Courses

Administrative Policy International Management Organizational Behavior Strategic Decision Making  Strategic Management   

               

Administrative Policy

Administrative Policy  489                                                                                

Instructor:    Jerry Gosen                                                                        E-mail Office Hrs: MW 9:00-11:00    

5046 Carlson Bldg                                                                                  Face2face Office hours:                                                                                                                          T: 12:15 -3; Th: 1:15- 2:30

E-mail: gosenpuj@uww.edu goggsenpuj@mail.uww.edu                                                                                                              

  Text:  Strategic Management by Thompson and Strickland Edition 15

Micromatic: oaktreesim.com/micromatic

/THIS OUTLINE CONTAINS INFORMATION ON HOW I GRADE.  WHEN I GRADE CASES, I FOLLOW THE GRADING CRITERIA CONTAINED IN THIS OUTLINE. YOU SHOULD READ IT, NOW AND JUST BEFORE YOU WRITE YOUR CASE ANALYSES. 

          Course Objectives:  This is the capstone course in your undergraduate program.  It is intended to give you experience in (1) integrating concepts from a variety of fields‑notably business environmental analysis, strategic management, accounting, finance, marketing, production-operations, economics, organizational behavior and organizational theory,  (2) applying concepts to de­scriptions of real life situations, (3) understanding the perspectives of top management, (4) digging deep and organizing large amounts of information in di­verse forms including theo­reti­cal, simple statistical, and financial, for analysis and decision making purposes and (5) understanding the features, dynamics and types of strategy.  This course focuses on decisions top manage­ment must make to help their firms become more effective. 

Method of Instruction:  A multi‑mode instructional approach will be used, including "outside" and textbook readings, case analysis and discussion, outside speak­ers and a computerized management decision making game. 

Note:  In many ways this is a review course.  It covers concepts you’ve been exposed to in other courses. Here you integrate and apply these concepts.  

Grading:    Written Case Assignments                             45% 

                   Class participation                                        15%

                   Quizzes                                                        10%

                   Game                                                           30%

                        Competitive Performance                        10-20%

                        Game Reports                                         10-20%                 

NOTE: On the fifth page of this syllabus there are grading criteria for cases.  I use them to grade your case analyses.   

The final case is a capstone case and therefore important.  I grade in a way that  prevents “blowing off” the final case.  Concretely: 

IMPORTANT NOTE:

You cannot get a final grade of A without at least a 75 on the final case.

You cannot get a final grade of B without at least a 70 on the final case.

You cannot get a final grade of C without at least a 60 on the final case.

You cannot get a final grade of D without at least a 50 on the final case.  

The Game 

You will be participating in a computerized business game or simulation.  It will cost you $40 to register. In it, you will own a business which makes and sells Micromatic.  You can consider these  like small appliances.  Thirty percent of your course grade depends on performance associated with the game.  Up to twenty percent depends on performance from game decisions. That grade will depend, to a great degree, on how profitable your business is.  In determining each company's numerical performance score on the game, accu­mulated results will be consid­ered.  

   Criterion                            Weight

            Net Income(after taxes)     40%

            ROA                                  10%

            Return on sales                   25%

            Stock Price                        10%

            Sales                                  15%  

When you register it is highly recommended that you play Solo as a way to get used to the game. Those who do not very often play the competitive game at a disadvantage.  

You will begin the competitive game in teams of 3 (perhaps 2).  About 4 quarters into the game, I will copy the game program into 3 games, teams will split, and each player will take the team’s company into a new industry, and then begin the game over.  Players will compete against other individual players from other teams.  

Game Reports   Part of your game grade is based on reports on game progress.  There will be 2 reports one by teams and one by individuals, but the second one will count more.  If the second is higher than the first, the first one will not count at all.  If the first is higher than the second, the first one will count one quarter as much as the second.  

The assignment for both reports is to use game knowledge and understanding to explain why you did as well or poorly as you have in the game.

Criteria

            1. Accuracy, thoroughness and importance of game understanding.

2. Clearness and thoroughness of understanding of why you did as well or as poorly as you did     in the game.

            3. Use of data

            4. ability to capture game complexity

Criteria 1 and 2 count more than 3 and 4

 Cafeteria Grading  There will be cafeteria style grading for the game, as follows.  Students will be able to choose the game grade weights among 2 possible grades: performance on the game itself, and reports analyzing game performance.  The total of % associated with the game must equal 30.

                                                                                    Minimum          Maximum

            Game performance                                                10                    20

            Reports                                                                 10                    20

 

Classroom Procedures and the Participation and quiz Grades:   

The subjective participation grade will depend on classroom participation, on case write ups, and on attendance..  I will try and assess whether you are prepared for class.  Not preparing and missing class will hurt your participation grade.  So will dominating discussion and disruptive behavior.  

Regarding attendance, you will lose 1 pt. from your participation grade for your 3rd  and 4th absences and 1 1/2 pts. for each subsequent absence. (1 hour and 15 minutes = a class)  

  For those who choose to not participate verbally you can prove preparation by supplying a paper summarizing and analyzing the case or chapter.  The paper should be about a page.  Credit will not  be given for papers summarizing only parts of the case.  Less credit will be given when only short  cases are summarized.  More credit will be given for thoughtful analyses. 

Quizzes.  You r grade on quizzes counts 10% of your grade.  Pop quizzes can be on cases or assigned chap­ters or articles.  I’ll quiz you on more than half the cases and articles I assign you.  I grade on the degree to which your answers to quizzes reflect thorough participation.  Partial or non-thorough preparation could result in a poor quiz score. 

Written Case Assignments:  Case assignments mean written cases to be done at home and handed in.  There will be two.  The last will be a comprehensive case.

            1st assignment                 15%

            2nd assignment                30%

 

THIS OUTLINE CONTAINS INFORMATION ON HOW I GRADE.  WHEN I GRADE YOUR PAPERS, I FOLLOW THE GRADING CRITERIA CONTAINED IN THIS OUTLINE. YOU SHOULD READ THEM, NOW AND JUST BEFORE YOU WRITE YOUR CASE ANALYSES.            

Criteria for Grading Cases:  Maximum page limit for case analysis: 6 pages on the 1st case, 9 on final. This is not a rigid limit. If it takes you more pages than 6 (or 9 for the final case) to make the points you feel you need to make, then go over the limit.  The limit is there partially to encourage you to be succinct and partially to discourage padding, that is just writing to write a long paper or show me you know ‘stuff.’

