The Student Room Group

AQA Business Studies A-level

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60
Has anyone got the set 2 specimen paper 2? Please attach for me if you do thanks.
16 and 9 marker exam structures?
When calcuting current ratio do you round the answer to 2 decimal places, for instance say the answer was 1.469434833 would you round it up to 1.47 ?
Reply 63
Original post by PM98
Also, anyone know of any youtube channels, or sites alike, that offer good videos covering topics? I know Tutor2U videos are good but they don't have them for every topic and there are certain topics, like Grenier's model and Network Analysis, I still need some help with.


Try 'TakingTheBiz' on YouTube. He's very good as well. Gives some different perspectives to tutor2u.
Original post by Romafelipa100
When calcuting current ratio do you round the answer to 2 decimal places, for instance say the answer was 1.469434833 would you round it up to 1.47 ?


Round it up to 2 decimal point :smile: you can write the exact answer and then beneath it write it again and in brackets (2 d.p.) coz thats how i usually do it too
Reply 66
For questions in paper 3 where it mentions "any" business in the question, obviously you refer to the business in the case study mainly,but for evaluation is it okay to bring in examples of businesses to counter an argument? For instance, if I was discussing about Sainsbury's and suggesting that their strategy was successful by responding to changes in the market, could you counter it with evaluation saying that not all businesses adapt to changes in the market - like Kodak for example?
Original post by Much118
For questions in paper 3 where it mentions "any" business in the question, obviously you refer to the business in the case study mainly,but for evaluation is it okay to bring in examples of businesses to counter an argument? For instance, if I was discussing about Sainsbury's and suggesting that their strategy was successful by responding to changes in the market, could you counter it with evaluation saying that not all businesses adapt to changes in the market - like Kodak for example?


As the question only demands for "any business" you don't necessarily have to refer to a specific business but as you're using it as an example in your argument it seems fine. But you may want to do an overall judgement after that. so after you mention the kodak example, you may wanna conclude by saying 'hence it depends on the business and blah blah"
Original post by Much118
For questions in paper 3 where it mentions "any" business in the question, obviously you refer to the business in the case study mainly,but for evaluation is it okay to bring in examples of businesses to counter an argument? For instance, if I was discussing about Sainsbury's and suggesting that their strategy was successful by responding to changes in the market, could you counter it with evaluation saying that not all businesses adapt to changes in the market - like Kodak for example?


hey I done that same question yesterday and sent it to my teacher. turns out i was way off the questions (even though i literally reworded the question in every other sentence) ive sent quite a few essays and this is second time ive got it back without a mark, im freaking out.

Can someone give me a foolproof exam structure style, because i think that is where i will lose marks. Does anyone here have consistent high marks and can give me a few tips? Id appreciate it alot
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 69
Original post by Nowavves1998
hey I done that same question yesterday and sent it to my teacher. turns out i was way off the questions (even though i literally reworded the question in every other sentence) ive sent quite a few essays and this is second time ive got it back without a mark, im freaking out.

Can someone give me a foolproof exam structure style, because i think that is where i will lose marks. Does anyone here have consistent high marks and can give me a few tips? Id appreciate it alot




Sainsbury’s has set objectives for Corporate Social Responsibility in five categories. To what extent do you think it is essential for Sainsbury’s to set these objectives for CSR?Justify your view. [ 20 marks ]

