7051CRB Leading Strategic Change through Creativity and Innovation CW Assignment Brief 2025-26 | CU

7051CRB Assignment Task

This is an individual assignment based on a critical analysis of a real organisational issue. To complete this assignment, you must submit three tasks:

Based on one of three case studies:

1. A written Strategy Report for Task 1
2. A Creative Brief and Supporting Notes for Task 2 

Based on your plans and objectives:

3. A written Reflective Element for Task 3

To complete this assignment, you must choose one of the case studies from the choice of three provided on Aula for this semester as below:

• Legal & General Affordable Homes
• Clockworx
• Sky Notes:

In your responses to Tasks 1 and 2, you are allowed to make reasonable research-based assumptions about the case study details provided. However, the case study should not be changed or compromised in any way.

Failure to use one of the three case studies above for Task 1 and/or Task 2 will result in a mark of zero for the entire assignment. Task 3 is not related to these case studies.

Task 1 – Strategy Report (1,500 words, 40% of the marks)

Produce a 1,500-word report on your chosen case study company, including a case study introduction, to:

• Critically evaluate the operating environment.
• propose a strategic change;
• complete a strategic analysis; and
• Propose a strategic change management plan.

Your Task 1 Strategy Report, based on the case study, should be structured as follows: 

Using definitions, appropriate tools and/or models:

Write a short introduction to the case study company (100 words).

1.1 Define “drivers of change”, then analyse the internal and external pressures on the case study company (400 words).

1.2 Define “strategy”, then analyse the current strategy, propose a strategic change to aid the development of the case study company and then analyse the proposed strategy. Use the same appropriate strategy model to analyse the current and proposed strategy (500 words).
 
1.3 Define “change and change management”, then describe the process by which you will manage your proposed change programme, recognising the effect that the change will have on employees (500 words).

Include a Task 1-specific list of references.

Task 2 – Launch Materials (1000 words, 30% of the marks)

You have been allocated an appropriate budget to outsource the design and creation of a set of Launch Materials for the change you have proposed in Task 1 for the Case Study company. No pricing or costing is required.

2.1  Creative Brief

You are therefore required to write a 500-word Creative Brief with descriptions, diagrams, sketches and drawings, as you see fit, to specify the creative and innovative nature of the change programme that you want to be communicated to your stakeholders and peers. Your Creative Brief will be sufficiently developed and detailed to allow a creative contractor to prepare a first draft of the Launch Materials without significant further reference to you.

The Launch Materials will consist of:

• a Project Name and Tagline, which are specified and created by you; and
• a Logo; and two A4 page Leaflets, which are specified, but not created by you; and
• one other intervention, specified, but not created by you, that you feel will further enhance the launch in the case study company (500 words).

In essence, your Creative Brief needs to include all the core information (what is your message and how you want it to look) that your selected contractor needs to correctly interpret your vision for the Launch Materials.

Note: If a submission includes a complete or essentially complete logo,/leaflet,/or other intervention, these aspects will be ignored from a marking perspective.

2.2 Supporting Notes: Analysis, theories and methods

You are required to document the creative process that you followed as you wrote the Creative Brief in a Supporting Notes document.

There are two key aspects to the Supporting Notes document:

• Your analysis of the process you followed – how and why you made the decisions inherent in the Creative Brief (250 words); and
• identification of the specific creativity and innovation theories, approaches and methods that you followed (250 words).

In essence, how you did it, why you did it and the academic approaches you followed for each of those decisions.

Note: If a submission includes generic or essentially generic material in the Supporting Notes, this will be ignored from a marking perspective; it must be specific to your creative brief.

Include a Task 2-specific list of references.

Task 3: (1,000 words, 30% of the marks)

Note: Task 3 is about you and NOT the case study company.
Describe your specific Target Career in terms of a job role, industry sector and, if appropriate, prospective employers. (100 words).

3.1. Using definitions, and based on your Target Career

Define “leadership”; then reflect on where leadership, innovation and creativity will be essential in your Target Career. Use an appropriate leadership model to explore the key leadership qualities and skills you will need to lead a team tasked with managing a strategic change with creativity and innovation in your Target Career, and why leadership innovation and creativity will be essential in your target career (450 words)

3.2 Having identified the key leadership qualities and skills you will require:

Identify the gaps between your current and ideal position, then decide which are the two most important skills and/or behaviours you want to develop and why. Use SMART objectives to identify the key aspects of your Personal Development Plan to demonstrate how you plan to achieve this (450 words).

Note: 3.1 and 3.2 are specifically in the context of your Target Career; this is not a generic question.

Include a Task 3-specific list of references.

For ALL Tasks

It is expected that appropriate models, academic sources and good practice will be applied and be academically rigorous to support your work throughout.

You should focus your report primarily (at least 60% of references overall) on learning material from Aula and CMI LeadershipDirect. Submissions without references or with less than 60% CMI/Aula-based references will be marked out of 90%.

You must include appropriately listed and cited references, using APA 7 for each task. Students on law-related courses where OSCOLA is used may continue to do so in this assignment.

A typical APA 7 Aula page reference should include the specific page title, with its Aula Page ID number. For example, Burke and Litwin, in Short Course 1:1, would be referenced as “Aula 7051CRB. (2025a). Applying Burke & Litwin [P1:1-106]. 
The in-text citation would be (Aula 7051CRB, 2025a). Each Aula reference and matching citation has a unique suffix on the date field. See the assignment support material and support sessions for further examples, including CMI Leadership Direct referencing.
 
Your report must include a cover sheet (from Aula) and a contents page, with your student number (NOT your name), your chosen employer case study and your word count.

It must be typed in MS Word (do NOT upload PDF versions of your work); include page numbers; be written in font size 12 and be 1.5 line-spaced and submitted as a single, complete MS Word document to Turnitin. You are encouraged to familiarise yourself with the appropriate Turnitin submission link before submission. Ensure that you have saved a copy of your submission and save a copy of the Turnitin receipt after you have submitted.

The word count is 3,500. There is an allowance of plus or minus 10% of the word count limit, excluding the lists of references, table of contents and the cover sheet.

7051CRB Marking and Feedback

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked by the module marking team.

How will the marks be allocated?

Your 3,500-word equivalent submission will be assessed on the following areas:

Marks out of:
Task 1 – Developing a Change Management Strategy	40%
Task 2 – Developing presentation materials to support the change	30%
Task 3 – Reflective personal and professional development account	30%

How will I receive my grades and feedback?

Your final results will be published and made available via SOLAR. Feedback will be provided on Turnitin using the Rubric icon.

What will I be marked against?

Details of the marking criteria for this task can be found at the bottom of this assignment brief.

7051CRB Assessed Module Learning Outcomes

The Learning Outcomes for this module align with the marking criteria, which can be found at the end of this brief. Ensure you understand the marking criteria to ensure achievement of the assessment task. The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task:

LO1	Critically evaluate approaches to organisational strategy and managing change in professional practice.
LO2	Critically review the application of creativity and innovation in changing an organisational strategy to achieve a business objective
LO3	Critically reflect on the leadership qualities for effectively managing strategic change with creativity and innovation about professional development

Professional Standards and Regulatory Body (CMI) Learning Outcomes:

LO1	Understand how to develop strategy
LO2	Know how to develop strategy
LO3	Understand the scope and context of strategic change
LO4	Know how to propose a strategy for leading strategic change

Assignment Support and Academic Integrity

If you have any questions about this assignment, please see the Student Guidance on Coursework for more information.

Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar:

You are expected to use effective, accurate, and appropriate language within this assessment task.

Academic Integrity:

The work you submit must be your own, or in the case of groupwork, that of your group. All sources of information need to be acknowledged and attributed; therefore, you must provide references for all sources of information and acknowledge any tools used in the production of your work, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). We use detection software and make routine checks for evidence of academic misconduct.

Definitions of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and collusion, can be found on the Student Portal. All cases of suspected academic misconduct are referred for investigation, the outcomes of which can have profound consequences for your studies. For more information on academic integrity, please visit the Academic and Research
Integrity section of the Student Portal.

Support for Students with Disabilities or Additional Needs:

If you have a disability, long-term health condition, specific learning difference, mental health diagnosis or symptoms and have discussed your support needs with health and wellbeing, you may be able to access support that will help with your studies.