 

A.     Report and interpret data fully and appropriately.  Any data contained in the case that sheds light on important case issues should be reported and interpreted. Ratios, expenses, sales and/or income figures should be reported over time and compared with industry and/or similar firms, especially if pertinent to the rest of the analysis. Data not compared will receive lowered grades. Ratio analysis is par­ticularly important.  Expense analysis can also be very important.  Papers without financial analysis and ratios and papers without calculations done by the student will receive low grades on the data grading criteria.   

                 The appropriate data should be reported.  For example, in Wendy's, sales rates are more important  than the current ratio. 

    Doing calculations on your own will count more than mere reporting; e.g., For company X has lost $20, 50, 80, 115, and 135 million            over  the past 5 years.  Looks bad doesn't it?  But the losses are at a decreasing rate.  Doing such simple (or more complicated) calculations, if relevant, will help your grade.  

Data should be interpreted.  Data should help explain whether a company’s choices are good ones.  For example, if it is expanding, are its returns and activity ratios increasing with size?  Data should also exhibit the results of case phenomena and events.  For example, in Wendy’s, prices increased and franchisees lowered quality.  These are reflected in lower profit margins and lower sales per franchise store.  

Data conclusions should connect to your strategic analysis.  If, for example, you want your company to diversify, and your data shows a consistent drop in profits for the present products and services, you can use the data to support your stra­tegic suggestions.  Or if a company is growing and its return on sales is dropping, that justifies criticizing a growth strategy.   

B.     Identify strategies and deal with the appropriate level of strategy.  Sometimes a key specific strat‑ egy means a lot for survival, growth, or the profit picture of the firm.  In that case, describe and evaluate that strategy.  More often though, it's more important for this course to deal with general direction strategies (e.g. quality hamburgers for adults for Wendy's).  At any rate, you will be graded on 1) whether or not you describe accurately the strategies of the firm or corporation, 2) the degree to which you choose the proper level of strategy, 3) whether the strategies you choose are the key ones for the firm and 4) the degree to which your list completely describes the company stra- tegies.  Sometimes, key general direction strategies are not obvious, but you may be graded on how well you find them.  That means that some key strategies are not explicit in the case and you’ll be expected to find strategies inherent in patterns of and decisions made by the company.  For example, acquiring a specific company or developing a particular product is not a general direction strategy, but acquisitions or developing new products often is.  

C.    Evaluate and recommend due to the correct reasons.  Evaluation of strategies should be in terms of 1) environmental features or trends; 2) company strengths, weaknesses and/or resource positions; 3) stage of product market evolu­tion, for example when the market is growing fast; 4) values of key people; 5) competitive position, 6) the market trends; 7) features of the industry; 8) features of the market, and 9) customer characteristics.  For example, Wend­y's chicken/salad bar strat­egy was appropriate because they had a reputa­tion for quality (strength), there was a market of health‑consci­ous adults who were in a hurry (customer characteristics) and their present market was getting older and more health conscious (market features).  Also beef prices were increasing (an environmental trend).  And the more of the above reasons you use the better.  If you evaluated Wendy's in terms of both the strength and the environmental factors plus perhaps other factors, you'd get a higher grade than if you used only one factor.  You don't always have to recommend future strategies, but if you do, say why in terms of the members of the above list.  Students often do not do well on this crite­rion.  

D.         Write well and write an analysis that hangs together.  Try to get your recommendations to be based on the rest of your analysis.  If you recommend changes in direction for the company, show how its present direction has produced negative financial results and/or show how the present direction is not appropriate.  Likewise, if the data says to you that the company is performing OK and you see present strategies as appropriate, then you don't have to recommend changes.  What if the data says one direction, and your evaluation of a present strategy says something else?  For example, financially the company is doing OK, but they could do even better if they adapted to changing market trends.  In this case, present your conclusions acknowledging or considering the pros and cons of all choices.  At any rate, you will be graded on how well your analysis is coherent, how well it is written, and how well you cap­ture the case's complexity.  

E.    Correct  use of theory.  Theory refers to application of the concepts from lecture and the assigned readings (or applying points you learned from previous cases or the game).  This category might be worth less than the others. (If the other categories are worth 15 points, this one may be worth as little as 5 but could be worth 10.)  And there will be a higher likelihood that I will add more points for a good job on this category than on the others.  

F      Analyze rather than describe and judge.  The analysis needs to focus on why strategic decisions are made, their consequences     and                         appropriateness.  In this course, merely describing actions, events and decisions or merely judging actions or decisions (without assessing the appropriateness in terms of C. above) will likely earn a low grade.  It should be noted that during class I will describe decisions on the environment, strategies, etc. but I will always try to put these in analytic (causes, meanings, consequences, appropriateness) frames by the end of class discussion. 

G.     Deal with the important issues as defined by the author and me.  I rarely give trick cases. So what the case is about is usually fairly clear.  Often there is more than one correct focus.  So you need to figure out what the case is about and organize your paper (to at least some degree) around that. 

        H. For the final case only, show how the way strategy is implemented is consistent with company strategies. 

Usually I grade in the following manner.  I begin with 100 points.  Then I subtract (or sometimes add) points depending on how analytical you are, how strategic you are, how well you handle data, how well you evaluate strategy and how well your analysis hangs together (i.e., I use the criteria A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H above.  Usually, A, B, C, count the most, with G the next most.  E and H count the next most.  Of the 6 categories I’m most likely to add points for E.  I very rarely add points for D and F, but I rarely subtract points and very rarely subtract more than a few for D and F.  

Materials:

-Cases not in text will be either handed out or found on reserve or D2L

-Cases on reserve are on electronic reserve under the name of the case.  

Course reading materials not in the text may be obtained thru the UWW Anderson Library WEBSITE. Click Find Reserves on the Library home page.  Click on the direct link to course reserves. Sign in. On the course pull down menu, click on MGT 489. On the professor pull down menu, click on Gosen. Click on search. Click on the item you want.  Items are often in parts; you are responsible for all parts (unless otherwise specified). 

D2L also contains course materials not found in the test, discussion questions, as well as this syllabus. 

Schedule

*Note:  This schedule is to be followed unless otherwise noted.  From time to time, I forget to announce the next day's assignment.  If I do forget, you are responsible for the earliest prepared for event and assignment on the outline not already covered.  Also the schedule is necessarily tentative due to uncertainties regard­ing the game, the time it takes for discussions and guest speakers.

