What are the sources of competitive advantage for IKEA in the international market?

What are the sources of competitive advantage for IKEA in the international market?

1. Environment scan [PEST analysis about the general environment to illustrate opportunities and threats]

2. Resource and competences analysis of IKEA

• Tangible and intangible resources of IKEA
• Unique resources and core competences of IKEA
• Dynamic Capabilities of IKEA to cope with the dynamic international environment
• How the strategic capabilities help the focal firm to gain competitive advantages

3. Value Chain analysis

• Identify what resource and competences IKEA is having in each activities
• Diagnose in which activities IKEA is making or losing value
• Form a strategy to deal with the resource gap

4. Porter’s generic strategy

• Identify which strategy IKEA is currently adopting
• Analysis the factors which enable IKEA to implement the selected strategy

Introduction, conclusion and referencing 15%
Environment scan 10%
Resource and competences analysis of IKEA 30%
Value Chain analysis 25%
Porter’s generic strategy 20%

M12BSS (Global Markets and Entry Strategies) has an individual report and a group presentation.


You will have to submit an individual report of your analysis on the case study – IKEA (the case study can be found on CUonline).

Using the case study and other materials available on the web, please provide answer for the following question:

What are the sources of competitive advantage for IKEA in the international market?

• The word limit is 3,500 words (Max)
• All work submitted after the submission deadline without a valid and approved reason (see below) will be given a mark of zero. Please

note that a non-submission is not the same as a failed submission; a failed submission counts as an attempt whereas an absent mark does not

necessarily allow you to resit the coursework.
• Short deferrals (extensions) of up to three calendar weeks can only be given for genuine “force majeure” and medical reasons, not for

bad planning of your time. Please note that theft, loss, or failure to keep a back-up file, are not valid reasons. The short deferral must be

applied for on or before the submission date. You can apply for a short deferral by submitting an Examination/ Coursework Deferral Application

Form. Application Forms along with the supporting evidence should go to the relevant Student Support Office (WMG03). For a longer delay in

submission a student may apply for a long deferral.
• Your coursework will be given a zero mark if you do not submit a copy through Turnitin. Should you submit work on time but fail the

assignment, you will be offered a resit opportunity but the resit mark will be capped at 40%.
• Checks will be made on your work using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites.
• Students MUST keep a copy and/or an electronic file of their assignment.

This assessment will assess the module learning outcomes 1and 2 and makes up 50% of the overall module mark.

Word Count Limit
Your word count excludes in text citations but not the final references or appendices. If you are more than 10% over or under the word count

limit you may lose marks as a 10% penalty applies.

The contents of your References and Appendices are not normally given a specific mark (though they may contribute to your overall mark, as

detailed in the assessment criteria). We therefore recommend that you only use Appendices for supporting material and not for the substantive

part of your work.

As part of your study you will be involved in carrying out research and using this when writing up your coursework. It is important that you

correctly acknowledge someone else’s writing or thoughts and that you do not attempt to pass this off as your own work. Doing so is known as

plagiarism. It is not acceptable to copy from another source without acknowledging that it is someone else’s writing or thinking. This includes

using paraphrasing as well as direct quotations. You are expected to correctly cite and reference the works of others. The Centre for Academic

Writing provides documents to help you get this right. If you are unsure, please visit www.coventry.ac.uk/caw.

Turnitin includes a plagiarism detection system and assessors are experienced enough to recognise plagiarism when it occurs. Copying another

student’s work, using previous work of your own or copying large sections from a book or the internet are examples of plagiarism and carry

serious consequences. Please familiarise yourself with the CU Harvard Reference Style (on Moodle) and use it correctly to avoid a case of

plagiarism or cheating being brought. Again, if you are unsure, please contact the Centre for Academic Writing or a member of the course team.

Return of Marked Work
You can expect to have marked work returned to you 2 weeks after the submission date. Marks and feedback will be provided online. As always,

marks will have been internally moderated only, and will therefore be provisional; your mark will be formally agreed later in the year once the

external examiner has completed his / her review.