Given the change in that customers are becoming increasingly socially aware of business activity, it may be argued that it is essential for Sainsbury’s to set these objectives for CSRas a means to indicate to customers that they are attempting to be more ethical in the way they act. In many ways, these CSR objectives have proven critical to the financial success of Sainsbury’s as the firm have been able to reform its operations to improvethe quality and consistency of its products to ensure that they are fresh-and-tested and best for the health of the consumer. This shows that Sainsbury’s is committed to tackle issues within society, such as the growing levels of obesity, thereby changing theperception of Sainsbury’s to more of a philanthropic company and so increasing the company’s brand loyalty. In another instance, setting CSR objectives may be seen as essential for Sainsbury’s to undermine the reputation of its competitors, particularly whenthe horsemeat scandal is taken into consideration. The objective of sourcing with integrity has proven critical to Sainsbury’s, as the firm avoided a scandal by ethically sourcing and testing its products, unlike its competitors. As a result, Sainsbury’s wasable to increase brand loyalty and market share, providing a sustainable source of income for future years. However, the extent of how essential these CSR objectives are may well depend on the activities of rivals as if all competitors act ethically, the existingbenefits such as stronger brand loyalty are no longer rewarded.
On the other hand, it may be argued that CSR objective setting is not essential for Sainsbury’s but rather its change in strategy regarding pricing and an increased gearing ratio may bemore critical in explaining its success. The reduction in pricing enabled Sainsbury’s to remove itself from being ‘stuck-in-the-middle’ to a differentiator under a hybrid strategy, as it adds greater value to its products through quality assurance and ensuresthat the costs associated with it are exceeded by the benefits it provides. As a result, Sainsbury’s was able to increase its sales volume and market share by appealing to a wider demographic, especially considering that of lower incomes during a time of difficultmarket conditions. The increase in their gearing ratio suggests that the company has increased their borrowing, and thanks to the difficult market conditions it has become cheaper to do so as a result of lower interest rates, thereby helping Sainsbury’s tofuel the expansion of its local convenience stores by 354%, that which contributed greatly to increased market share and sales volume. Therefore, the financial success of Sainsbury’s may be argued to have been more a result of its pricing strategy and its financial structure than its approach to CSR, although it certainly added much to its reputation.
On this basis, it would appear that the setting of CSR is not essential for Sainsbury’s. Of course, its approach to CSR did much to modify the customer’s perception of the retailer, especiallyduring the horsemeat scandal. Its CSR approach made the company seem more philanthropic and willing to tackle social issues, helping to increase brand loyalty. However, much of Sainsbury’s success stems from its pricing strategy and growing of new stores, asit was able to target a wide demographic at a time of recession in which more people are price conscious of the goods they purchase.






I mean that's one question I did from the same paper. I sent it and got 14. I think my conclusion needs more focus and depth, but I would have given it about 16 as it is, but that's bias. :/
Original post by Much118






ahh, i done the last 20 marker.

Under Justin King, Sainsbury’s changed its strategy. Do you think that to be successful the strategy of a business needs to be determined mainly by what is happening in its external environment? Justify your answer. 24 Marks

heres a paragraph


Sainsbury’s, CSR objectives highlight that focusing on what’s happening in the competitive market will inevitably lead to a profitable thus a successful outcome. For example, a recent scandal of horse meat at Tesco lead Sainsbury’s to assure ethically aware consumers that all food is ‘sourced with integrity’. Although variable costs increased for the company, the focus on the demands of the consumer means the business were able to remain competitive within the market. It is clear that Sainsbury’s considered the importance within the environment within its CSR objectives. Competitor, Morrison, was under scrutiny after reviewing the firm’s landfill impact in 2010. A pressure was put on supermarkets to dispose of waste efficiently , such as adopting a lean production strategy or focusing on recycling. Thus, Sainsbury’s was successful in minimising waste through the use of IT systems, which minimised waste and decreased costs for the business, leading to larger profit margins. The opening of convenience stores, The installation of self service checkout, and increasing non-food products illustrates how Sainsbury’s was dependent on the external environment, through recognising that sales for clothes was growing as well as the need to shorten queue lines within the store. It can be said that these changes influenced the success of the strategy as sales increased by 67%. Within the supermarket industry, it is clear that online grocery sales is growing rapidly, for a business like sainsburys it is clear that not responding to the external change can lead to loss in sales and market share. Thus, kings ‘future strategy’ illustrates that a lack of a response to buying trends is likely to decrease sales within the business. Finally, the rise of discount retailers has led to the ‘main four’(tesco, sainsburys, asda and morrisons) to rethink pricing strategies, with king ensuring the goods are ‘even better prices quality at good prices’ mataining a competitive edge through providing higher perceived value products. Despite this, determining strategy soley on the external does not guarantee success, due to the changing nature of the external environment. Furthermore, not considering internal stakeholders, such as the shareholders and employees is likely to lead to a reduced confidence in the business, with low productivity due to declining staff morale and the sale of shares due to a fall in dividends for shareholders.

what do you thinks? do you think the answer isn't being answered at all?
Original post by Much118









I mean that's one question I did from the same paper. I sent it and got 14. I think my conclusion needs more focus and depth, but I would have given it about 16 as it is, but that's bias. :/

btw that was the other one i got no marks for lol. my teacher sent me this.