 

Topic                                                                                               Assignment

1.  Course & Strategy Introduction                                              

  2.  Strategy Introduction, Business Concept, Position                        TSG, Chs. 1 & 5

  3.  Game Introduction & Reports                   

  4.  Data Lecture                                                                               Begin Solo (game), TSG pp 98-99

  5.   Wendy’s (CER)

  6.  Wendy’s con’t                                                                             Micromatic first decision – Decisions

Strategy evaluation lecture                                                                     likely due every Tuesday @ 9AM unless otherwise specified

  7.  Dell (TSG)

Core Competency Lecture                                                                TSG: 

8.   Dell con’t

9. Value Chain; Krispy Kreme (CHO)  

10.Krispy Kreme con’t                                                                     TSG 110-114

Kremed                                                                                           (AER)                                                                                                                                                                                                      12.  Oliver markets (TSG                                                                 New competitive

Turbulent environments                                                                         Landscape (AER)

  13. Guest Speaker

  14.  Open                                                                                             First Written Analysis due

                                                                                                            To be handed out

                                                                                                        Game changes to individuals

  15.  Implicit Strategies; competitive strategies                                    TSG: 177-83

    Dell revisited                                                                                

  16  Black and Decker (CER)                                                            1st game report (groups)

  17.              Black and Decker (con’t)

Diversification Lecture                                                                      TSG 272-283

  18.  Puma(CER)

 Globalization Lecture                                                                       Yip (AER)

  19. South African Breweries (CER)

  20.  SAB (con’t)                                                                              Second game Report Due

      Implementation Lecture                                                               Individuals TSG 322-324, 359-365

  21.  Guest Lecture                                                                           

  22.  Starbucks  (TSG)

  23.     Nucor   (CER)                                                                       TSG 384-368, 404-410

  24. Nucor Con’t W.L. 

    25.    Social Responsibility

  26.  Merck (TSG)

  27.  Zeeburgh CER

  28. 2 Cheers for sweatshops                                                                 Final Case Analysis: Lincoln Electric (CHO)  

  CER= Case on Electronic Reserve; 

TSG = Case in text

AER= Article on Electronic Reserve

CHO=  Case handed out

Back to the top

International Management

Management 777: International Management

Jerry Gosen                                                                  Office Hrs.

Carlson 5046                                                               Amer.  Family MW 8:15-9:00

gosenpuj@uww.edu                                                     Email  MW 9-11

262-472-3956                                                             T:  5-6:30

/facstaff.uww.edu/gosenpuj/Teaching%20Philosophy.htm

  There is no text book.  Course materials consist of cases and articles. Most these materials are attainable on D2L for this course. Course reading materials may be also obtained thru the UWW Anderson Library WEBSITE.  Find Reserves on the Library home page.  Click on the direct link to course reserves. Sign in and submit query.  On the course pull down menu, click on MGT 777. On the professor pull down menu, click on Gosen. Click on search. Click on the item you want.  Items are often in parts; you are responsible for all parts (unless otherwise specified).

 Points to be made

Doing business internationally (as opposed to domestically only) is a given.  Way more than 90% of all companies will have to deal with entities from foreign lands.  As examples: the vast majority of electrical appliances  are made outside the US, and companies are outsourcing (to foreign lands) an increasing number of units and employees. 

National Culture counts; companies have to adjust to the culture they are dealing in. (For example if a company establishes a unit in a Moslem country, it must allow employees time for daily prayers.)  However more factors than culture influence international business behavior, and these non-cultural factors can, in many cases, be more important than culture. 

As an influence, culture impacts how companies deal with their employees and customers.  It also influences and modifies the way companies manage human resources.  Culture has less influence over finance, manufacturing and strategy. 

In the search for understanding cultural stereotypes furnish a beginning, but they are only that.  Consider that the stereotype is that the Japanese fear uncertainty, while the American stereotype is much the opposite.  Why then, are American inter-company relations extremely legalistic and Japanese companies relate to each other with a handshake? 

The international business world is very complicated and competitive – to the point that countries compete with each other for business.  Note for example how many produced in Hollywood movies are made in Canada, Central Europe, or Mexico. 

As opposed to domestic or multi-national, businesses are using a global strategy (global means the same strategy in every country.  As businesses get more global, business practices become increasing more uniform. These practices are not totally uniform and national culture still influences but practices are becoming more homogenous. Consider how different a computer is for a Russian person than it is for an Australian. 

Coordination among parts of companies and among partners is a key competitive advantage. 

Knowledge management and transfer is an important consideration and the above- mentioned coordination helps with knowledge management. 

The international business environment is rapidly changing. Players have to be adaptive and flexible.  Employees need to be treated so that they too are knowledgeable and flexible.  This is true even in cultures that are authoritarian. 

The whole value chain needs to be managed for competitive advantage.  This is true domestic or international, macro or micro.  Wal-mart is a great example. 

Cross-border outsourcing is a given. Outsourcing thoughtfully is a competitive advantage advantage. Outsourcing thoughtfully is more than finding cheap labor. 

Morality in the international business place is tricky.  There are some absolute “bads”, but what is good or bad often changes with the situation. 

It is very possible that changes in the course schedule, procedures, and/or requirements will be necessary. If necessary, such changes will be announced. 

Grading

Individual Case Analyses          25

Class Participation                    25

Project                                     25

Exam                                        25                

  Class Participation and the Class Participation Grade:

 Most class sessions will entail discussions of cases and articles.  The participation grade will be based on attendance and the instructor’s impressions of the quality of a person’s discussion and the degree to which he or she is prepared. 

Regarding attendance, you will lose 1 pt. from your participation grade for your 2nd absence and 2.5 pts. for each subsequent absence. The penalty for leaving in the middle of class without an excuse is 2.5 points. 

I reward preparedness, thoughtfulness, and discussing (reacting to others, asking questions, challenging others’ [including the instructor].  Because this is a small class, I will easily be able to judge preparedness, and that is the most important thing.  Still the following will also apply. 

The participation part of your grade cannot be entirely objective, for three reasons.  First, it is based on whether or not you are participating from preparedness and I will not be able to always judge that objectively.  Second, I must judge quality (thoughtfulness) of contribution and that is also not done easily, objectively. Third, attitude is a factor.  I must distinguish contributions whose purposes are solely to get partic­ipation points from those which are intended to teach, reflect, add to the discussion, or obtain learning.  I try to reward input that builds off of others’ input, shows a willingness to disagree, seems thoughtful or welcoming of other’s opinions.  I try not to reward dominance. Quantity counts but it is not the only factor. 

 Talking is not required.  If you do not want to talk and still want a decent grade, you can write summaries of assigned readings, and cases. Credit will not be given for papers summarizing only parts of an assignment.    More credit will be given for thoughtful analyses. On the other hand in a small class, it will be hard to avoid discussions, because I will call on individuals for their opinion. 