Assessment Criteria

CW1: IndividualAssignment (50%)

85 – 100% In order to secure a mark in this range, a candidate must submit an outstanding answer with original thinking. Apart from

showing an excellent level of understanding of the topic, the work must demonstrate critical/analytic skills and originality. For example, such

an answer would include new and valuable insights into international business field which are from the student’s own critical thinking

andcontributes to the existing literature.

70-85% An essay in this range will demonstrate a excellent understanding of theories, concepts and issues relating to international business.

There will be evidence of wide-rangingreading from a variety of valid sources (as described and presented in the marking criteria for 60-69%).

The assignment must be written in a clear, well-structured way with a coherent and seamless flow and show evidence of independent, critical

thought. It must show extensive relevant reading on the subject and intelligent use of the material to present a well-balanced and well-argued

assignment. For example, the student will have considered a range of relevant issues and be able to assess the strength and weaknesses of

various approaches/arguments and put forward a confident and articulate view of their own.
60-69% An essay in this mark range will demonstrate a strong understanding of the requirements of the assignment and of theories, concepts and

issues relating to the module. Anassignment in this percentage range will include a balanced discussion of issues central to the question, how

these are addressed by different authors or sources and some critical thinking into their relative merits or shortcomings.

The answer will be contain few errors and little, if any, irrelevant material. It will show evidence of reading from a variety of sources (i.e.

more than 3 or 4) but not so many sources that the discussion loses focus and becomes unclear or irrelevant. All sources should be of some

academic merit (e.g. books, journals, reports, media publications). Unreferenced material from non-credible internet sources MUST be avoided.

All sources must be included and properly referenced in the references. The assignment will be well-organised and clearly written/presented


50-59% The answer will demonstrate some reasonable understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues relating to the module but also some

minor errors of fact or understanding.

The assignment will not be based on an extensive range of sources (for example few references are included), or much evidence that they have

been read closely or well-understood. For example, the assignment will retell sources rather than analyse them.

The assignment may be quite general in part. Some errors may be present and some irrelevant material may be included.

The essay may not be particularly well-structured, and/or clearly presented and contain some spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. A few

sentences may be unclear.

40-49% A mark within this percentage range will be given to an essay which:

• shows some limited basic understanding of the subject but is incomplete. For example, if it answers one part of a question but not the

• makes only very general statements
• includes some factual errors or misunderstandings e.g. confusion between different companies or misuse of certain key terms.
• shows limited use of material with limited reading/research on the topic and includes only a very small number of references, not all of

which are included mistakes and an incomplete reference list.
• has a poor structure and does not flow e.g. if there is noconclusion or new facts are introduced in the conclusion rather than

introduction or main discussion.
• contains some fundamental errors.

35-40% A fail on this assignment means the assignment submitted:

• is poor and suggests that the student has spent very little time on it e.g. if the answer is considerably under the word requirement

and/or presented in note form rather than as a fully written up essay.
• bears little relation to the assignment topic.

• shows a poor understanding of theories, concepts and issues relating to the module and to the learning outcomes detailed in this


• contains some or many fundamental errors and misunderstandings of the academic or other material used. For example many of the facts

cited are incorrect.

• uses literature or other material which is largely irrelevant or has no academic value

• is poorly structured and poorly presented. For example, sentences may be hard to understand and contain many spelling or grammatical


• contains no or few references.

0-35% Work within this mark range shows a complete failure to 0 – 19% meet the requirements of the assignment. A mark in this range will be

given for an essay which:
• is below 500 words in length.
• bears no link to the question chosen and shows very little or no knowledge or understanding of any of the theories, concepts and issues

relating to the learning outcomes. The answer may be fundamentally wrong or trivial.
• the examiners do not feel could be described as a serious attempt by any reasonable standards.