If you feel you may benefit from additional support, but have not disclosed a disability to the University, or have disclosed but are yet to discuss your support needs, it is important to let us know so we can provide the right support for your circumstances. Visit the Student Portal to find out more.

Unable to Submit on Time?

The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you cannot submit your assessment by the deadline or sit a scheduled exam. If you think this might be the case, guidance on understanding what counts as an extenuating circumstance and how to apply is available on the Student Portal.

	Task 1
	Drivers of change and analysis	Current and proposed strategy	Change and change management
80 to 100%	Exceptional work. Professionally addressed; accurate definition; precise analysis of pressures; insightful analysis; precise supporting evidence; strong case study linkage	Exceptional work. Professionally addressed; accurate definition; insightful current and proposed strategy; strong case study linkage	Exceptional work. Professionally addressed; accurate definition; insightful process; precise impact analysis; strong case study linkage
70 to 79%	Excellent work. Fully addressed; clear definition; comprehensive analysis of pressures; full supporting evidence; clear case study linkage	Excellent work. Fully addressed; clear definition; comprehensive current and proposed strategy; clear case study linkage	Excellent work. Fully addressed; clear definition; comprehensive process; strong impact analysis; clear case study linkage
60 to 69%	Very good work. Largely addressed; largely clear definition; analysis of pressures mostly developed; mainly appropriate evidence; largely clear case study linkage	Very good work. Largely addressed; largely clear definition; mainly comprehensive current and proposed strategy; largely clear case study linkage	Very good work. Largely addressed; largely clear definition; mainly clear process; mostly developed impact analysis; largely clear case study linkage
50 to 59%	Good work. Appropriately addressed; some irrelevance; sufficient definition; satisfactory analysis of pressures; sufficient evidence; sufficient case study linkage	Good work. Generally addressed; some irrelevance; satisfactory current and proposed strategy; sufficient case study linkage	Good work. Generally addressed; some irrelevance; sufficient definition; satisfactory process; appropriate impact analysis; sufficient case study linkage
40 to 49%	Outcomes met. Attempt to address; significant irrelevance; adequate definition; analysis of pressures undeveloped; some evidence present; passable case study linkage	Outcomes met. Attempt to address; significant irrelevance; adequate definition; acceptable current and proposed strategy; passable case study linkage	Outcomes met. Attempt to address; significant irrelevance; adequate definition; acceptable process; adequate impact analysis; passable case study linkage
Fail – 30 to 35%	Outcomes not met. Limited attempt to address; considerable irrelevance; poor definition; poor analysis of pressures; little or no evidence; little or no case study linkage	Outcomes not met. Limited attempt to address; considerable irrelevance; poor definition; poor current and proposed strategy; little or no case study linkage	Outcomes not met. Limited attempt to address; considerable irrelevance; poor definition; poor process; little or no impact analysis; little or no case study linkage
Fail – 0 to 29%	Outcomes not met. Minimal attempt to address; mostly irrelevant; no/ in- correct definition; little/no analysis of pressures; little/no evidence; little/no case study linkage	Outcomes not met. Minimal attempt to address; mostly irrelevant; no/ in- correct definition; little/no current and proposed strategy; little/no case study linkage	Outcomes not met. Minimal attempt to address; mostly irrelevant; no/ in- correct definition; little/no valid pro- cess; little/no meaningful impact analysis; little/no case study linkage