Projects

Students can chose their project, within limits.  The project must deal with some aspect of international management.  It must be both international in scope and deal with management.  It should have a point of view, for example: 1) prove a point or hypothesis, 2) point out a set of problems and how to solve them, 3) analyze why an entity is as successful or as unsuccessful as it is, 4) suggest, how to do something or why do something a certain way. The project must use articles and cases from the class or a set of similar articles (or cases).  Projects need to be approved by me.  They need to be written, with references AND likely presented to the class.  Your grade will be on the written document; in extremely rare cases a high quality verbal presentation could raise a grade. 

The best project will be on a topic that you are interested in. If you can’t think of something unique to your interests, then there are some examples of possible projects that follow. 

Students can chose a company to analyze.  They should choose a company they are familiar with.  If possible, they should choose a company they’re working for or have worked for.  The project could be to analyze the company in terms of a set of concepts from the course. Or the company could have a problem and the student could solve it with the course. 

You could argue against one of the course assumptions, using course materials or materials that you have gathered.  For example the course argues that culture is not the most important factor in international relations.  You could argue a different opinion. 

Students could focus on a particular country and analyze it in terms of a set of concepts from the course. Examples:  A student could choose a country and take the US point of view suggesting how a US manager or company could effectively behave in that country.   He or she could focus on the country, suggest why (companies in) it might be successful, suggest  what problems companies in that country might have in operating internationally, or compare and contrast the country from others in doing business internationally.:

Grading Criteria

Understanding of Articles applied

Quality (accuracy, thoroughness) of application

Thoroughness

Thought

Perceived effort

Writing Quality and coherency.

Quality and Quantity of materials applied. (Wipedia used beyond the slightest degree will get you a very low grade) 

Cases:

Hopefully you will see that as we discuss cases in class, I try to accomplish two things.  First I want (us) to understand the case, analyze what’s going on, ‘get’ why the case was presented.  For example the Lincoln electric case was presented to show that American notions of monetary incentive systems are rarely accepted in other lands. It also shows the multi-nationals need to consider the context when establishing units overseas, and that Americans can be naive. It also shows how humane a company can be to its employees.  

Second I want to apply theory to the case. The content of many of the articles we study in this course apply to cases. I want us to see how the theory applies to a real situation, how the theory of the course helps us to enrich the understanding of the case. As a very general non-detailed example, Lincoln’s strategy was a global one and they did not consider culture when establishing their financial incentive system.  Much of the cross- cultural literature suggests that when individuals are involved, companies have to consider national culture when establishing practices (such as an incentive system) and Lincoln did not. Also both Yip and Porter (who wrote articles assigned in this course) would say that a global strategy is appropriate for Lincoln because welding machines are used the same world-wide.  

Written Case Grading Criteria:  Written case analyses will be graded on the following criteria. 

1.          Quality of analysis.  Do you analyze rather than describe or judge? ?  (Analyz­ing means discussing why, using causes and consequences, and concretely judg­ing appropriateness of strategies and actions.)  Does your analysis hang together (do you present problem A and solve that problem rather than solving problem B)?  Are you thorough?  Are you thoughtful?  Does your paper capture the case's complexity?  

I prefer you to apply the articles to the case instead of using the case as an example of the articles. 

2.                  Does the paper deal accurately, thoroughly, and in depth with concepts emphasized in the course?  By depth I mean you cannot simply mention a general concept and expect to get credit. For Example 1:  You cannot say in applying Yip that a company should use a global strategy because the industry contains global drivers.  You must specify the global driver and explain how it exists in that industry.  Example 2:  You cannot say a company needs to be strategically flexible because it exists in the new competitive landscape.  You must explain how its strategy needs to be flexible and what about its environment makes it like the new competitive landscape. 

3.                  Correct answer.  The paper should deal with topics important to the case and the course.  I’m more interested in 1)how well you apply the articles and 2) a thoughtful coherent analysis than if you get the “correct” answer, but if you don’t deal with important issues raised by the both the case and the course, your grade will likely suffer. 

4. Perceived Effort. 

There is no precise formula for which of the above counts more or less.  E.G., very poorly written papers may fail even if OK on the other criteria, or a great paper on an incorrect but important topic may get an A (while an ade­quate paper on a trivial topic may get a D).  In general though, criteria 2 counts the most, 1 the next most, and 3 and 4 the least (but 4 could count considerably against you). 

Cases should be less than 12 pages.  There is no minimum. 

It is very possible that changes in the course schedule, procedures, and/or requirements will be necessary. If necessary, such changes will be announced  

Schedule 

Week 1

Introduction and Whether how to go global                       

                        Gupta and Govindarajan: Cultivating a global mind-set

                        Porter:  Changing Patterns of International Competition

                        Case: Airview Mapping

Week 2                      

Cross Cultural Issues

            Gardenswartz:  Cross Cultural Awareness

            Pressey and Selassie: Are cultural differences over rated

            Plenert: Developing a Production System in Mexico

            Plenert: Tremec Revisited:An update on developing a Production System

                        in Mexico

            Osland and Bird: Beyond Sophisticated Stereotyping           

            Case: West Indian Yacht Club 

Week 3: Written Case analysis to be determined 

Human Resource Management

            Toi and DeNisi:  A local perspective to expatiate sucess

            Lecture on Human Resource Management

            Case: Lincoln Electric   Harsh Lessons 

Managing

            Ownership

                        Lee and O’neill: Ownership a structures and R&D investment of U.S. and

                                    Japanese firms             

            People Management                

                        Lunnon et al.: Global transfer of management practices

Week 4: Written case analysis (case to be determined, due Monday of Week 4) 

Strategy:

            Global/Local

                        Yip:  Global Strategy in a world of nations                    

                        Kostava and Roth:  Social Capital in multinational corporations and  (part

                        1 only)  

                        Case:  South African Brewery 

            Adapting to an unstable environment

                        Hitt, Keats and DeMarie:  Navigating in the new competitive landscape 

                        Case: Puma           

Week 5: Project due  (Wednesday of week 5)

               Exam to be handed out (Wednesday of week 5)

            Supply Chain Strategy 

                        Trent and Monczka: Pursuing Competitive Advantage thru integrated

                                    global sourcing

                        Business Week (Engardio)  The future of Outsourcing

                        Liker and Wu:  Japanese automakers, US suppliers, supply chain

                                    Superiority                                   

                        Case: GE Med 

Knowledge Management

Dyer and Nobeka: Creating and managing a high power knowledge

sharing Network 

Micro-Enterprise

            Hoque: Stagnated growth of Micro-enterprises and the flawed role of

                        credit NGO’s:  Evidence from Bangladesh Not in D2L; will be handed out 

                        Excerpts from an article by Arunachalam and Asha also to be handed out 

Sweatshop Discussion:  Do not read Two Cheers for Sweatshops until next week 

Week 6   Exam Due (Thursday of week 6)

*Alliances

                        Lecture on Alliances 

                        Case: Hero-Honda  Not in D2L; will be handed out                       

Ethics

            Two Cheers for Sweatshops

            Donaldson: Values in tension: Ethics away from home

            Case: Lockeed

Back to the top

Organizational Behavior

Instructor:  Jerry Gosen                                                                                      Office Hrs: T-4:30-6:15

Office:  Carlson 5046                                                                             email home MW - 9:00-11:00                            

Phone:  472-3956        

E-Mail: ggogosenpuj@uww.edu 

Text:  Cohen, Fink, Gaddon & Willits, Effective Behavior in Organizations. 

Other course materials: Either Electronic Reserve or D2  

Catalog Description:  250301  ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR

A study of the behavior and attitudes of people in an organizational setting:  the organization's effect on their perceptions, feelings, and actions; and their effects on the organization, particularly how their behavior affects the achievement of the organization's purposes. 

Course Purpose:  The purpose of Management 301 is to acquaint you with concepts and skills from the human side of management‑‑those which deal with the management of people.  The course will be both cognitive and experiential, that is, the student will learn from both readings (cognitive), one’s own experience (experiential) plus cases.  To a great degree, the readings, exercises, and cases cover the same concepts. 

The course will be different from others you've taken at least to a great degree.  In some respects, this course will be more like having a job in an organization than taking a class.  We will discuss just which respects during the course pur­pose discussion session about a month from now.  At any rate, you will be asked to "get into it" (this course) personally.  You will be asked to examine how you are behaving and reacting to course situations instead of sitting back passively taking in knowledge.  The fact is much of the focus of this course is on your class‑­related behavior as well as some general textbook concepts.  You will learn textbook concepts and you will be responsible for them, but these concepts will serve as guides for your understanding for your own behavior and not as material to regurgitate on an exam. 

Grading:  In order to earn a high grade in this course, you must learn to thor­oughly analyze human (individual, inter‑personal, and group) situations.  For those purposes, papers and reports are better vehicles for testing analytical skills than exams.  

     Graded Projects

  Group Analysis of Bagel Hockey                                                                 5%

     Group Analysis Slade                                                                                  15%

     Individual Analysis Bob of a case TBA                                                         15%

     Group Analysis Pat the Porter                                                                      20%

     Group Preparation for International Panel                                                     10%

     Term Paper                                                                                                 35% 

Preparation and Attendance and extra credit. Points can be added or subtracted to your grade.  Points can be subtracted for lack of preparation or lack of attendance.  If it appears that the class (or a significant portion of it) is ill prepared for cases and readings, then I will give quizzes, and points can be subtracted for poor grades on quizzes. You can be penalized for absences beginning with the third absence. There will be a course review exercise in which groups can voluntarily present what is valuable from 1 or 2 chapters in the text, and extra credit can be awarded. 

Assignments and Grading Criteria:  the assignments and grading criteria for  the International  Panel, cases and the term paper appear in D2L .

Regarding the Case Analysis criteria, criterion 1 & 2 will be weighted more heavi­ly than #3.  The

term paper assignment sheets are there to give you ideas in case you are lost.  The term paper criteria are much more important in determining your grade.  The term paper example is a B+ to A‑.  It is organized by concept.  I prefer organization by chronology or by important themes.  Also, regarding the term paper, I recommend you keep a journal. 

Regarding both the Case Analysis and Term Paper criteria, I want to call your attention to the concluding comments. The listed criteria are guides and not to be blindly followed at the expense of your best ideas.  Well thought‑out, creative, on target papers not following the guidelines may be judged superi­or to those which do follow the guidelines but only mechanistically.  On the other hand, papers merely expressing one's opinions and ignoring both the criteria and the course concepts will be given low grades.  Also for group projects, there will be a procedure for group members to grade each other.  That procedure appears near the end of your packet. 

It is highly recommended to keep a journal.  Doing so improves your term paper capability.   

International Panel Preparation:  Late in the course I will organize a panel of people with inter­national experience.  Each group will develop questions for the panel, design its processes and/or raise issues for it to discuss.  The group's output will be graded as to its relevance, thoughtfulness and perceived effort.  The panel will help me grade this project.  

A further note on grading:  to reduce the influence of group work on grades and to stress the importance of the term paper you cannot get a B in the course without at least a 72 on the term paper.  You cannot get a C in the course without at least a 62 on the term paper. 

Preparing group papers on line. One of minor purposes of the course is for you to compare working in a group face 2 face with working online.  Therefore I will (almost) require you to spend time preparing your first case face 2 face and encourage you to prepare the second case on line.  There will be no penalty for not following my directions, but I encourage you to

All Chapters are in Cohen Fink [CF} Many of the readings and exercises are on D2L; some will be handed out 

Schedule

Session       Event                                                              Assignment

Week 1                                                                                   

   1             Course Expectations 

   2             Polling Student Experience                     

  3             Form Task Groups                                  Ch. 1, 2, 3 (All chpts Cohen, Fink [CF])

   4             Banana Time                                                  The Case [CF]                  Skill lecture on cause & effect 

   5             Group time for Bagel Hockey

Week 2

    6            Atlantic Store Furniture                                   Ch. 4, 5, 6, The Case [CF]

                  Skill lecture on Multiple Causes 

    7            What Workers Want                                                          What Workers Want- Do part 1 before class. Also bring Process Thermometer

                                                                                        (Materials in d2l)

                                                                                        Group Written Analysis: Bagel Hockey [CF]              

    8            Ultimate Frisbee                                             Case in packet. Bring Guideline for Ob-

                                                                                        servers (in D2L)                                                                                       

    9            Purpose of course discussion 

Note:  You are encouraged to prepare, communicate about and write Slade on line and NOT meet face to face 

Week 3

   10           Olivia Francis                                                 The Case [CF]. Ch. 8. Group written analysis

of  Slade (to be handed out) 

   11           Full Speed Ahead                                                           The Case (reserve D2L). Ch. 7. Feel free to read sample student analysis of case(inL)afterclass     

  12      Eager New Lawyer                                                              9 & 10. Eager NewLawyer in D2L. Read part 1 only.      

   13           Misbranded Goat                                           The case [CF] and How to reach an unreach-

                                                                                        able person (d2l) Ch. 11 

Week 4

  14            Feedback Exercise                                         Do written portion of exercise in d2l and

                                                                                        bring to class 

   15           Bully or Victim                                                The case [CF]. Ch. 12 Individual analysis of

                                                                                        of a case to be announced 

16                      Group Day 

   17           Consumer Materials Inc.                                 Ch. 13. Case [CF].  Preparation for panel   due  

Week 5

   18           International Panel

   19          Smoke Stack Village                                       The case [CF]. Ch. 14 

   Group written analysis Pat the Porter. This paper will be due August 8th, a Wednesday.  The graded papers will be handed back August 9th  

   20           Barbra Debella                                               Case [CF]. To Touch or Not to Touch (d2l) 

   21           Is This the Right Time to Come Out                Case in D2L

                                                                                        Groups need to announce that they want to do a

                                                                                        course review presentation       

Week 6

22-23         Course Review Exercise 

24          Inter-group Sharing Exercise                           Please do top two rows of form (in d2l) for

                                                                                        own group (How see selves and how you think

                                                                                        others see you)

   25           What to do with Bob and Nancy                     Case [CF] 

TERM PAPER DUE AUGUST 17 AT NOON

Back to the top

 

Strategic Decision Making                                                                         

Instructor:    Jerry Gosen                                                                                                              Office Hrs:

Office:         5046 Carlson Bldg                                                                     MW  11:30-1:30(2nd 8 weeks)

Phone:         (262) 472‑3956                                                                                R 4:30-6:15 (2nd 8 weeks)

E-mail: gosenpuj@mail.uww.edu                                                                         TR-9:00-11:00 (email only)      

Text:   Micromatic at hOaktreesim.com/micromatic 

Course Objectives:  This is a "capstone" course in your curriculum and thus its purposes are general and integrative.  The course presents seemingly diverse phenomena and one of the major purposes of the course is to help you integrate these.  This is an applied course.  There is not great deal of theory and your task is to apply theory rather than know and present it.  At times you will be presented large amounts of information and you will need to dig through it, organize it, analyze it, evaluate it, and come to conclusions. 

It is also a skills course.  I will ask you to identify and assess strategies and assess company effectiveness. I will facilitate the learning of those skills.  You will be assessed on the degree to which you possess those skills. 

It is also a decision making class.  You will make total enterprise and strategic decisions for a simulated business. 

Method of Instruction:  This is a case analysis and simulation course.  

Grading:

     Two written case analyses                       50%

     Class participation/subjective evaluation  20%

     Simulation                                               30% 

Participation Grade:  The subjective participation grade covers preparation, attendance and participation.  Not attending class will hurt your participation grade.  One point will be subtracted from your grade for every 1/2 class missed, beginning with the fourth. 

Turning in a brief description and analysis of the case(s) and chapter(s) missed will modify the "hurt." 

Preparation is more important than talking.  You can still get an "A/B" in partic­ipation without saying a word in class by turning in a brief description and analysis of 67% of the course's cases and articles.  (Don't be "gamey" about this! You won't get an A/B if you turn in papers on only the courses shortest cases.)  And if you feel you're not getting an A in participation, but you are talking, handing in written descriptions and analyses will help. 

The papers to help your grade can be brief (under 2 pages).  They must show that you have read the whole case(s) and article(s) and thought about them.  That means you must analyze. 

However the discussion grade encourages discussion. With regard to discussion I reward prepa­ration, quality and quantity in that order.

-talking from thoughtful preparation will be rewarded greatly

-talking to add to the discussion or stimulate controversy will be rewarded

-talking to others will be rewarded

-talking to me, talking to talk, talking to show off, talking from a lack of  preparation will not be rewarded 

I will also ask you to research for information to follow up on some of the cases. I will assign cases and people on the first day of class. 

Written Cases:  There will be two.  The first worth 20% of your grade the second worth 30.

 Grading Criteria

The following is important.  It describes the way I grade cases and should guide your analysis as you write up your cases.  There is no format for how to do cases for me, but the content of your write ups should be guided by what is contained below. 

A.         Report and interpret data fully and appropriately.  Ratios, expenses, sales and/or income figures should be reported over time and compared with industry and/or similar firms, especially if pertinent to the rest of the analysis.  Ratio and expense analysis is par­ticularly important.  Papers without financial analysis and ratios and papers without calculations done by the student will receive low grades on the data grading criteria.   

Data should be reported over time and compared with industry and/or similar firms, especially if pertinent to the rest of the analysis.  Data not compared will receive lowered grades. 

Doing calculations on your own will count more than mere reporting; e.g., For company X has lost $20, 50, 80, 115, and 135 million over the past 5 years.  Looks bad doesn't it?  But the losses are at a decreasing rate.  Doing such simple (or more complicated) calculations, if relevant, will help your grade. 

Data should help explain whether a company’s choices are good ones.  For example, if it is expanding, are its returns and activity ratios increasing with size?  Data should also exhibit the results of case phenomena and events.  For example, in the late 80’s, sales results for Briggs and Stratton, the market leader in lawn mower engines, started dropping, and their margins relative to the competition were small.  The competition was from Japan, they had lower labor costs, and over all better efficiency than B&S.  People began to buy Japanese products and not Briggs and Stratton’s. Those facts show up in market share and margin data.  More recently, Krispy Kreme’s sales and overall profits had leveled off, while debt and capital investment margins were increasing.   These data reflect heavy investment in cost saving technology in the face of the market’s reduced infatuation with KK’s product, and the cost savings helped  KK to maintain their profit margins. 

Data conclusions should connect to your strategic analysis.  If, for example, you want your company to diversify, and your data shows a consistent drop in profits for the present products and services, you can use the data to support your stra­tegic suggestions.  Or if a company is growing and its return on sales is dropping, that justifies criticizing a growth strategy.   

B.     Identify strategies and deal with the appropriate level of strategy.  Sometimes a key specific strategy means a lot for survival, growth, or the profit picture of the firm.  In that case, describe and evaluate that strategy.  More often though, it's more important for this course to deal with general direction strategies (e.g. quality hamburgers for adults for Wendy's, low cost for Dell).  At any rate, you will be graded on 1) whether or not you describe accurately the strategies of the firm, 2) the degree to which you choose at least some general comprehensive strategies, 3) whether the strategies you choose are the key ones for the firm and 4) the degree to which your list completely describes the company strategies.  Sometimes, key general direction strategies are not obvious, but you may be graded on how well you find them.  That means that some key strategies are not explicit in the case and you’ll be expected to find strategies inherent in patterns of and decisions made by the company.  For example, acquiring a specific company or developing a particular product is not a general direction strategy, but acquisitions or developing new products often is. 

C.    Evaluate and recommend due to the correct reasons.  Evaluation of strategies should be in terms of 1) environmental features or trends; 2) company strengths, weaknesses and/or resource positions; 3) stage of product market evolu­tion; 4) values of key people; 5) competitive position, 6) the market trends; 7) features of the industry; and 8) the customer.  For example, Wend­y's chicken/salad bar strat­egy was appropriate because they had a reputa­tion for quality (strength), there was a market of health‑consci­ous adults who were in a hurry and their present market was getting older and more health conscious (Environmental factors.)  And the more of the above reasons you use the better.  If you evaluated Wendy's in terms of both the strength and the environmental factors plus perhaps other factors, you'd get a higher grade than if you used only one factor.  You don't always have to recommend future strategies, but if you do, say why in terms of the members of the above list.   

D.         Write well and write an analysis that hangs together.  Try to get your recommendations to be based on the rest of your analysis.  If you recommend changes in direction for the company, show how its present direction has produced negative financial results and/or show how the present direction is not appropriate.  Likewise, if the data says to you that the company is performing OK and you see present strategies as appropriate, then you don't have to recommend changes.  What if the data says one direction, and your evaluation of a present strategy says something else?  For example, the company is OK, but they could do even better if they adapted to changing market trends.  In this case, present your conclusions acknowledging or considering the pros and cons.  At any rate, you will be graded on how well your analysis hangs together and how well you cap­ture the case's complexity.  

E.    Use of theory correctly.  Theory refers to application of the concepts from lecture and the assigned readings (or applying points you learned from previous cases or the game).  This category is usually worth less than the others. (If the other categories are worth 15 points, this one may be worth as little as 5).  And there will be a higher likelihood that I will add more points for a good job on this category than on the others.

F      Analyze rather than describe and judge.  The analysis needs to focus on why strategic decisions are made, their consequences and appropriateness.  In this course, merely describing actions, events and decisions or merely judging  actions or decisions (without assessing the appropriateness in terms of C. above) is discouraged.  It should be noted that during class I will describe decisions, the environment, strategies, etc. but I will always try to put these in analytic (causes, meanings, consequences, appropriateness) frames by the end of class discussion. 

G.         Deal with the important issues as defined by the author and me.  I rarely give trick cases. So what the case is about is usually fairly clear.  Often there is more than one correct focus.  So you need to figure out what the case is about and organize your paper (to at least some degree) around that. 

The Game  You will be participating in a computerized business game or simulation.  In it, you will own a business which makes and sells Micromatics.  You can consider these like small appliances.  Thirty percent of your course grade depends on performance associated with the game.  Up to twenty points depends on performance from game decisions (so not all the points devoted to the game are based on performance). That grade will depend, to a great degree, on how profitable your business is.  In determining each company's numerical score on the game, accu­mulated results will be consid­ered.

            Criterion                            Weight

            Net Income(after taxes)     40% 

            ROA                                  10%

            Return on sales                     25%

            Stock Price                          10%

            Sales                                    15% 

Cafeteria Grading

As indicated above not all the points devoted to the game are based on performance. You will also write game reports, and those will count for a grade.  There will be cafeteria style grading for the game, as follows.  Students will be able to choose the game grade weights among 2 possible grades: performance on the game itself, and reports analyzing game performance.  The total of % associated with the game must equal 30.  You can write 2 reports.  If you like your grade on the first one, you need not write a second one. Game reports will be due after quarters 4 and 8.

                                                                                    Minimum          Maximum

            Game performance                                                10                    20

            Reports                                                                 10                    20 

All readings, including articles and cases are on on D2L or onelectronic reserve.  To get into electronic reserves, go to the Anderson Library web sight (It’s a UWW web page) Click Find Reserves on the Library home page.  Sign in. On the course pull down menu, click on MGT 788. On the professor pull down menu, click on Gosen. Click on search. Click on the item you want. (you might have to click on the course again before you click on the item).  Items are often in parts; you are responsible for all parts (unless otherwise specified).  

                                                                        SCHEDULE  

Week   Topic                                                               Assignment (if not specified,

assignments in the  ER = Electronic Reserve) 

1. Introduction  

2. Supply Chain                                                           Perdue Chickens                                      

  3. Business Level Strategies                              Sonic Drive Ins*,  Starbucks*, McDonalds*                

  4. Coping in rapidly changing                            Hitt, Keats and DeMarie (Navigating in environments                                                                                                              the New Competitive Landscape), Apple Computer, Nucor Steel*

  5. Global Strategies                                             First Written Case Analysis.(Crown Cork and Steel)  South                                                                             African Breweries*,  Heineken, (Puma)

  6. Multi-line Strategies                                      Ford Motor Company.  Black and Decker*.

  7.    Implementing Strategies                             WL Gore*,  Carlos Ghosn at  Nissan* 

                                                                Second Written Case Analysis (Southwest Airlines)

*  Follow up requested. Puma is tentative                       

Back to the top

Strategic Management

Jerry Gosen                                                      Office Hours: M W 9-11 email only

Carlson 5046                                                               Th 4:30-6:15

262-472-3956                                                             T-Th 10 –11.  T 1:00-2:15senpuj@uww.edu

Teaching Philosophy: http://facstaff.uww.edu/gosenpuj/Teaching%20Philosophy.htm

  Course reading materials may be obtained thru the UWW Anderson Library WEBSITE.or thru D2L.  There is no text book.  To find course material thrh the Library website, click Find Reserves on the Library home page.  Click on the direct link to course reserves. Sign in. On the course pull down menu, click on MGT 771. On the professor pull down menu, click on Gosen. Click on search. Click on the item you want. (you might have to click on the course again before you click on the item).  Items are often in parts; you are responsible for all parts (unless otherwise specified). 

Purpose:  For students to become acquainted with, to understand, and to apply contemporary theory in Strategic Management.

Catalog  Description: See Catalog 

Teaching Methodologies:  This course concentrates on strategic theory.  I want you to know, understand and apply strategic theory and to be able to judge the relevance of  contemporary theories in Strategic Management. You will be assigned readings covering strategic theories and cases to which these theories can be applied. 

Each class period, designated students will report on assigned readings and present descriptions, analyses and applications to the rest of the class. They (the designated students) will apply readings to an organization or an industry of their choosing.  The report will placed on-line two days before the class is assigned to discuss the reports (and readings).  Each student will be responsible for three reports.  It should be noted that some of the articles are difficult, and we will spend some time in each class making sure we understand what the articles are about.

