A SSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT501 Business Environment
Assessment Internal and External Stakeholder Analysis
Length 2,500 words
Learning Outcomes This assessments addresses the following Subject Learning Outcomes:
c) Analyse and synthesise the fundamentals of business in the contemporary environment.
d) Construct and Justify a professional value proposition as a business practitioner
Submission 12 Week Delivery: By 11:59pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 5.2 (week 10)
Intensive Class: Due By 11:59pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 5 (week 5)
Total Marks 50 marks
Business stakeholder analysis is a technique for identifying stakeholders and analysing their roles. The aim of the analysis is to map out the stakeholders’ level of influence and degree of interest with regards to the business. Stakeholder analysis can also be used to assess the relationships between different stakeholders and the issues they care about most.
Internal stakeholders are individuals or groups who are directly involved in the business, such as owners, board members, managers, employees, and investors. External stakeholders are indirectly influenced by the business activities, like customers, suppliers, competitors, society and government.
By understanding both perspectives, the business can engage and enhance communication with relevant stakeholders, reduce or prevent risks, identify business opportunities, improve internal stakeholders’ commitment in the business and the reputation of the business amongst external stakeholders.
In this assessment, you will examine a business organisation in an industry that you have either previously worked or would like to work in the future. Leading up to the assessment submission, you MUST participate in the Assessment 2 weekly discussions in the Discussion Forums on Blackboard. You will locate this discussion forum in the Assessment Area of blackboard. Weekly discussion and contributions are based on Modules 2-4.
Note for Assessment 2 Discussion Forum:
• The business organisation and its functionalities selected for the Discussion Forum MUST be the same with Assessment 2 write-up and submission.
• You MUST make some references to subject contents, including other readings.
• You are ENCOURAGED to employ minimum of 3 reference sources for each topic, two (2) academic (textbooks & peer-reviewed journal articles) and one (1) other sources (newspaper article, business/trade publication, or substantiated website).
• You are REQUIRED to extract and enclose each topic’s responses (e.g., your responses, and critique of your peer’s responses) of your ‘Assessment 2 Discussion Forum’ as appendix in your final Assessment 2 document.
Please Remember your contributions to the discussion topics are one of the assessment attributes.
(LMS please create an Assessment 2 Discussion Forum separately in the Assessment area of blackboard as students are required to participate in this to complete the assessment)
Presenting a business example and contributing to the discussion forum, you will:
• identify and analyse functional areas in the business
• identify and analyse the internal and external stakeholders
• compare two industries with each other
• create a stakeholder matrix
• discuss chosen stakeholders and industries in the context of relevant theories and frameworks
Suggested format for Assessment 2
Your individual stakeholder analysis should follow standard report structure and include the following:
• Cover page
• Executive Summary
o A concise summary of the main report in bullet points
• Introduction and background information on your business example
• Main body
o Identify functional areas
o Identify internal and external stakeholders and their roles
o Identify the nature and degree of main stakeholders’ interests, and implications of conflicting interests
o Identify the level of main stakeholders’ influence o Create a stakeholder matrix
o In the discussion forum, choose an example from your peers and compare the industry your business operates in with their industry, identify the main points of stakeholder dissimilarities and analyse the differences in stakeholder interests and influences
Support your observations and statements by incorporating links to theory and conceptual frameworks. Please ensure your sources are referenced clearly in the APA 6th style both in-text and in the reference list.
• You are REQUIRED to employ minimum of 15 reference sources, ten (10) academic (textbooks & peerreviewed journal articles) and five (5) other sources (newspaper articles, business/trade publications, and substantiated websites). References to ‘Wikipedia’ or similar unsubstantiated sources are not acceptable.
• You are REQUIRED to use the correct APA referencing style for both in-text citations and reference listing. Please see more information on referencing here: http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Tips to get started:
PESTLE is a good tool to use to help you identify all stakeholders. By considering political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental/ethical factors and how they relate to the business, it’s easy to identify stakeholders.
Submit your Assessment 2 Internal and External Stakeholder Analysis in the submission link in the main navigation menu in MGT501 Business Environment by the end of Module 5.2 (week 10).
Intensive Class: Due by the end of Module 5 (week 5)
A rubric will be attached to the assessment. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Your reports will be marked against the rubric, which is shown on the next pages. Please ensure that your submission addresses all five of the Assessment Attributes in the rubric.
Learning Rubric: Assessment 2 Internal and External Stakeholder Analysis
Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49% Pass
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
75 -84% High Distinction
Knowledge and understanding
Understands theory and concepts
Percentage for this
30% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge.
Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Knowledge or understanding of the concepts and theory.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the concepts and theory.
Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Highly developed understanding of the concepts and theory.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. A sophisticated understanding of the theory.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Contribution to the discussion forum
Percentage for this
10% Never or rarely posted messages with very little or occasional activity. Simple entries lack insight, depth or are superficial.
The entries are short and are frequently irrelevant to the events. Entries show some insight, depth and are connected with events, topic or activity.
Entries are typically short and may contain some irrelevant material. Entries show insight and depth.
The content of posts is connected with events, topic or activity. Entries show insight,
depth and understanding.
The content of posts is connected with events, topic or activity, and are
They do not express opinion clearly and show little understanding. There are some personal comments or opinions which may be on task. These entries may contain some irrelevant material but are for the most part on task. supported by evidence and examples.
Entries are relevant with links to supporting material.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
Demonstrates a clear understanding of the practical applications and implications of relevant concepts
Percentage for this
30% Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application based upon analysis. Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and/or independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and/or independently developed models. Recommendations are
clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Well-structured report with a clear line of reasoning Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning. Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Line of reasoning is easy to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
Demonstrates analytical skills. Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Percentage for this
20% Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic, demonstrates high levels of insight and analytical skills.
Correct citation of key resources and evidence
Percentage for this
10% Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence