BU4001 International Business Strategy Capstone Assignment SEM 1 2025/26
| University | University College Cork (UCC) |
| Subject | BU4001 International Business Strategy Capstone |
BU4001 Assignment Details
Department of Economics and Management and Marketing
CORK UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL
Module Code(s): BU4001
Module Title: International Business Strategy Capstone
Year: 2025/2026
Semester: 1
Struggling with your BU4001 International Business Strategy capstone?
Assignment 1: Vodafone: Sustainable Strategies for Future Growth
Write a report on Vodafone examining sustainable strategies for future growth addressing the following 6 key questions using the case evidence on Canvas and other evidence available:
- What should Vodafone’s value proposition be in the medium term? (Note: Your analysis should explore its value proposition, its customer segments, its markets as appropriate.)
- What are the key opportunities and threats that Vodafone will face into the future? (Note: Your analysis should include an external analysis exploring factors in Vodafone’s wider environment and its industry/market environment)
- What are the key strengths that Vodafone needs to build sustainable strategies for future growth? (Note: Your analysis should conduct an internal analysis to carefully consider the uniqueness of the resources and capabilities of Vodafone and the strengths and weaknesses of its business model to drive future sustainable growth.)
- Describe Vodafone’s International strategy, where should it go, how should it enter new markets and how should it manage the political and geopolitical risks it will face.
- Comment on how Vodafone’s strategy aligns with the ethical and CSR concerns in its internal and external environment.
- Finish by setting out recommendations for future growth and responsible leadership.
Referencing:
Check out the Harvard referencing guide for referencing styles and the student declaration form which should be attached to your submission.
Submission & Formatting Guidelines:
Please note the following in relation to assignment submission: Assignments should be typed and submitted as a word document.
- They should use a minimum of 12pt font size.
- The complete document should be named “BU4001_*your name_Assignment1”.
- The final assignment must be submitted via Canvas using the relevant assignment submission folder by 5pm on Friday 28th of November.
- Word Count: 2,500 excluding appendices but the appendices can be no more 25 pages.
- All assignments will be checked for plagiarism using Turnitin.
Assignment extension/permission for absence from an in-class test:
In exceptional circumstances students can apply for an extension on their assignment deadline or for permission for absence from an in-class exam. More details can be found at: CUBS Coursework Policy. Applications must be made online using the form: Request for Extension/Absence.
Assessment Feedback Policy:
Feedback will be provided via canvas with 20 working days.
Marking & Rubrics:
The assignment tests the application of frameworks to a case study. Marks will be awarded based on the selection of appropriate frameworks to gather a wide breadth of evidence. Strategic principles and models should be clearly, cohesively and comprehensively applied to a breadth of evidence. There should be a clear and comprehensive critical evaluation of the evidence building from the problem/issue/framework and aligned with evidence collected. Conclusions should set out clear recommendations for sustainable growth and responsible leadership into the future and be linked to the evidence gathered from frameworks. These should be plausible based on the findings from your analysis. The assessment should be professionally presented (e.g. Section headings and subheadings). All frameworks, literature and evidence should be carefully cited and referenced. It should be from trustworthy sources. See overleaf for the marking rubric.
BU4001 Marking Rubric
| Criteria | Excellent | Very Good | Competent | Basic | Insufficient |
| Selection and Application of Strategic Frameworks (30%) | Highly appropriate and relevant frameworks. Wide breadth of evidence gathered. Clear, cohesive, and comprehensive application of principles and models. | Appropriate frameworks with minor gaps. Sufficient evidence gathered. Clear application with minor lapses in cohesion or comprehensiveness. | Generally appropriate frameworks. Adequate evidence with some gaps. Clear but less consistent application of principles. |
Somewhat appropriate frameworks. Limited evidence with significant gaps. Basic application with limited cohesion. |
Inappropriate or irrelevant frameworks. Minimal or no evidence. Unclear or non-existent application of principles. |
| Critical Evaluation of Evidence (30%) | Comprehensive and insightful evaluation. Strong alignment with frameworks. Logical, well-supported conclusions. Sophisticated critical thinking. |
Good evaluation with minor gaps. Generally strong alignment with frameworks. Mostly logical conclusions. Strong critical thinking. |
Reasonable evaluation with some inconsistencies. Adequate alignment with frameworks. Somewhat logical conclusions. Basic critical thinking. |
Limited evaluation with significant gaps. Weak alignment with frameworks. Superficial or unsupported conclusions. Minimal critical thinking. |
Poor or absent evaluation. Misalignment with frameworks. Unsupported or flawed conclusions. Lack of critical thinking. |
| Conclusions and Recommendations (20%) | Clear, well-supported conclusions. Highly plausible and innovative recommendations. Strong alignment with findings. Deep understanding of strategic implications. |
Clear conclusions with minor gaps. Plausible recommendations. Good alignment with findings. Strong understanding of strategic implications. |
Mostly clear conclusions with some support. Plausible but less detailed recommendations. Reasonable alignment with findings. Basic understanding of strategic implications. |
Somewhat unclear conclusions. Marginally plausible recommendations. Weak alignment with findings. Limited understanding of strategic implications. |
Unclear or unsupported conclusions. Implausible or misaligned recommendations. Little to no understanding of strategic implications. |
| Presentation and Referencing (20%) | Professionally presented. Clear structure with appropriate headings. Careful citation and referencing from trustworthy sources. Clear, concise, error-free writing. |
Well-presented. Clear structure with minor lapses. citations and references are accurate. Minimal errors in writing. |
Adequately presented. Reasonable structure. Some inconsistencies in citations and references. Some errors in writing. |
Somewhat disorganized presentation. Basic structure. Significant inconsistencies in citations. Frequent errors in writing. | Poorly presented. Little to no structure. Inaccurate or absent citations and references. Numerous errors in writing. |
Can’t Complete Your UCC BU4001 Assignment On Time?
The BU4001 International Business Strategy Capstone assignment demands strong application of strategic frameworks, critical evaluation, and well-supported recommendations using real case evidence like Vodafone. Many students struggle to integrate PESTLE, Porter’s Five Forces, and resource-based analysis cohesively while meeting Harvard referencing standards. At Ireland Assignments, our strategy experts deliver human-written, AI-free business assignments aligned with university rubrics. Get focused assistance from UCC Assignment Helper specialists who understand case-based analysis. For reliable academic support, explore 24 hour assignment writing service and submit your capstone with confidence.
