CMI 3410 Competing in the Digital Economy 2010-11

Assignment – INDIVIDUAL work – weighting: 100%

1. Schedule

Blcok Week 10: Day 5 03/12/10 Hand out assignment

THURSDAY 23/12/10 Hand in Assignment (via Digital
Dropbox on Blackboard)

FRIDAY 21/01/11 Hand back Assignment

Grades/ feedback via Blackboard's
Grademark (2 weeks early)
NOTE: Failure to submit e-copy by Digital Dropbox on or before the due date will
result in Passing work being capped at 40% as LATE WORK. ALL work must be
submitted to TurnItIn for similarity-checking by each student.

2. Task

The tasks for this assessment require the application of the ideas developed in the module to
an analysis of Dell. The case study data should be supplemented with other secondary data as
required, as Dell's strategy has moved on and/or has the potential to move on from the
published case study data provided with this Assignment.

Assignment Questions/Tasks

(a) Using appropriate frameworks, analyse Dell's competitive environment and its business
model and business/IS/IT strategic initiatives. (60% of the marks)

(b) Many authors over the years have attempted to conceptualise the notion of a ‘customer
journey’ or ‘customer activity cycle’ (e.g. Ives & Learmonth, Vandermerwe, Feeny, and
Sawhney). Critically evaluate the utility of this concept and then use it to help Dell to evaluate
its current offerings and the identification of new opportunities in its target markets. (20% of
the marks)

(c) In your opinion, based on your analysis (with supporting evidence), what are Dell's core
competencies and how unique and sustainable are they? (10% of the marks)

(d) Based upon the above analyses and your interpretation of the strategic issues facing Dell,
what advice and recommendations would you give the CEO of Dell for the future? (10% of the
marks)

(3500 words maximum for the 4 tasks)

Harvard Referencing required throughout (guides handed out during Induction Week - also e-
copy in the Assignment folder).

3. Guidelines

Your assignment will be assessed for its coherence and quality in directly addressing the
questions set. Generalised coverage will attract few marks, whereas focus and critical review
will attract high marks. At this level we are expecting critical analysis, NOT description.

We expect to see evidence of wider reading, including books, journal articles for more up-to-
date, research-related material and other information sources. Although you may find the
Internet useful, do not expect to find all the information you require there, and reference the
material that evidences your argument. The material provided to you in the teaching sessions
represents a ‘jump–off point’ for your own research. We do not expect verbatim repetition of
this material in your assignment. You must perform your own reading, research, organisation
and critical analysis of your material, using some of the tools you have put into practice during
the Block Week.

Your work must be word-processed and spell-checked and you must include full references to
books and articles that you have used in the Harvard Style.

Aside from the basic considerations of legibility, grammar, structure, and presentation, emphasis
in assessing your written work at Masters Degree level will be placed on your demonstration of:

• Evidence of information gathering/research

• Evidence of critical analysis and an understanding of the issues involved
• Logical development of your analysis and arguments
• Originality of analysis
• Well-argued analysis of Dell's strategy with equally well-argued recommendations for the
company to consider in its strategic decision-making processes.

Do not forget that breaking your work down into manageable sections in advance of the
submission date is much more likely to lead to a quality answer than leaving your work until
the last minute; also, it helps to discuss your progress with your tutors in the advertised
Assignment Support Sessions over the next two weeks.

(customer activity cycle

http://blog.kitetail.com/2009/05/05/from-idea-to-business-concept-blueprint-in-five-steps/

From idea to business concept blueprint in five steps

Copyright © 2006-2010 KiteTail Consulting, LLC

4. Assessment Grading Criteria

Mark band: A (70+ % )

An Excellent or outstanding performance consistent with the
Description:
commendation of the term ‘distinction’.
• Demonstrates analysis, judgement and a thorough understanding,
through a penetrating review and critical analysis of the relevant issues
involved in studying business models and strategy. Evidence of an in-
depth understanding of theoretical as well as practical issues relevant to
the study and management of business/IS/IT strategic alignment.
• Evidence of extensive reading of relevant research papers, texts and
journals.
• Constructively challenges current thinking in the business model literature
base.
• Identifies and fully utilises the appropriate conceptual frameworks, and
concepts that are rigorously and critically applied to the case study
Criteria:
organisation.
• High degree of rigour, coherence and originality of analysis and discussion
of results, inferences, and implications for the case study organisation.
• The conclusions and recommendations are original, detailed, supported
by the analysis and clearly address the brief, reflecting previous
discussions by pulling together, in a cohesive manner, all the arguments
developed throughout the assignment
• Presented with great clarity and lucidity of prose, coherent organisation,
and synthesis of material and development of ideas.

• The referencing is in the Harvard style.

Mark band: B (60% - 69%)
Description: Very Good Pass
• Demonstrates analysis, judgement and understanding, through a mostly
penetrating review and critical analysis of the relevant issues involved in
studying business models and strategy. Evidence of an understanding of
theoretical as well as practical issues relevant to the study and
management of business/IS/IT strategy initiatives.
• Evidence of extensive reading of relevant research papers, texts and
journals.
• Identifies and fully utilizes the appropriate conceptual frameworks, and
concepts which are rigorously applied to the case study organisation.
Criteria: • Very good degree of rigour, coherence and originality of analysis and
discussion of results, inferences, applications and implications for the case
study organisation. The analysis is detailed but with a few minor errors
and omissions.
• The conclusions and recommendations are detailed, supported by the
analysis and following the brief, but may lack a critical edge, or be slightly
lacking in focus.
• Presented with reasonable clarity and lucidity of prose, coherent
organisation, and synthesis of material and development of ideas.
• The referencing is in the Harvard style.
Mark band: C (50% - 59%)
Description: Average Pass
• Demonstrates understanding through a good review and analysis of the
relevant issues involved in studying business models and strategy. Mostly
understands concepts and theories involved, although theoretical
understanding is limited in parts.
• Evidence of reading of relevant research papers, texts and journals, but
lacks critical engagement with the most relevant business model ideas
and concepts. Occasionally descriptive rather than analytical.
• Identifies and uses the appropriate conceptual frameworks, and concepts
but these could be applied with further rigour and criticality to the case
Criteria:
study organisation.
• The analysis is detailed but with a few minor errors and omissions.
• The conclusions and recommendations lack some detail, although mostly
linked to the preceding analysis.
• Whilst the structure of the work is clear and easy to follow, there may be
occasional weaknesses in the clarity and lucidity of prose, synthesis of
material and development of ideas.
• The referencing is in the Harvard style.

Mark band: D (40-49%)

Description: Weak Pass
• Demonstrates understanding through a passable review and analysis of
the relevant issues involved in studying business models and strategy.
Generally understands concepts and theories involved, although
theoretical understanding is shallow.
• Evidence of reading of some relevant research papers, texts and journals,
but lacks critical engagement with the relevant business model ideas and
concepts. Tendency to be too descriptive rather than analytical.
• Identifies and uses the appropriate conceptual frameworks, and concepts
but these could be applied with more rigour and criticality to the case
Criteria:
study organisation.
• The analysis is satisfactory but with several minor errors and omissions.
• The conclusions and recommendations lack detail and may be less ably
linked to the preceding analysis.
• Whilst the structure of the work is relatively clear and easy to follow,
there may be weaknesses in the clarity and lucidity of prose, synthesis of
material and development of ideas.
• The referencing is in the Harvard style.
Mark band: E or F (Below 40%)
Description: Refer or Fail
• An inadequate piece of work. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the
subject matter. This piece of work contains errors, omissions or poorly
expressed ideas. It may lack an adequate conceptual or theoretical base
and fails to identify the key issues or demonstrate a basic
misunderstanding of the brief. Evidence of a good breadth of reading is
lacking.
• The analysis is largely inadequate and is likely to be mainly descriptive:
o with some relatively minor errors and omissions (REFER: 30-39%)
Criteria: o or a major error or omission (FAIL: below 30%).
• Fails to offer any form of critical evaluation and analysis and what is
presented can only be described as superficial.
• Almost wholly descriptive, rather than analytical. Contains a number of
unsupported observations and fails to reach informed conclusions and
recommendations.
• The structure of the work is confused and difficult to follow.
• The referencing fails to adhere to the Harvard style throughout.

ENDS