Extenuating Circumstances are circumstances which: ? impair your examination performance in assessment or reassessment, or ? prevent you from attending for assessment or reassessment, or ? prevent you from submitting assessed or reassessed work by the scheduled date You will need to retrieve this assignment if any of the following occur during the semester: You fail to achieve 50% for this assignment:For your retrieval assessment you should: Review events that relate to Ubers operations in Great Britain that have occurred since the development of the case study (October 2017) and using your findings in conjunction with the case study itself, produce a strategic report for

Presentation: (10%) You are expected to submit work that follows a clear and logical structure, is written in correct English that is easy for the reader to follow, and is professionally laid out, with page numbers and numbered sections. Appropriate and (better still) imaginative use of tables and figures will enhance your mark. Persistent poor spelling, inappropriate vocabulary and other avoidable errors, such as a poor or missing Executive Summary, will be penalised. If the English is too poor to be understood, as typically happens when translation software has been used, the mark under this heading will be zero, and the marks for other sections may also be affected.

Appraisal of the organisation’s strategy: (40%) You are expected to use concepts from the module, such as strategic resources and capabilities, business model canvas and the value chain to analyse the strategy being followed by the firm you are examining. You may also use relevant theory to analyse the relationship of Uber to the rest of the Group (you are not required to examine the Group’s corporate-level strategy). You should also appraise the strategy, for example by applying the VRIN framework to its resources and capabilities, and/or by assessing the extent to which its strategy enables it to meet the key industry success factors, or to which its businesses (if it has more than one) are related or offer synergies.

For a grade of 50-59% you are likely to have employed some relevant theory. However there are likely to be gaps in your argument. You may have executed a thorough piece of analysis but not drawn out the implications. There may be some gaps in your understanding of it, shown by errors in your use of the terminology. Or you may have reached a plausible and soundly argued set of conclusions but used no theory at all. For a grade of 40-49% you are likely to have shown a basic understanding of the easier elements of theory, such as PEST, but there will be errors in your use of the more difficult elements. For example, you may have confused the firm with its environment. You are unlikely to have considered the implications of your analysis for the future of the industry. Your conclusions are likely to have little support from analysis or factual evidence.

For a grade of 60-69% you will have employed the relevant theory correctly, and grounded your conclusions in the factual evidence. Your conclusions may lack the insight expected of a distinction-level answer or may not explore the impact of emerging trends.

Specification: For a mark of 70% or better under this section, we should be able to see clear evidence that you have deployed the full range of relevant theory and drawn relevant, insightful conclusions that are solidly grounded in the factual evidence. The theory will have been correctly employed, and you will have clearly deduced what the key success factors in the industry are likely to be in the light of emerging trends in the environment.

You should move beyond rudimentary techniques such as PEST(LE). While PEST(LE) is an acceptable tool, it is only the beginning of your analysis. If that is the only theory you use in this section, you should not expect better than 45%, and may well end up with a mark of less than 40%.

Do not make this section too long. It’s only about 1/4 of the marks – so it should only be 1/4 of the report. The theory must be applied. If you do no more than reproduce relevant theory without applying it to the company you are studying, you can expect no more than 15% of the available marks. You are expected to produce your own analysis and to draw your own conclusions. If your conclusions are drawn entirely from what you have read from secondary sources, then you cannot expect more than 45% of the marks for this section, however thorough and well-referenced those sources may be. We want to know what you think – and why you think it.

Analysis of the organisation’s business environment and of industry survival and success factors: (20%) You are expected to use theory from the module, particularly the Porter 5 forces and PEST(LE), to analyse the business environment, assess the impact of emerging trends from the macro-environment, and draw out the implications for survival and success in the future. If you can find and use relevant theory from sources other than the module textbooks, this will enhance your grade – but the theory base here is mature, so that new theoretical insights are likely to be hard to find.

Please find attached word file. 1 Uber case study 2 Assignment instructions as per lecturer 3 BT case study example - its just an example not to be followed exactly but lecturer is keen how good essay should look like in structuring, easy language etc. Need written essay not less than 3000 words, excluding executive summary. Please check for plagiarism report as well. Please Note: Strictly follow assignment instructions attached here.