With reference to an organization of your choice, examine the impact of culture on organizational strategy.

Refer to Paper 2 markbands for 2016 forward, section C available under the "Your tests" tab > supplemental materials.

N.B. Although the question asks for the application of one concept on another, it is still expected that Business Management content will be aligned with the concepts especially the second concept (the one being acted on).

Please note that candidates can conclude that there was a minimal impact, however it has to be based on balanced arguments and evaluation.

Additional guidance in relation to the assessment criteria
For each criterion, the aim is to find the descriptor that conveys most accurately the level attained by the candidate, using the best-fit model. It is not necessary for every single aspect of a level descriptor to be met for that mark to be awarded.

• The highest level descriptors do not imply faultless performance and should be achievable by a candidate.
• A candidate who attains a high level of achievement for one criterion will not necessarily reach high levels of achievement for the other criteria and vice versa.

If only one concept is addressed:

• Criteria A, B, C and E: award up to a maximum [3].
• Criterion D: full marks can be awarded.

Where the question asks for impacts of two concepts on content, examiners must allow for unbalanced treatment of the two concepts throughout a candidate’s response. One concept may be more significant than the other.

Criterion B
For [2]: “…connection is not developed” should be treated the same as superficial.

Criterion C
1 + 1 arguments are expected per concepts.

• Questions 6 to 8 require consideration of the impact of one concept on a second concept – therefore accept 2 + 2 arguments for a balanced response.
• Justification is through logic or data.
• For [2] there is no balance as there are no counter arguments at all, or the arguments are all one-sided then this would be unjustified.
• For [3] there are some balanced arguments – some of which are justified.

Criterion D

• Introductions need to be concise and related to the question.
• The candidate’s response does not to have explicit headings for each structural element.
  
• A body is the area in which the substance of arguments occurs. It is usually located between the introduction and the conclusion.
  
• Fit-for-purpose paragraph means that ideas are presented in a clear academic way. For example, one idea per paragraph.
  

Criterion E

• One example of an “individual” could be an individual consumer or an individual manager. However, this cannot be considered with a “group” of consumers or a management team.
  
• For [4], a balanced response: look at the perspectives of both individual and group(s).
  
• The chosen individual, group needs to be applicable and relevant to the question with specific explanation.
  
• Candidates need to go beyond stating the stakeholder.
  
• Please do not use the adjective ‘inappropriate’ in the descriptor for 2 marks. If inappropriate award 1 mark
  
• Candidates need not explicitly say “stakeholder”.
  

In section C, the question rubric explicitly states that “organizations featured in sections A and B and in the paper 1 case study may not be used as a basis” to candidate’s answers to questions 6, 7 and 8. When this happens please award marks as follows:

Criterion A: award a maximum of [1]. The business management content cannot be relevant if the organization is fictitious.
Criterion B: 0 marks – there is no connection to a “real-world organization”
Criterion C: award a maximum of [1]. The arguments cannot be relevant if the organization is fictitious.
Criterion D: mark as normal.
Criterion E: award up to a maximum of [1]. The individual and/or group perspective(s) cannot be relevant if the organization is fictitious.

Accept organizational culture or national culture.

Accept any relevant organizational strategy.

 

Most candidates had at least some understanding of culture. They were weaker on organizational strategy. McDonald’s’ changing menu items when enter a new market, which was a commonly written essay, does not rise to the level of organization strategy, unless the question is examined in a fifty-year historical context, which did not happen.