The managers of a public limited company believe that it is important for the business to behave ethically. To what extent do you think that an ethical approach to business decision making is now essential for managers in public limited companies?

[25 marks]


Response 4 22 marks

For many businesses who are plc’s (ie owned by shareholders with shares traded on the stock exchange) I believe it is now more essential than in the past that managers adopt an ethical approach to decision making. As ethical issues such as the treatment and payment of the workforce, impact of decisions on the environment and honesty when dealing with customers become more important, and more known about globally due to the power of social media. Managers of plc’s, which are often followed in the news, must make decisions which take into account Corporate Social Responsibility. If a plc makes an unethical decision (for example making many employees redundant and telling them by text) then other staff and other stakeholders will quickly hear the bad news and poor treatment of employees. This could lead to lower morale and motivation in the workforce which could lead to a fall in productivity due to industrial action. This would mean higher costs. Also, customer may decide to boycott the plc, leading to lower sales revenue. All this means lower profits which for a plc, means lower share prices as shareholders now expect less dividends.

Nowadays because many investors / shareholders (eg the pension funds of workforce groups such as nurses or teachers) will avoid investing in plcs which make unethical decisions.

However, for some plcs, a truly ethical approach to business decisions is impossible for managers. For example, an ethical decision by the manager of a tobacco business would be to cease making and selling cigarettes especially now that the dangers of smoking are so well known. But, without other products to replace cigarettes the tobacco plc would be left with zero revenue, no profits and shareholders would own worthless shares. There are ways, however, that managers of plcs which sell such harmful products could adopt a more ethical approach for example by trying to innovate and develop less harmful tobacco.

In conclusion, I believe that most plcs cannot afford to ignore ethics when they make business decisions because the power of the media is so great nowadays that bad behaviour is quickly known about globally and a hard earned brand image can be destroyed very fast. But for some plcs such as tobacco, oil and alcohol, if managers adopt a wholly ethical approach then these plcs would simply cease to exist so it is actually essential that they continue to make unethical decisions.
Reply 72
Original post by Nowavves1998
Original post by Much118






ahh, i done the last 20 marker.



what do you thinks? do you think the answer isn't being answered at all?

I think it is being answered, but somewhat limited. You should counter the argument in the question by showing that a business should instead determine its strategy by focus on its internal operations. I'd probably give yours about 8, no offence. I'm not an examiner, but it's advice nonetheless. I don't know if you've watched tutor2u, but he and many others suggest having 1 solid paragraph supporting the argument in the question, and then a paragraph that contrasts/opposes the question.


Here is my answer for comparison. It's not golden, but take what you will from it and give me advice.

It is undoubtedly important that the strategy of a business is influenced by what is happening within the external environment, as a business must ensure that they are meeting changes effectively and not experiencing any symptoms of strategic drift. In the instance of Sainsbury’s, the company’s sales and market share were falling, for its strategy no longer aligned with the needs and wants of customers within the market. By transforming their strategy, Justin King was able to reposition and recover the supermarket chain as he accounted for changes in the external environment. From what was a period of flux for Sainsbury’s, the use of market research enabled the firm to modify its strategy by taking account of what was happening in the external environment, that which involved a recession in 2008 and the difficult market conditions that followed. As a result, Sainsbury’s was able to make a transformational change in its strategy, moving away from being ‘stuck-in-the-middle’ to a hybrid supermarket that offers high quality products for a low price. This yielded great financial success for Sainsbury’s as it enabled them to broaden the demographic to which they sell to, targeting those of lower incomes to increase market share as well as sales volume under the opening of new convenience stores. The influence of the external environment on the success of a strategy can be reinforced by the failure of Kodak whose inability to accept changes in the external environment saw them filing for bankruptcy. However, the extent to which the success of a strategy may be determined by the external environment may well depend on the industry within which a business operates.



On the other hand, it may be argued that a focus on internal operations regarding a strategy is just as significant for its success. This may be supported by the case of Sainsbury’s, whose staff morale was low, that which is rather common in the retailing industry. Nevertheless, King’s focus on internal operations saw greater focus placed on employee engagement as a means to increase staff involvement. By increasing staff involvement, King was able create a higher quality customer service, that which he believed to have a certain correlation in greater customer satisfaction. The success of the strategy by focusing on internal operations for Sainsbury’s saw greater customer satisfaction as a result, that which reinforced their brand loyalty and undoubtedly enabled them to achieve an increase in monthly sales for 36 consecutive months from 2010 to 2013. However, the success of Sainsbury’s regarding internal focus may be a result of the leader that the company has and so the effectiveness of change in a strategy may only be as effective as the leader.



Overall, the success of a strategy is dependent both on the external environment and a business’s internal operations. Of course, a focus on the external environment ensures that a business does not experience strategic drift as Sainsbury’s had done, even more so for Kodak. A focus on internal operations enable a business to compete effectively against competition and meet changes in customer needs, as Sainsbury’s achieved with a change in their pricing strategy to target the growing number of price conscious consumers. However, a focus on internal operations is just as critical. For a business strategy to be successful, it requires a clear vision that which must be understood by all employees. A negligence of the internal operations means the business lacks purpose and does not focus on improving itself relative to competition, as is best demonstrated by Kodak and their failure to respond to changes the external environment.
Reply 73
The managers of a public limited company believe that it is important for the business to behave ethically. To what extent do you think that an ethical approach is now essential to business decision making for managers in public limited companies? [ 25 marks ]

An ethical approach to business decision making can be argued as essential due to the vast social changes that have occurred over the past decade whereby society is ever more aware and critical of business activity. The extent to which ethical behaviour is essential, however, can be challenged by various concepts like Carroll’s CSR pyramid.

Carroll’s CSR pyramid highlights the fact that the foundation of all business activity is economic. For many, the reason why businesses exist is to profit from its operations, and in order to act ethically a business must first have the financial means to do so. Nevertheless, many public limited companies avoid their ethical responsibilities or at least do not cater to them as they are not aligned within their best interest. A financially driven corporation exists purely to maximise its profits, as can be explained by the exploitation of foreign labour by many public limited companies within the fashion industry, like Primark. By adhering to its ethical responsibilities that which it is not obliged to do, a business’s resources are restrained and its potential for innovation is stifled. By limiting innovation due to the ethical considerations of its actions, the potential for success is limited too. In certain markets, particularly those which are price inelastic, consumers will continue to purchase goods from businesses despite unethical practices. For instance, global fast-food retailer McDonald’s is known for its unethical manner in producing its food, yet most customers continue to purchase the goods because the alternatives are not necessarily any better. This highlights that an ethical approach does not determine the success of a company and is therefore not essential towards decision making, particularly in markets where customers will buy products regardless of business activity.

In contrast, an ethical approach can be deemed as essential in the long term and can help to discourage short-termism. Business activity and society are interdependent, and so acting in a sustainable manner to help society will allow a business to reap the success from this kind of approach at a later date. For example, Ben & Jerry’s have developed a healthy brand image as they continue to donate 7.5% of pre-tax profits to different charitable institutions. This kind of forward-thinking will in the long run, improve society’s ills. As a result, a public limited company can improve its reputation by adopting an ethical approach to decision making. In the long-term, acting ethically may yield a public limited company greater profit than a financially driven public limited company. This can please shareholders through greater dividend payments. However, an ethical approach is not always capable of satisfying all stakeholders. While ethically oriented shareholders may welcome an ethical approach, those financially driven may be angered by this change in business activity. Taking this into consideration, an ethical approach is once again not essential towards the success of neither a business nor its decision making.

Overall, I do not believe that an ethical approach to decision making is essential. While acting ethically can prepare a business more readily for a long-term means of success through sustainability, it is not essential for a business to act ethically in order to succeed. By acting ethically, a public limited company will have the attention of its stakeholders divided between those who financially benefit and those that want an improved society.
Reply 74
Original post by PM98
Also, anyone know of any youtube channels, or sites alike, that offer good videos covering topics? I know Tutor2U videos are good but they don't have them for every topic and there are certain topics, like Grenier's model and Network Analysis, I still need some help with.


on youtube this guy's channel called Takingthebiz is really good, he explains some of those models in detail
Reply 75
How long does everyone typically spend on 16 markers?

In fact, how long do you spend on each question in paper 3?
Reply 76
Original post by Much118
How long does everyone typically spend on 16 markers?

In fact, how long do you spend on each question in paper 3?


normally its supposedly a mark a minute but id say 20 minutes probably but i cant say I've ever times my self. Usually i would say most peoples 16 markers are roughly 1 and a half pages if thats anything to go on.
[QUOTE="Much118;72343870"]
Original post by Nowavves1998


I think it is being answered, but somewhat limited. You should counter the argument in the question by showing that a business should instead determine its strategy by focus on its internal operations. I'd probably give yours about 8, no offence. I'm not an examiner, but it's advice nonetheless. I don't know if you've watched tutor2u, but he and many others suggest having 1 solid paragraph supporting the argument in the question, and then a paragraph that contrasts/opposes the question.


Here is my answer for comparison. It's not golden, but take what you will from it and give me advice.

It is undoubtedly important that the strategy of a business is influenced by what is happening within the external environment, as a business must ensure that they are meeting changes effectively and not experiencing any symptoms of strategic drift. In the instance of Sainsbury’s, the company’s sales and market share were falling, for its strategy no longer aligned with the needs and wants of customers within the market. By transforming their strategy, Justin King was able to reposition and recover the supermarket chain as he accounted for changes in the external environment. From what was a period of flux for Sainsbury’s, the use of market research enabled the firm to modify its strategy by taking account of what was happening in the external environment, that which involved a recession in 2008 and the difficult market conditions that followed. As a result, Sainsbury’s was able to make a transformational change in its strategy, moving away from being ‘stuck-in-the-middle’ to a hybrid supermarket that offers high quality products for a low price. This yielded great financial success for Sainsbury’s as it enabled them to broaden the demographic to which they sell to, targeting those of lower incomes to increase market share as well as sales volume under the opening of new convenience stores. The influence of the external environment on the success of a strategy can be reinforced by the failure of Kodak whose inability to accept changes in the external environment saw them filing for bankruptcy. However, the extent to which the success of a strategy may be determined by the external environment may well depend on the industry within which a business operates.



On the other hand, it may be argued that a focus on internal operations regarding a strategy is just as significant for its success. This may be supported by the case of Sainsbury’s, whose staff morale was low, that which is rather common in the retailing industry. Nevertheless, King’s focus on internal operations saw greater focus placed on employee engagement as a means to increase staff involvement. By increasing staff involvement, King was able create a higher quality customer service, that which he believed to have a certain correlation in greater customer satisfaction. The success of the strategy by focusing on internal operations for Sainsbury’s saw greater customer satisfaction as a result, that which reinforced their brand loyalty and undoubtedly enabled them to achieve an increase in monthly sales for 36 consecutive months from 2010 to 2013. However, the success of Sainsbury’s regarding internal focus may be a result of the leader that the company has and so the effectiveness of change in a strategy may only be as effective as the leader.



Overall, the success of a strategy is dependent both on the external environment and a business’s internal operations. Of course, a focus on the external environment ensures that a business does not experience strategic drift as Sainsbury’s had done, even more so for Kodak. A focus on internal operations enable a business to compete effectively against competition and meet changes in customer needs, as Sainsbury’s achieved with a change in their pricing strategy to target the growing number of price conscious consumers. However, a focus on internal operations is just as critical. For a business strategy to be successful, it requires a clear vision that which must be understood by all employees. A negligence of the internal operations means the business lacks purpose and does not focus on improving itself relative to competition, as is best demonstrated by Kodak and their failure to respond to changes the external environment.


hey no offence taken haha, i did do a counter argument but i thought id be too long to post!

Here is my full answer..

In one argument, it can be said that the success of a business strategy does not depend mainly on the external environment, as the productivity of the workers is vital for the business to remain profitable, thus successful. In the case of Sainsbury’s, it is clear that staff morale was low before the leadership of King. As a result, king understood that the internal environment must be adapted to create an alignment of values, the foundation of a strong corporate culture. As a result, the ‘tell Justin’ initiative allowed the colleagues to feel a part of developing its strategy, which led to greater employee engagement. As a consequence, staffs were able to perform effectively at shop floor level, providing excellent customer service as well stock management, leading to greater customer satisfaction as well as sales. Another focus by king was on the supply chain management within the internal operations sector. Before kings intervention, significant inventory shortages was another reason for the downfall of the business, as it is clear that the operations sector was not effectively organised. Kings approach of including a ‘scientific assessment’ of the company’s inventory led to a maximisation of customer availability and minimum waste. Thus, it is clear that the strategy of a business should not focus on only the external environment as it is likely the business would be focusing on the financial performance, leading to a decline in the internal environment. Despite this, it can be argued that the changes implemented within the internal environment were due to the external environment. Kings focus on greater employee engagement was due to the social changes within the external environment, in which employees demanded greater praise as well as involvement, rather than simply following rules and regulations found within a bureaucracy. Also, changes in the supply chain was essentially due to techlogical advances, king responded to these changes through modernising its IT system, thus remaining competitive as well as profitable within the market.

Sainsbury’s, CSR objectives highlight that focusing on what’s happening in the completive market will inevitably lead to a profitable thus a successful outcome. For example, a recent scandal of horse meat at Tesco lead Sainsbury’s to assure ethically aware consumers that all food is ‘sourced with integrity’. Although variable costs increased for the company, the focus on the demands of the consumer means the business were able to remain competitive within the market. It is clear that Sainsbury’s considered the importance within the environment within its CSR objectives. Competitor, Morrison, was under scrutiny after reviewing the firm’s landfill impact in 2010. A pressure was put on supermarkets to dispose of waste efficiently , such as adopting a lean production strategy or focusing on recycling. Thus, Sainsbury’s was successful in minimising waste through the use of IT systems, which minimised waste and decreased costs for the business, leading to larger profit margins. The opening of convenience stores, The installation of self service checkout, and increasing non-food products illustrates how Sainsbury’s was dependent on the external environment, through recognising that sales for clothes was growing as well as the need to shorten queue lines within the store. It can be said that these changes influenced the success of the strategy as sales increased by 67%. Within the supermarket industry, it is clear that online grocery sales is growing rapidly, for a business like sainsburys it is clear that not responding to the external change can lead to loss in sales and market share. Thus, kings ‘future strategy’ illustrates that a lack of a response to buying trends is likely to decrease sales within the business. Finally, the rise of discount retailers has led to the ‘main four’(tesco, sainsburys, asda and morrisons) to rethink pricing strategies, with king ensuring the goods are ‘even better prices quality at good prices’ maintaining a competitive edge through providing higher perceived value products. Despite this, determining strategy solely on the external does not guarantee success, due to the changing nature of the external environment. Furthermore, not considering internal stakeholders, such as the shareholders and employees is likely to lead to a reduced confidence in the business, with low productivity due to declining staff morale and the sale of shares due to a fall in dividends for shareholders.

To conclude, it can be argued that focusing solely on the external environment is likely to lead to short term success due to the ever-changing nature of the environment. However, the business cycle which illustrates the cycle of the economy is in line with the demand of a product, as during the recession, consumers have lower disposable income so will favour discount retailers. Despite this, without also focusing on the internal environment, the demands of the external environment cannot be met. virgin illustrates that strong corporate culture will mean employees are more dedicated to objectives, such as focusing on innovation to remain competitive, due to an alignment of values which can lead to long term success. In essence, without a focus on the internal environment when developing a strategy, the business will not be able to respond to the external environment, showing that the success for a business’ strategy is stemmed from the internal environment.

still 8 marks? i hope not lol

Also, i read your essay and its so much more concise than mine, im a little jealous haha! id give it like 18or19/24 id say differentiate more between the different types i.e social.technological, etc. ( but im unsure because the questions says the external enviroment) i wrote mine similar to yours, (more waffley i think) but my teacher replied with this

'i dont think you answered the question, i think you should structure two points supporting that the external environment should be focused upon.

i.e yes - technological
yes- social
conclusion'

but i dont understand cause it simply says the external enviroment so i am confused :frown:
Reply 78
[QUOTE="Nowavves1998;72346508"]
Original post by Much118


hey no offence taken haha, i did do a counter argument but i thought id be too long to post!

Here is my full answer..

