STUDENT ASSESSMENT | Feedback Student Name Aleksander Godija Assessor Name Dr Roger

STUDENT ASSESSMENT | Feedback
Student Name
Aleksander Godija
Assessor Name
Dr Roger Haden
Date:
28/03/2022
Qualification Title
Bachelor of Tourism, Hospitality and Events Management
Subject Title/s
Strategic Planning and Management
Assessment Title
Assessment 2 – Case Study Analysis – Measuring, Monitoring and Control Report
Criteria
Poor
Adequate
Good
Very good
Excellent
Marks
Executive Summary (5% of overall mark)
• Summary of main findings and recommendations/ conclusions.
Has not included all aspects of executive summary or summary was poorly written.
No information on how findings were sourced.
Conclusion and recommendations not included or partially included.
4.25
2/5
Comments
An executive summary should
summarize the key points of the report
restate the purpose of the report
highlight the major points of the report, and
describe any results, conclusions, or recommendations from the report.
You only partially fulfill these criteria.
‘…the facilities [do you mean facility’s?] brand.’
Key Findings and Analysis (65% of overall mark)
Findings and facts (evidence) to build and support report criteria. Includes analysis of findings.
Comprises sections based on key findings and information, each focusing separate findings:
• Methods of measuring/ assessing performance against strategic plans used by organisation
• Who, when, what and how of measuring success of strategic plans
• Identifying gaps
• Communicating
performance information
Has failed to provide relevant findings and evidence for all report criteria.
The analysis fails to clearly discuss all relevant aspects of the report criteria and link to relevant theories and/or concepts.
Unable to link findings and analysis to relevant industry practices.
55
27/65
Comments
An analysis lacking in detail and logical flow
‘The Sydney Harbour Marriott Hotel has introduced recreational and relaxing activities as part of the its products and services. that they offer These can be included within an evaluation framework. to determine the elements of measurement, including Quality control of in preparation and processing of food and beverages and feedback as a hallmark for is key to measuring the quality of service delivered to the consumers.’ Even after tightening up the language your point is hardly worth making: the Marriott provide ‘recreational’ services (but noting that eating and drinking are also necessities). Quality control is important if customers are going to be happy. What’s the point here? Here are your examples? What is Marriott doing differently? How does this approach align with its strategy? How does it measure consumer satisfaction? How does the data it gathers in this regard feed back into its implementation of strategic processes?
When you claim to be using an example, it isn’t very effective: ‘An example of how comparison of performance applies to this facility is using the market numbers to compare how customer traffic is fluctuating depending on the applied interventions. This gives a clear picture of whether it is the facility or the entire market that is experiencing an influx of decrement in customers.’ This isn’t really an example, which needs to be detailed, relevant to the Marriott in specific ways, that you describe.
‘Measurement of social responsibility and sustainability strategies [you don’t measure the strategy, but its implementation across the organization] are usually [partly] facilitated through [the role played] by key performance indicators, [which can be used] that work to evaluate the internal performance [of employees, teams, and departments].’ But where is the Marriott? What are they doing? How are they tracking according to ‘measurement’?
‘According to the business model for Sydney Harbour Marriott Hotel attached in appendix 2, there are inputs, stakeholders, and organisational activities that contribute to the outputs and consumer experience, which is crucial for Strategic success.’ OK, great… but where is your analysis of how they are doing?
Lastly, ‘The owners and their employees interact differently with their communication of performance since these insights are distributed internally within the organisation for improvement or appreciation of work well done in different sectors. Regardless of the mode of communication used, the delivery is important for better decision-making and accommodating feedback from relevant stakeholders on the best way forward.’ This is very general in tone (again) and while it makes use of useful terms it really isn’t saying anything much, is it? It lacks a subject, coherence, and a point, which if anything seems to be that good communication is important, but other that it is rather confusing (e.g., what is the relation between the distribution of ‘insights’ and ‘communication of performance’?).
Introduction and Conclusion (5% of overall mark)
Introduction to include background information on the report.
• Introduced organisation used.
• Introduced reason for why measuring and assessing performance against strategic plans is required
Conclusion to:
• Summarises results from findings.
• Provides recommendations based on analysis.
• Links to introduction of report.
Background information is insufficient to adequately establish the topic context / irrelevant / inaccurate / unclear.
Key terms are not defined or are defined incorrectly. There is no discernible outline of the main ideas to be included and analysed in the body or it is unclear.
No discernible summary of the main findings and analysis presented, or it is poorly-defined.
No or poorly defined reference to the connections between the main ideas presented. Insufficient or no logical conclusions.
No or limited recommendations provided.
No or an inadequate link/s to the report ’s focus and the evidence in the body of the report.
4.25
1.5 /5
Comments
This ‘introduction’ doesn’t measure up to what an introduction needs to be.
Points to note (going through your intro)
‘Measurement and assessment of strategic plans are crucial’ -better to say that they are crucial to the implementation of the strategy.
Where you write: ‘On the other hand, control and monitoring allow the organisation to identify elements of the strategy that are directly influential in achieving their goals and re-evaluating their priorities or changes to the process for maximum effectiveness,’ this sounds like something you have read and paraphrased, without any direct reference to Marriott. The report is about Marriott. It needs to be focused on clear examples, evidence and analysis… of Marriott.
‘In terms of considering attainability and realistic nurse [?] as it relates to organisational strategy, this is done with the consideration of the current hospitality industry in mind and the positioning of the organisation to successfully implement the suggested strategy.’ This is very general in tone but also does little more than repeat your earlier (also general) point about strategy. It has no real core ‘message’ either. What are you actually arguing here?
‘Exploring our strategy’? This is not the right ‘person’ (pronoun/grammar) for a report.
And there are more general comments following on. This is not a very solid introduction art all, but rather a loosely collected number of general statements about the importance of strategy and evaluation. It needed to be more specific, better directed and organized, pointing to what the report covers and its rationale, etc., and it needed to focus on Marriott, which you mention but do not expand on in detail to any useful extent.
Your conclusion is not much better. You repeat what you said at the start (not a conclusion, as such) and then provide some recommendations, which have very little to do with measurement and evaluation. I would have expected something about how the report findings revealed gaps in Marriott’s analysis of its implementation of strategy. But there is little of real substance in your report, which is disappointing. No reference to figures, real data. I don’t have any idea what sort of hotel it is from reading your ‘report.’ How big is it? How many staff? No actual reference to, or quotes from, their strategic plan..??
A poor effort.
Criteria
Poor
Adequate
Good
Very good
Excellent
Marks
Structure, grammar and spelling (10% of overall mark)
Word count: 1350
Report structure includes:
• Title page
• Table of contents
• Executive summary
• Introduction
• Key findings/ information and analysis
• Conclusion and recommendations
• Reference list
• Appendices
Does not meet word limit.
Table of contents was not included or was inaccurate.
Written work is not presented in report structure.
Limited formatting or professional appearance.
Poorly written using formal and informal language
Constructed with minor to significant errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation.