Assignment Question:You are supposed to pick two different multinational companies (MNC) in Malaysia...

Question

Assignment Question:You are supposed to	pick two different multinational	companies (MNC) in Malaysia from two different industry sectors including consumer goods/service and manufacturing industries and try to complete the following tasks:	Task 1. A historical review	on core business domain of company including vision, mission and background analysis.	Task 2.	Analyze and discuss	both companies’ strategic innovations individually	and then compare those strategic invocations with the other chosen company’s strategic innovations accordingly.		Task 3.	Discuss in details how each of these companies	drive growth in profitability. For this comparison, you have to use the strategies that you have discussed in task 2.		Task 4.	Critically discuss how the chosen companies	specialize in being different	from their competitors - strategically or product wise. You have to use real examples and real occasions that these two companies actually have used historically to address that.		Task 5.	Critically analyze and discuss how each of these two chosen companies make their customers perceive them to have significantly	superior value in the market. You can then compare their approaches and critically analyze which has achieved that plan more successfully.				REPORT STRUCTURE				Title page			Table of contents			Executive summary			Introduction			Body			Conclusion			References			Appendix		Assessment Requirements:		Individual Type-Written Report		Maximum      word length allowed is		4000 words.			The      assignment assessment criteria and marks allocation are as follows:		Introduction         (5 marks)	Structure and flow  (15       marks)	Use of key concepts and models  (25 marks)	Substantive content  (25       marks)	Application to scenario or organization  (25 marks)	Adoption of Harvard referencing system  (5 marks)		This assignment is worth 100%      of the final assessment of the module.			Student is required to submit a      type-written document in Microsoft		Word      format		with Times New Roman		font      type, size 12		and line spacing of 1.5.		The		Harvard Style of Referencing		system is COMPULSORY.	Indicate the sources of      information and literature review by including all the necessary citations      and references adopting the		Harvard      Referencing System.			Students      who have been found to have committed acts of Plagiarism are automatically      considered to have failed the entire semester. If found to have breached the regulation for the second time, you      will be asked to leave the course.	Plagiarism      involves taking someone else’s words, thoughts, ideas or essays from      online essay banks and trying to pass them off as your own. It is a form      of cheating which is taken very seriously. Take care of your work and keep      it safe. Don’t leave it lying around where your classmates can find it.	Marking Criteria															MARK																								29 or   less																								30 - 39																								40 - 49																								50 - 59																								60 - 69																								70 +																																									CONTENT:																		Has the question been   answered?																																		Vague, random, unrelated   material										Some mention of the   issue, but a collection of disparate points										Barely answers the   question – just reproduces what knows about the topic										Some looseness/				digressions										Well focused										Highly focused																			TOPIC																		KNOWLEDGE				Is there evidence of   having read widely and use of   appropriate and up to date material to   make a case?										No evidence of reading.				No use of theory – not   even hinted at implicitly.										No evidence of reading.				An implicit hint at some knowledge of theory, etc.										No evidence of   reading. Very basic theories mentioned   but not developed or well used.										Some reading evident, but   confined to core texts.										Good reading.				Good range of theories   included.										Excellent reading.				Well chosen theories.																							UNDERSTANDING   & SYNTHESIS													Are ideas summarized   rather than being reproduced, and are they inter-related with other ideas?																							No theory included.										Vague assertions/poor   explanations.										Long winded descriptions   of theory.														Some long winded   sections.				Some quotations, but   stand alone.				Some inter- connections.										Good summary of theory.				Good use of quotations   that flow with narrative.				Good inter-connections.										Succinct, effective   summaries of theory. Excellent choice   and threading of quotations into argument.   Good counterpoising of a range of perspectives.																									APPLICATION																		Does it show appropriate   use of theory in a 				practical situation?														No examples										No/limited/				inappropriate examples										Few examples										Uneven examples										Good examples										Excellent range of   examples.																			ANALYSIS				Does it identify the key   issues, etc in a given scenario, proposal or argument?														Vague assertions about   issues.														Largely descriptive with   no identification and analysis of central issues.														Limited insight into   issues.														Some good observations.														Good, detailed analysis.														Comprehensive range of   issues identified and discussed fully.																													EVALUATION & CONCLUSION																		Does it critically assess   material?				Are there a workable and   imaginative solutions?														No evaluation.										Uncritical acceptance of   material.										Some evaluation but   weak. Little insight.										Good interpretation. Some but limited sophistication in   argument.														Good critical   assessment. Independent thought   displayed.										Full critical assessment   and substantial individual insight.																			REFERENCING				Thorough and accurate   citation and referencing														No referencing														No referencing														Limited/poor referencing										Some inconsistencies in   referencing														Appropriate referencing										Appropriate referencing																							PRESENTATION				Logical and coherent   structure to argument and effective presentation																							No structure apparent.				Poor presentation.														Poor structure.				Poor presentation.										Acceptable, but uneven   structure.				Reasonable presentation.										Reasonable structure.				Good presentation.										Good argument.				Well presented material.										Excellent argument.				Very effective   presentation format.

Abr Writing · Accepted Answer

Strategic Management 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	2
INTRODUCTION	3
MAIN BODY	3
TASK 1	3
Review of core field of company including vision, mission and background analysis	3
TASK 2	7
Discuss strategic innovations of both the companies and compare the innovation accordingly	7
TASK 3	8
How each of these companies drives growth in profitability	8
TASK 4	10
How the chosen companies specialize in being different from their competitors	10
TASK 5	12
Analyze and discuss how each of these two chosen companies make their customers perceive them to have significantly superior value in the market	12
CONCLUSION	13
REFERENCES	14
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Strategic management is considered as the process of building effective plans for maintaining the long term performance of the entity. It is essential to have core review and background analysis of the selected companies so that it may easily assist in measuring their significant position in their respective industries. In order to sustain in the competitive environment companies are required to engage in strategic innovation that would support the company in the attaining significant position among their competitors. It has also stated that with the successful implementation of strategic innovation in the departmental store it mainly focuses on modifying the products and services that are sold by the store to their customers. 
Along with this, implementation of technological factor in Parkson has also impact their overall process of selling range of international brand products to the customers. Furthermore, it has been also assessed that in the present scenario of automobile industry it is essential for the company to engage in innovation that would assist the company in imparting new product and services to their customers. With the help of modifying engineering process it results in enabling their innovation within their operational activities. 
INTRODUCTION
Strategic management is a continuous process that assesses and regulates the corporate along with the industries in which they operate and involved the activities. With the help of this process management easily evaluates the competitiveness among the competitors and measures their strengths and weaknesses so that they may gain the competitive edge in the market. Moreover, it also supports the business organisation to become adoptable so that valuable and limited resources are used to the best and optimum level so that it may not lead to wastage (Hill, Jones and Schilling, 2014). 
For the present report, two different Multinational Corporations from Malaysia has been chosen that include Parkson and PROTON holding, both the companies operate their activities in the different industries that are consumer goods and manufacturing industry respectively. Parkson is renowned publically traded company that deals in extensive network of departmental stores in the Asian countries especially in Malaysia. On the other hand, PROTON is one of the leading automobile company in the Malaysian region. 
The report will focus on gaining insight knowledge and background review of both the companies that assist in measuring their position among the competitors. On the other hand, it will also focus on discussing the strategic innovations that are engaged by both the companies to sustain its position among their competitors. Along with this, it will also emphasis on examining how each of the chosen companies enables their customers to perceive that company have superior value in the market. 
MAIN BODY 
TASK 1
Review of core field of company including vision, mission and background analysis 
It is essential have core review and background analysis of the selected companies so that it may easily assist in measuring their significant position in their respective industries (Ginter, Duncan and Swayne, 2018). The reviews of core business domain of companies are as follows-
Parkson is renowned publically traded company that deals in extensive network of departmental stores in the Asian countries especially in Malaysia. The Asian based company has around 131 stores across the different countries such as China, Vietnam, Indonesia as well as Myanmar. The company was established in the year of 1987 in Malaysia. The founder of Parkson was working in the retailing division of Lion Group and promptly engaged in setting own network of departmental chain across the Malaysia and nearby region. The first flagship store of Parkson was opened in 2007 as Parkson Pavilion. Through reviewing the 2014 financial statement of the company it has been measured that it earned revenue of RM 3,554 million while the generated net income was around RM 240 million in the stipulated year. 
Figure 1: Parkson departmental store
(Source: Our vision, mission & values, 2018)
Through reviewing the corporate profile of cited departmental store it has been assessed that key vision of Parkson is to become the leading departmental store group within the Asia region. On the other hand, mission of departmental store is to inspire their employees and workers so that they may engage in delivering quality products and delightful services to their customers. Along with this, Parkson also possess key values that support the departmental store in maintaining their strategic position in the marketplace (Our vision, mission & values, 2018). The key values of Parkson focus on team spirit that support in delighting their customers through providing quality products and services. Another value of cited departmental store is to engage in honesty and integrity within the internal environment that support the company in delivering proper services to their customers. 
SWOT analysis of Parkson 
	Strengths 
· The key strength of Parkson is that it ensure leading position in the Malaysian market that leads to tap domestic market
· Customer loyalty 
· Increased brand image and name 
· Pricing advantage
	Weaknesses 
· Weak management of activities in the departmental stores 
· Ineffective customer services within the store. 
	Threats
· Intensive competition in the consumer goods industry act as major threat for Parkson 
· Another threat is substitute products that is AEON 
	Opportunity 
· Enhancing their services on the online platform
· Tapping new market despite of targeting Asian market 
· International expansion of the departmental store  
On the other hand, another selected company is PROTON (Perushaan Automobile National Bhd.) holding Malaysian based automobile manufacturer company that was established in the year 1983. Primarily company has engaged in designing non-badged car that attract the customers towards their manufactured automobile. However, the designing was done under the collaboration of PROTON and Mitsubishi. Through engaging in this partnership company was significant in targeting the mass market.  However, since the year 2000 PROTON has manufactured a mix of locally engineered and badge engineered vehicles for the customers that has supported the company in enhancing their sales in the 15 countries majority were Asian countries. 
With the help of assessing the Malaysian automobile sector it has been assessed that in the year 2013 automobile market was captured by Perodua with targeting 37% of total market share.  On the other hand, PROTON has attained the second position in industry with capturing 26% of the Malaysian market. Through reviewing the present scenario, PROTON predominantly dependent on its domestic market and currently enduring the innovation and transformation process that would support the company in attaining long term plan. Therefore, company is also planning to attain the profitability ratio and regaining its presence in the international marketplace. 
Figure 2: PROTON Logo
(Source: About Us, 2018)
The company vision is to become the world’s successful automobile manufacturer company by delivering quality automobile products to different segment customers. In order to attain the vision of company mission statement has been devised that mainly engage in creating continuous innovative processes that assist in modifying the products and services of the company that accomplishes needs and requirement of customers (About Us, 2018). On the other hand, mission of PROTON also ensure getting committed to the culture so that management should ensure the promoting effective ethics at all the levels within the automobile company that support in delivering quality services to the customers at the competitive and affordable prices. 
Through analysing the automobile industry it has been stated that before entrance of Perodua PROTON has emphasis on capturing the Malaysian automobile market. But with the rise of competitors in the market PROTON has diminish and reduces the sales of their vehicles in the market. However, Perodua car manages their sales in the market through enabling cheaper price range so that they may effectively attract the customers towards them.  
SWOT analysis of PROTON
	Strengths 
· Low maintenance cost in the operational activities 
· Product portfolio 
· Elevation of the automotive eco-system that leads to strengthen their operational activities.

Assignment Question: You are supposed to pick two different multinational companies (MNC) in Malaysia from two different industry sectors including consumer goods/service and manufacturing industries...

Answer To: Assignment Question: You are supposed to pick two different multinational companies (MNC) in...

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment

MARK	29 or less	30 - 39	40 - 49	50 - 59	60 - 69	70 +
CONTENT: Has the question been answered?	Vague, random, unrelated material	Some mention of the issue, but a collection of disparate points	Barely answers the question – just reproduces what knows about the topic	Some looseness/ digressions	Well focused	Highly focused
TOPIC KNOWLEDGE Is there evidence of having read widely and use of appropriate and up to date material to make a case?	No evidence of reading. No use of theory – not even hinted at implicitly.	No evidence of reading. An implicit hint at some knowledge of theory, etc.	No evidence of reading. Very basic theories mentioned but not developed or well used.	Some reading evident, but confined to core texts.	Good reading. Good range of theories included.	Excellent reading. Well chosen theories.
UNDERSTANDING & SYNTHESIS Are ideas summarized rather than being reproduced, and are they inter-related with other ideas?	No theory included.	Vague assertions/poor explanations.	Long winded descriptions of theory.	Some long winded sections. Some quotations, but stand alone. Some inter- connections.	Good summary of theory. Good use of quotations that flow with narrative. Good inter-connections.	Succinct, effective summaries of theory. Excellent choice and threading of quotations into argument. Good counterpoising of a range of perspectives.
*APPLICATION* Does it show appropriate use of theory in a practical situation?	No examples	No/limited/ inappropriate examples	Few examples	Uneven examples	Good examples	Excellent range of examples.
ANALYSIS Does it identify the key issues, etc in a given scenario, proposal or argument?	Vague assertions about issues.	Largely descriptive with no identification and analysis of central issues.	Limited insight into issues.	Some good observations.	Good, detailed analysis.	Comprehensive range of issues identified and discussed fully.
*EVALUATION & CONCLUSION* Does it critically assess material? Are there a workable and imaginative solutions?	No evaluation.	Uncritical acceptance of material.	Some evaluation but weak. Little insight.	Good interpretation. Some but limited sophistication in argument.	Good critical assessment. Independent thought displayed.	Full critical assessment and substantial individual insight.
REFERENCING Thorough and accurate citation and referencing	No referencing	No referencing	Limited/poor referencing	Some inconsistencies in referencing	Appropriate referencing	Appropriate referencing
PRESENTATION Logical and coherent structure to argument and effective presentation	No structure apparent. Poor presentation.	Poor structure. Poor presentation.	Acceptable, but uneven structure. Reasonable presentation.	Reasonable structure. Good presentation.	Good argument. Well presented material.	Excellent argument. Very effective presentation format.