Task Instructions
The contract of your hotel (on the HOTS software) with the property owner has now expired and you are attempting to make the case to secure a renewal of the contract for your services for the next two years based on your performance to date.
Drawing on the situation your hotel was in when you took it over, critically evaluate your plans for the period you managed, and how well you realised them in the marketplace, and, most importantly, your proposed plans for the hotel for the coming two years.
For this assessment, you must critically evaluate the implemented strategies, plans and actions of the last three years and provide justifications for all business recommendations for your hotel (used in the HOTS) to move forward. Application of theoretical models and other theories from your whole course is imperative. Your arguments must be supported by credible academic resources.
Note
You need to make an objective case, so a wholly positive report will come across as unbelievable. Use examples of planning and outcomes that might not have gone as planned to highlight how you have learned and adapted to the market. You will need to show critical thinking throughout the report in the assessment of the applied strategy, this will allow your recommendations to be built on strong objective grounds. Graphs should be used but are not included in the word count. Please utilise academic research throughout your report, appropriately referenced in APA 7th edition.
Please write your HOTS Strategic Business Report in the format below:
TITLE PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENT
TABLE OF FIGURES
MAIN BODY:
INTRODUCTION
• Section 1: INTERNAL / ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS & STRATEGIC STATEMENT
• Section 2: MARKETING, OPERATIONS & FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
CONCLUSION
RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCE LIST (APA 7th edition format, minimum 12 peer-reviewed academic journal article references)
CRITICAL NOTE:
Just presenting graphs is not enough. There is a need to discuss what the graphs reveal and the implication(s) for your hotel.
Format
• Word Count: 1,000 words per group member + financial and statistical analysis
• Style: Business Report
• Refer to the 2018 Assessment Structure Style Guide (in the SHM608 Assessment folder) for further format requirements.
Recommended Texts and Materials
Enz, CA 2010, Hospitality Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases (2nd ed.), Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Frynas, J. G., & Mellahi, K. (2011), Global Strategic Management (2nd ed.), Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gamble, J. E., Thompson, A. A., & Peteraf, M. A. (2013), Essentials of Strategic Management: The Quest for Competitive Advantage (3rd ed.), New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Ghemawat, P. (2007), Redefining Global Strategy: Crossing Borders in a World Where Differences Still Matter, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Gupta, A. K., Wakayama, T., & Rangan, U. S. (ed.), (2012), Global Strategies for Emerging Asia, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Page 4 of 5
Hill, C. W. L., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach (10th ed.), Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Lamb, C.W, Hair, JF, McDaniel, C, Summers, J & Gardiner, M (2013), MKTG2, Asia-Pacific (ed.), South Melbourne, Vic : Cengage
Okumus, F., Altinay, L., & Chathoth, P. (2010), Strategic Management for Hospitality and Tourism, Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinmann.
Referencing
All referencing must be in accordance with the Academic Writing Guide: APA 7th Edition on SharePoint.
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here in the Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills website.
Group Work and Peer Evaluation Instructions
At the beginning of a term/project:
• All students taking part in a group assessment should draw up and sign a group contract using the template provided on Blackboard, in the Assessments section. This step should be completed at least two weeks prior to your assessment due date. Your Learning Facilitators may ask to review the contracts when deemed necessary (for example, when there is a lack of progress or conflict among group members).
During a project:
• You should keep records of communication and drafts. Any serious concerns about individual group member’s contribution should be brought to the attention of your Learning Facilitator as soon as they occur or at least two weeks before the due date, whichever is earlier.
At the end of a project/assessment submission:
• When submitting your group assessment, you are required to attach the group contract as an appendix of your submission. You are reminded not to ‘recycle’ (self-plagiarise) contracts from other assessments. Sections on deliverables, timeline and expectations, in particular, should be unique to each assessment or project. Self-plagiarism constitutes a breach of Academic Integrity and can lead to penalties to the assessment or subject.
• The group contract accounts for 10% of your assessment grade, as indicated in the marking rubric. The group contract will be assessed based on its effectiveness in stipulating targets, plans and expectations. It should be clear, realistic and appropriate for the nature of the project.
• A peer evaluation form is available on Blackboard in the Assessments section. This can be used when you feel there was unequal or unfair contribution from other group member(s) which you would like to raise with your Learning Facilitator. You must provide clear supporting evidence (e.g. records of communication and drafts) and email it to your Learning Facilitator together with a completed peer evaluation form by the assessment due date. Otherwise, the allegations will be dismissed.
• If you have been accused of not contributing equally or fairly to a group assessment, you will be contacted by your Learning Facilitator and given three working days to respond to the allegation and provide supporting evidence. If there is no response within three working days of contact, your Learning Facilitator will determine an appropriate mark based on the evidence available. This may differ from the mark awarded to your group members and would reflect your contribution in terms of quantity and quality of work.
Submission Instructions
1. Please submit your report in the format as prescribed above in Word document to:
Blackboard SHM608 folder ‘Group Assessment’ by 11:55pm on the Friday of Week 10.
2. Typed and formatted following the Assessment Structure Style Guide. Recommendations are OPTIONAL.
3. The total word count, excluding executive summary and references, must be within 10% (+ or -) of the assessment word count. Penalties will apply when word count restrictions are not met.
4. To be submitted in electronic form as a word-processed file to BlackBoard
5. You are expected to refer, in text, to a minimum of twelve (12) academic sources, plus others as required in order to show competency in the assessment. Up to four of these can be academic textbooks, with a minimum of eight academic journal articles. Blogs and other unverifiable sources will not count as references
6. A TUA cover sheet to be attached to your paper (Group assessment cover sheet) 7. See marking rubric below, you do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
NOTE: For the group assessment, only one copy of the report is to be submitted to Turnitin with all group members name of the cover sheet.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Rubric
Assessment
Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Ability to apply correct theories, concepts and frameworks for analyses
• 25% • Limited to no understanding of application. • Theory is somewhat identified and applied in the analyses. • Theory is broadly and consistently applied in the analyses. • Theory is well identified and applied in the analyses. • Theory is logically and strongly identified and applied consistently in the analyses.
Quality, relevance, logic and application of external research utilized for the report
• 25% • Little to no evidence of external material included in the report OR material used that has no relevance to the report or analyses. • A marginal attempt identifying and using external material in the report OR material used that has limited / broad relevance to the report or analyses. • A satisfactory attempt identifying and using external material in the report OR material used generally has relevance to the report or analyses. • A focused attempt identifying and using external material in the report OR material used has relevance to the report or analyses. • Strongly supported with research from the various external, industry and customer environments. Research is strongly linked to the analyses used.
Quality, logic, synthesis
and relevance of strategies
• 20% • Little to no connection / linkage between analyses and strategies. Could not be applied in a business environment. • Limited linkages to analysis. Strategies need to be refined as they are too broad and unrealistic. • Obvious linkages between analysis and strategies. Could be applied in a business context. • Clear and logical linkages between majority of analysis and strategies. Could be applied in a business context. • Complete, thoughtful and integrated linkages between analysis and strategies. Could be applied in a business context.
Format (Presentation, spelling, grammar, referencing, font/spacing,
margins
• 20% • Serious errors with submission. The student is advised to contact CALS and seek assistance otherwise academic progression may be at risk.
• Acceptable submission with some errors with the required format. The student is advised to ensure work is edited before submitting. • A good attempt at formatting the document correctly. Only a few minor errors noted. Submission may require a second edit. • The document has only a few errors that require a small amount of editing. Evidence of attention to detail is evident. Presented at a corporate standard. • An error free report that would be considered an excellent submission and quite suitable for further submission within a business or associated environment.
Group contract
• 10% weighting • The group contract has been poorly completed. Targets, plans and expectations have not been clearly defined and are not achievable.
• The group contract has not been completed or submitted. • The group has partially completed the contract. Some targets, plans and performance expectations have not been identified and clearly defined. Some targets, plans and performance expectations are not achievable. Roles are not always clear. • The group has completed the contract. The group contract contains somewhat clear, precise and achievable targets and plans. It also stipulates performance. • The group has thoroughly completed the contract. The group contract contains well thought out targets, plans and performance expectations. There are clear explanations in relation to performance • The group has completed the contract to an exceptional level. The group contract contains clear, precise and achievable targets and plans which are detailed and well justified. There are clear and well-structured explanations in relation to performance expectations for each group member or role.
SHM608 Assessment 2 Brief Group Business Plan Page 5 of 6
expectations for each group member or role.
Mark range out of 100 0 – 49.5 50 – 64 65 – 74 75 – 84 85 – 100
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Understand and apply analytical tools for strategy formulation appropriate to a hotel.
SLO b) Prepare, apply and monitor a strategic business plan for a hotel.
SLO c) Generate, implement and justify business and marketing strategies suitable for new or continuing hotels.
SLO d) Evaluate and justify resources, capabilities, competencies and competitive advantage for new or continuing hotels.
SLO e) Analyse the managerial tasks associated with developing and executing organisational strategies.
SLO f) Work effectively in teams and participate in strategic management decision-making concerning the operations of a hotel.
SHM608 Assessment 2 Brief Group Business Plan Page 6 of 6