In one argument, it can be said that the success of a business strategy does not depend mainly on the external environment, as the productivity of the workers is vital for the business to remain profitable, thus successful. In the case of Sainsbury’s, it is clear that staff morale was low before the leadership of King. As a result, king understood that the internal environment must be adapted to create an alignment of values, the foundation of a strong corporate culture. As a result, the ‘tell Justin’ initiative allowed the colleagues to feel a part of developing its strategy, which led to greater employee engagement. As a consequence, staffs were able to perform effectively at shop floor level, providing excellent customer service as well stock management, leading to greater customer satisfaction as well as sales. Another focus by king was on the supply chain management within the internal operations sector. Before kings intervention, significant inventory shortages was another reason for the downfall of the business, as it is clear that the operations sector was not effectively organised. Kings approach of including a ‘scientific assessment’ of the company’s inventory led to a maximisation of customer availability and minimum waste. Thus, it is clear that the strategy of a business should not focus on only the external environment as it is likely the business would be focusing on the financial performance, leading to a decline in the internal environment. Despite this, it can be argued that the changes implemented within the internal environment were due to the external environment. Kings focus on greater employee engagement was due to the social changes within the external environment, in which employees demanded greater praise as well as involvement, rather than simply following rules and regulations found within a bureaucracy. Also, changes in the supply chain was essentially due to techlogical advances, king responded to these changes through modernising its IT system, thus remaining competitive as well as profitable within the market.

Sainsbury’s, CSR objectives highlight that focusing on what’s happening in the completive market will inevitably lead to a profitable thus a successful outcome. For example, a recent scandal of horse meat at Tesco lead Sainsbury’s to assure ethically aware consumers that all food is ‘sourced with integrity’. Although variable costs increased for the company, the focus on the demands of the consumer means the business were able to remain competitive within the market. It is clear that Sainsbury’s considered the importance within the environment within its CSR objectives. Competitor, Morrison, was under scrutiny after reviewing the firm’s landfill impact in 2010. A pressure was put on supermarkets to dispose of waste efficiently , such as adopting a lean production strategy or focusing on recycling. Thus, Sainsbury’s was successful in minimising waste through the use of IT systems, which minimised waste and decreased costs for the business, leading to larger profit margins. The opening of convenience stores, The installation of self service checkout, and increasing non-food products illustrates how Sainsbury’s was dependent on the external environment, through recognising that sales for clothes was growing as well as the need to shorten queue lines within the store. It can be said that these changes influenced the success of the strategy as sales increased by 67%. Within the supermarket industry, it is clear that online grocery sales is growing rapidly, for a business like sainsburys it is clear that not responding to the external change can lead to loss in sales and market share. Thus, kings ‘future strategy’ illustrates that a lack of a response to buying trends is likely to decrease sales within the business. Finally, the rise of discount retailers has led to the ‘main four’(tesco, sainsburys, asda and morrisons) to rethink pricing strategies, with king ensuring the goods are ‘even better prices quality at good prices’ maintaining a competitive edge through providing higher perceived value products. Despite this, determining strategy solely on the external does not guarantee success, due to the changing nature of the external environment. Furthermore, not considering internal stakeholders, such as the shareholders and employees is likely to lead to a reduced confidence in the business, with low productivity due to declining staff morale and the sale of shares due to a fall in dividends for shareholders.

To conclude, it can be argued that focusing solely on the external environment is likely to lead to short term success due to the ever-changing nature of the environment. However, the business cycle which illustrates the cycle of the economy is in line with the demand of a product, as during the recession, consumers have lower disposable income so will favour discount retailers. Despite this, without also focusing on the internal environment, the demands of the external environment cannot be met. virgin illustrates that strong corporate culture will mean employees are more dedicated to objectives, such as focusing on innovation to remain competitive, due to an alignment of values which can lead to long term success. In essence, without a focus on the internal environment when developing a strategy, the business will not be able to respond to the external environment, showing that the success for a business’ strategy is stemmed from the internal environment.

still 8 marks? i hope not lol

Also, i read your essay and its so much more concise than mine, im a little jealous haha! id give it like 18or19/24 id say differentiate more between the different types i.e social.technological, etc. ( but im unsure because the questions says the external enviroment) i wrote mine similar to yours, (more waffley i think) but my teacher replied with this

'i dont think you answered the question, i think you should structure two points supporting that the external environment should be focused upon.

i.e yes - technological
yes- social
conclusion'

but i dont understand cause it simply says the external enviroment so i am confused :frown:


It's arguing that the success of a strategy is determined mainly by the external environment. You should take this as a hint to support external environment in one paragraph, and in the other oppose it by suggesting the internal environment as just as important.
[QUOTE="Much118;72347146"]
Original post by Nowavves1998


It's arguing that the success of a strategy is determined mainly by the external environment. You should take this as a hint to support external environment in one paragraph, and in the other oppose it by suggesting the internal environment as just as important.


yeah thats what i thought, id give myself like 16/24, is that right or too low? what do you think?

Quick Reply

Latest