	Task 2
	Creation/innovation	Analysis/reflection	Quality/referencing
80 to 100%	Exceptional work. Professional quality; all expected interventions2 present; strong message; fully integrated; astute thoughts; highly original creativity/innovation; great care demonstrated; no contractor issues	Exceptional work. Professionally addressed; insightful analysis/reflection on creation/ innovation process; what/how/why done meticulous and individual; strong theoretical process and methods	Exceptional work. Language particularly clear/expressive; full range of appropriate sources; correct APA71 referencing; 60% Aula/CMI references present.
70 to 79%	Excellent work. All expected interventions2 present; clear message; fully integrated; insightful thoughts; original creativity and innovation; good care demonstrated; few contractor issues	Excellent work. Analysis/reflection on creation/ innovation process fully developed; what/how/why done clear and individual; full theoretical process and methods	Excellent work. Language clear/ expressive; wide range of appropriate sources; correct APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
60 to 69%	Very good work. All expected interventions2 present; largely clear message; mostly integrated; sensible thoughts; largely original creativity/innovation; care demonstrated; some contractor issues	Very good work. Analysis/reflection on creation/innovation process largely developed; what/how/why done largely clear and individual; theoretical process and methods mostly addressed	Very good work. Language generally clear/expressive; appropriate sources; mostly correct APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
50 to 59%	Good work. All expected interventions2 reasonably present; reasonably clear message; reasonably integrated; modest thoughts; sufficient creativity/ innovation; reasonable care demonstrated; some contractor guidance will be needed.	Good work. Insightful analysis/reflection on creation/innovation process generally developed; what/how/why done sufficient with little generic content; theoretical process and methods partly addressed	Good work. Minor/infrequent clarity/accuracy lapses; mostly appropriate sources; mostly correct APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
40 to 49%	Outcomes met. Expected interventions2 mostly present; quite clear message; some integration; adequate thoughts; some creativity and innovation; adequate care demonstrated; significant contractor guidance will be needed	Outcomes met. Analysis/reflection on creation/innovation process attempted; significant irrelevance; what/how/why done undeveloped some generic content; theoretical process and methods addressed adequately	Outcomes met. Frequent clarity/accuracy lapses; some inappropriate/ absent sources; attempt at APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
Fail – 30 to 35%	Outcomes not met. Limited attempt; expected interventions2 only partly present; unclear message; little integration; inadequate thoughts; original creativity and innovation; little care demonstrated; contractor will struggle	Outcomes not met. Limited attempt; generic in nature; limited analysis/reflection on creation/innovation process; considerable irrelevance; what/how/why done poor; little or no theoretical process or methods	Outcomes not met. Language often unclear/confusing; mostly inappropriate/ absent sources; insufficient/ weak referencing; 60% Aula/CMI references generally not present
Fail – 0 to 29%	Outcomes not met. Minimal attempt; expected interventions2 mostly absent; vague message; no integration; mostly absent thoughts; no creativity and innovation; no care demonstrated; contractor will probably decline the work	Outcomes not met. Minimal attempt; analysis/ reflection on creation/innovation process missing, generic or mostly irrelevant; no attempt or generic what/how/why done; theoretical process and methods absent or generic	Outcomes not met. Language unclear/ confusing; entirely inappropriate/ absent sources; absent/invalid referencing; 60% Aula/CMI references not present

	Task 3
	Leadership skills	SMART objectives	Quality/referencing
80 to 100%	Exceptional work. Target career described particularly clearly; application to target career described meticulously; appropriate model selected; key leadership qualities identified and justified; clearly personal not generic	Exceptional work. Skills gaps identified particularly clearly; two most important skills/behaviours identified clearly and justified; thoughtful, individual and practical SMART objectives; clearly personal not generic	Exceptional work. Language particularly clear/expressive; full range of appropriate sources; correct APA71 referencing; 60% Aula/CMI references present.
70 to 79%	Excellent work. Target career described clearly; application to target career described fully; appropriate model selected; key leadership qualities identified and justified; clearly personal not generic	Excellent work. Skills gaps identified clearly; two most important skills/behaviours identified clearly and justified; thoughtful, individual and practical SMART objectives; clearly personal not generic	Excellent work. Language clear/ expressive; wide range of appropriate sources; correct APA7 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
60 to 69%	Very good work. Target career described; application to target career described largely clearly; appropriate model selected; key leadership qualities identified and justified largely clearly; clearly personal not generic	Very good work. Skills gaps identified; two most important skills/behaviours identified largely clearly and mostly justified; largely clear individual and pract- ical SMART objectives; clearly personal not generic	Very good work. Language generally clear/expressive; appropriate sources; mostly correct APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI
50 to 59%	Good work. Target career described reasonably; application to target career described sufficiently; generally appropriate model selected; some key leadership qualities identified and justified sufficiently; mostly personal not generic	Good work. Skills gaps identified; two most important skills/behaviours identified sufficiently clearly and suitably justified; sufficiently clear, individual probably practical SMART objectives; mostly personal not generic	Good work. Minor/infrequent clarity/accuracy lapses; mostly appropriate sources; mostly correct APA71 referencing; 60% references Aula/CMI