Assessment

Task:
(1) Using one country of your choice, critically apply the PESTEL framework to Volvo in order to identify the challenges the company is likely to face in the future (1500 Words)
(2) Building on your question 1 analysis, what strategic advice would you give to Volvo? (1000 Words)

Your work must be correctly referenced throughout in the Harvard format. You are expected to include in your discussion relevant references from academic sources. Journalistic, public policy and publicly available commercial literature / sources may also enrich the assignment.

You must be within the designated word counts by +/-10%.

Your assignment should be word processed and produced in an appropriate business style. The font should be 12, and be double spaced.

https://www.academia.edu/1746449/Principles_of_Marketing

http://www.studymarketing.org/articles/Presentation_Slides/Marketing_and_Strategy_Series.html

http://www.studymarketing.org/articles/Home/Excellent_Powerpoint_Slides_on_Marketing_and_Strategy.html

Click here to place an order  for a similar  paper  and have exceptional work done by our team and get A+results

Attachment

Literature Review in RC

1. Purpose and Style of Literature Review

Many assessments in Salford University graduate programmes are based on a review of literature pertaining to the topic being studied.  To assist students prepare their literature reviews (“LR”), this paper sets out their purpose and how best to go about them.

First consider the purpose of an LR: it is to allow students to demonstrate mastery of the topic.  That is far from being a summary of what various authors write about the topic.   Instead, students have to make the ideas about which they have studied into their own.  That means not just summary, but analysis and expression in their own words.

“In their own words” – a simple but crucial phrase. They immediately preclude copy/pasting and most direct quotes, even with citations.  “Their own words” mean that writers have taken the concepts, understood them, maybe even critiqued them, and explained them to the reader.  This implies full engagement of the mind!

2. Structure

Most concepts are dealt with by more than one author, often with different tilts, and sometimes with opposing views.  This observation provides the clue as to how to get away from preparing an LR based on “who says what”. Build the LR in terms of concepts not authors.  Subordinate the authors to the concepts.

The best means to bring concepts to the fore is to devote each paragraph to a concept or theme.  The opening sentence should tell the reader what the paragraph is dealing with.  The rest of the paragraph expands, explains and critiques the concept.  If authors present different views, it may be possible to contrast them in the paragraph, but only if does not make it too long.  Otherwise, continue with the same concept in a new paragraph or two.

Avoid as much as possible starting paragraphs with sentences about an author: what he or she says. This approach opens the temptation to mere summaries, taking the writer away from the objective of analysing, comparing and contrasting and, possibly, critiquing.

Proper paragraphing, not too long and each dealing with one concept of a theme, are natural organisers.  They oblige a degree of structuring, first in the mind of the writer and then in his/her words.  They proved the building blocks of a paper and are easily complemented by appropriate section headings.  Whether the writer works from headings to paragraph or vice versa is of little import, and depends on personal style.

To critique a concept does not simply mean that the writer should say whether he/she likes it or not.  LRs are best depersonalised.  Use impersonal and third-person language, as well as the passive voice. There is very little room in LRs for the first or second person.

3. Citations

Academic papers, and especially, LRs require citations.  They serve to bolster the affirmations and arguments of the writer, and show that he/she really is reviewing literature and not just writing a personal essay.  Yet too much of a good thing can wreck the readability of a paper.  This is because of a risk that can be called “overstuffing”; which involves putting so many citations into a paragraph the flow of the text is destroyed.  The simplest way to eliminate this risk is to put one or two citations for each paragraph at the end of the paragraph.  There will inevitably be times when a citation has to go into a paragraph, but such exceptions can be minimised by having more, shorter paragraphs.

Do not make sentences too long.  Usually one subordinate clause is quite sufficient.  Remember that a sentence is meant to be one statement.  Avoid taking what are clearly separate sentences and joining them together with “and”.

Avoid hackneyed and almost meaningless phrases like “it is important to note” or “that being said”.  Just write in a simple and straightforward way.

In your own words!

Click here to place an order  for a similar  paper  and have exceptional work done by our team and get A+results