three – Reasons for Success
In this section you need to keep the reader aware of where you are analysing. Some of this will be devoted to the corporation, and some of this can come from expert opinion considering the likely success factors for this new division. Here you are looking to collect reasons for success at the corporation (as a whole) that can be marshalled and channelled towards their new division.
A similar situation that occurred in the past happened at Sony. In the 1990s they were suddenly able to enter and compete most effectively in the games console market. This is now a celebrated example of Dynamic Capability. Sony had all the constituent parts for a successful and potent market entry.
Consider whether all the necessary precursors exist in your corporation(?). Again, don’t try to finish this section until you have reached section 7 recommendations. At
the very least you will probably want to reorder the subsections (3.1, 3.2, 3.3, etc) to support your analysis in section 4 and your recommendations in section 7.
Section Four – AVC-VRIN
Here you’re going to have to imagine the Adapted Value Chain (AVC) for this division going forward. Some of the clues will come from the existing competitors in this marketplace like Netflix. However, do look carefully at articles suggesting how this is going to be constructed, because it might not be a carbon copy of the major competitors. Has your corporation got their own “Distinct way of doing things”? or are they accomplished innovators? You’ll probably be able to find opinions about this in the third party press.
The VRIN candidate factors should emerge from your research about the corporation and the speculative press articles about this new division. Is there something that the corporation is particularly noted to be good doing that can be applied here?
Don’t forget to synthesise the AVC with the VRIN (probably by means of an additional rightmost column in the VRIN Table “AVC location” which carries the requisites AVC codes).
Section Five – Leadership
Make the reader aware that you are conducting this analysis at the top corporate level. You are analysing the current leader (and if he or she is a recent recruit, then you might be looking at the legacy of the former leader). How does this leadership style impinge upon this fledgling division? Has the leader had to stand down from any other positions to prevent a conflict of interest? Is this the “pet project” of this particular leader? Will the leader’s ‘success’ be inextricably linked to the fortunes of this new division?
Section Six – Focus Issue Choice
Your choice here, but most of these will have to be somewhat speculative.
Business Level Strategy (6A) you will need to speculate on what basis your corporation will be competing with existing players in the marketplace. Would a Strategy Canvas help with the word count?
International Strategy (6B) … whether you choose this or not will probably depend upon here is going to be a gradual internationalisation for this division.
Innovation Strategy (6C) how might corporate innovation methods be carried into the new division. Could it impinge upon the market entry process? Could the corporation enter the market with a Blue Ocean strategy (if, so why not use a Strategy Canvas?). Don’t forget we are talking about product, process and business model innovation (why not refer back to your AVC which should reflect this).
Collaboration Strategy (6D) will have to be at the corporate level (how might M&As or Joint Ventures affect the new division?).
Sustainability Strategy (6E) can the division contribute to or lead the way on sustainability for the corporation?
Section Seven – Strategic Recommendations
Having built the metaphorical pyramid you are now in a position to deploy your argument making frequent referrals back by page number. Don’t forget that it may be necessary to make some adjustments in the previous sections to strengthen your argument. If nothing else make sure that you are mentioning the key facts first in each section. Yes, this analysis has been somewhat speculative, but it is based upon available facts and the opinions coming from relatively authoritative sources. Where you have had to use a questionable source you have made the reader aware of your misgivings (perhaps even suggested that the reader should be alert for future news on that particular subject; e.g. speculation surrounding a possible merger, acquisition or planned legislation).
Now you can write your Introduction in less than 100 words. Name the corporation, specify the division and tell the reader why it is worth their time reading this valuable document!
6. Can I use Appendices?
No.
Any material you put into an appendix will not be marked. Notably, if you put your VRIN or AVC into an appendix you will probably fail this module!
7. Will we be submitting to TurnItIn?
Yes.
There is no printed assignment hand in for this module. Please make sure that you will be able to submit on-line in May 2020.
8. Is the file type and filename format important?
Yes.
We strongly recommend that you convert Word files to PDF before submitting to FINAL. Why? This is because TurnItIn automatically converts all Word files to PDF.
If you convert the file to PDF first, you can then examine it in a PDF Viewer before submitting it as a PDF.
Please check before submitting that all of your diagrams (like AVC and VRIN) are still correctly shown. Sometimes a PDF conversion can make them unreadable!
We would also prefer you to use the following filename format:
SM9636__.PDF
IF the Company Codes were: ABC, DEF and GHJ *
e.g. SM9636_20001234_ABC.pdf (Student 20001234 wrote about company ABC).
* See the SM9636 AY2019-20 SEM1 SM9636 Company Checklist for actual codes.
9. Can I use insider information?
No.
Even if you have worked for the chosen company in the past (or you have a friend or relative in that situation), you cannot cite (or make any use of) material that is not in the
public domain. We expect you to analyse as an outsider.
10. Is Section Three concerned with MY reasons for the company’s success?
No.
Section Three is your collection of reasons given by third party experts and commentators. It is as though you are a curator of a museum laying out exhibits for display. Separate the reasons found into numbered sub-headings that make it easy for the reader to assimilate …
Here is a “fake” example …
3. SIX TO TEN REASONS FOR THE COMPANY’S BUSINESS SUCCESS
1 Extensive Intellectual Property Rights
˂your text explaining with sources cited …˃
3.2 On-line Platform Ownership
˂your text explaining with sources cited …˃
3.3 Strategic Alliance with Key Competitor
˂your text explaining with sources cited …˃ etc., etc., to 3.6 and beyond(?)
You do not have to write very much under each sub-heading, just enough to clarify what is suggested and the citation of where you collected this source. This will be just a few lines. When you have reached Section 7 and formulated recommendation(s) you can refer back (by page number or sub-section) to any of these reasons that support your argument.
Perhaps you should then re-order the sub-headings with those that you are using for support stated first … why? Well, you are trying to convince the reader, so why not put those reasons (that are important to your argument) first!
11. In the Assessment Brief you mention the use of double quotes?
This happened to be a peculiarity of the TurnItIn software (when we last checked): If you use ….
“Core rigidities are the flip side of core capabilities. They are not neutral; these deeply embedded knowledge sets actively create problems”, (Leonard-Barton, 1992, p.118).
… then TurnItIn ignores it for Plagiarism (by SM9636 TurnItIn Filter Settings). Whereas …
‘Core rigidities are the flip side of core capabilities. They are not neutral; these deeply embedded knowledge sets actively create problems’, (Leonard-Barton, 1992, p.118).
… gets cited against anyone else who has used it (including Dorothy Leonard-Barton herself …).
Some writers reserve the double quotes for the spoken word, but unfortunately this
distinction is lost on TurnItIn*.
*This semester we have the new TurnItIn LTI 1.3 which may have fixed this bug.
12. I am running out of word count … what can I do?
This is a common problem (but the word count is an intrinsic part of the assessment). Here are some suggestions of where you might be able to recover some words in SM9636.
Have a look at your Section 4. Have you wasted too many words on a textual description of your Adapted Value Chain (AVC)? If the logic of the diagram is obvious, there is no need to repeat it in words.
Have you described theory to the reader? You can assume that your marker knows the origins of the theory. We just want to read how you have used it (and cited its usage). We do not need long explanations of say, “core competence”; just cite the key authors (e.g. Prahalad & Hamel, 1989).
You do not need to display a blank Porter’s Generic Value Chain if you have created an Adapted Value Chain (AVC); we are not interested in its history or lineage.
Refer back by page number to earlier analysis. Do not repeat it in full in your recommendations, e.g.:
“As was identified in these activity sets in the AVC (p.5) and analysed in VRIN (p.7) this SCA can underpin this strategic recommendation.”
or …
“As mentioned previously, key authors have identified this as a reason for success (p.3); however the AVC-VRIN analysis (pp.8-10) also supports …”
We often encounter excellent work that “runs out of steam” in Section 7 because you have not left enough words for the suggestions in your recommendation. Make sure that you are apportioning the word count wisely. Remember Section 7 is worth 20% of marks in SM9636.
13. You have frequently mentioned that we should keep our own opinions out of sections 2-6 and then express them as a strategic recommendation in section 7; shouldn’t we justify throughout?
No.
What we are wanting you to avoid is an unsupported strategic recommendation. You can only make a fully-supported strategic recommendation after presenting all of your evidence and analysis in sections 2 to 6. In section 7, you support your recommendation by referring back to evidence or analysis previously made (by page number). In this way you are satisfying both requirements.
In Section 2 – 6, it is therefore important that you are not too dogmatic in any personal statement concerning evidence or analysis. For instance, in section three you mentioned that one authoritative source is making a strategic suggestion concerning the company and you write that this is a big mistake (in your opinion). It is likely that you will receive feedback from the marker “How do you know this?”, “How can you support such an argument?”, or “You should put your suggestions into Section 7”.
14. Title and Visual Style for the Assignment?
We are not giving any additional marks for visual presentation, so please don’t devote too much time to this. A logo on the front page is more than enough. You can give a title phrase to the report such as “Future Business Success at Company X” or similar. Make it consistent with the Introduction (100 words).