We will also read and analyze cases.  We will apply the articles to the cases. 

In class we will discuss authors’ perspectives, but we will also discuss what you think is important about issues raised in the article. 

Course Philosophies:   For strategies to be good and successful, they need to be appropriate for the company’s external environment, in particular its market.  For analyzing whether a set of strategies are good or not, it is not always easy to think through whether strategies are appropriate for the environment, but for most of the cases we encounter in this course, that thinking through is very important.

            Successful strategies also take advantage of company strengths. It is good to develop a set of core competencies and build the company around those.  The course explicitly deals with core competencies, a lot. It should be noted that not all strengths are core competencies.

Core competencies are central to this course. Strategies should be built on company strengths, and alliances, outsourcing decisions, and diversification choices should be made with core competencies in mind.

            The course presumes that businesses face complex, rapidly changing environments. That is the rule rather than the exception. To thrive in those, businesses need to be innovative, flexible, and in close contact with and learn from entities in the environment. To operate that way, they need to decentralize and empower (at least some of their) workers.  The course also presumes that efficiency is important for the success of most companies and that reducing costs is also important. In addition, the company needs to be guided; therefore control is important.  Therefore, the course argues that a company needs to 1) be flexible, 2) adapt to rapidly changing environments, 3) empower workers, 4) be efficient, and 5) control strategy all at the same time.  Combining those may seem weird, we will try to figure out how companies can do all five  at the same time.

 Grading

Midterm Exam                          15%

Final Exam                                           25%

Course Project or case analysis            30%

Class Presentations                               10%

Class Participation                                20% 

The exams will cover the readings, and passing them will require knowing all or at least most of them.  The exams will either be take home OR in-class, closed-book, and you will receive the questions a week or more prior to the exam.  In order to get a B or better on the exam you must use the meat of the articles in your answers. The meat means information in the actual paragraphs of the articles. If you just use topic headings (and it is not crystal clear to me that you know what it’s in the paragraphs of that topic), you will get less than a B. Applying quotes from student presentations without using the meat of the actual articles will also get you less than a B. 

The project will entail you applying the first five units of the class -- general strategy, competencies and the environment, the value chain, and types of strategies -- to an organization of your choosing.  You need not apply all the articles, but you need to apply enough of them for me to be pretty sure you are familiar with all of them.  

It is far better to apply the articles to your company than your company’s strategies to the article.  That means you begin with and organize you paper around features (strategies) of your company instead of vice versa.  In addition, the project should make a point. Examples: If your company is successful, why in terms of the articles?  If your company has problems, use the articles to explain why the company has them. 

It is better (but not imperative) that you use a company with which you have direct contact than a company where the  information you attain is from the internet. 

As with the exam you must use the meat of the articles in your project.  If not or if you only quote student presentation information, you will get less than a B. 

Grading Criteria for the project: 

Understanding of Articles applied

Quality (accuracy, thoroughness) of application

Thoroughness

Thought

Perceived effort

Writing Quality and coherency. 

As an alternative to the project you can write analysis of a case that I will hand out.  You will be asked to analyze the cases as we do for the cases assigned for class discussion, Dell as an example. The grading criteria will be similar to those for the project. 

As with projects and exams, you must use the meat of the articles in your case analyses.  If not or if you only quote student presentation information, you will get less than a B.   

Note:  I’m more interested in how well you apply the articles and a thoughtful coherent analysis than if you get the “correct” answer, but if you don’t deal with important issues raised by the both the case and the course, your grade will likely suffer. Again I prefer you to apply the articles to the case instead of using the case as an example of the articles. 

Class email presentations (of articles to be discussed in class).  Students are expected to explain the article and it’s main points.  They are also expected to explain how the article applies to business in general, how useful it would be to the business practitioner, and to an industry or company chosen by the student. Students will present three articles. Some are extremely easy, and for those, I will simply present discussion questions and there will be no student ‘presentation. 

 Presentations will be graded on effort and thought.  More concretely, this means that you must show understanding of the main points of the article and the degree to which and how the article applies in the real world.  Since the presentations will be delivered via email, it is the email report that I will grade.

Participation Grade:  Although 1 – 3 students will present an article, everyone is responsible for reading and discussing it. The subjective participation grade covers preparation, attendance and participation. 

 With respect to the participation grade regarding talking...I reward prepa­ration, quality and quantity in that order.

-talking from thoughtful preparation will be rewarded greatly

-talking to add to the discussion or stimulate controversy will be rewarded

-talking to others will be rewarded

-talking to me, talking to talk, talking to show off, talking from a lack of  preparation will not be rewarded. 

Preparation is more important than talking.  In a small class, it is easy for me to tell whether participation comes from preparation. Therefore it is not necessary for all your comments to reflect preparation. 

You can still get an "A/B" in partic­ipation without saying a word in class by turning in a brief description and analysis of about 2/3 of the course's cases and articles.  (Don't be "gamey" about this!  You won't get an A/B if you turn in papers on only the courses shortest articles and cases.)  And if you feel you're not a high enough grade in participation, but you are talking, handing in written descriptions and analyses will help. 

Not attending class will hurt your participation grade.  Turning in a brief description and analysis of the case(s) and chapter(s) missed will modify the "hurt." Regarding attendance, one  point off for every 1/2 class missed, beginning with the third. 

Schedule  

Unit and Week                Assignment  

Unit # 1 Week 2                             

General Strategy                    Collins and Porras, Building your Company’s Vision 

                                                Porter,  ‘What is Strategy’           

                                                Aaker, Leveraging the Corporate Brand 

Unit 2 Week 3&4            Hitt, Keats and DeMarie, Navigating the new

Competencies and                    competitive landscape                                

the environment

                                                Long and Vickers-Koch, Using Core Capabilities to create

                                                            competitive advantage  

                                                Dass and Picken Creating Competitive (Dis)advantage:

                                                            Learning from Food Lion’s free fall 

                                                Cases: Lincoln Electric and Lincoln Electric Harsh Lessons                                               

Unit 3 Weeks 5&6           Quin and Hilmer:  Strategic Outsourcing

Manufacturing and                   

supply chain                              Rossetti and Choi: On the dark side of strategic sourcing:

                             Experiences from the aerospace industry  

Liker and Wu:  Japanese automakers, US suppliers, supply chain superiority 

Mehri:   The darker side of lean 

                                                Cases:  Dell, Krispy Kreme 

Week 7                                                       

Unit 4                                    Yoffie and Kwak, Judo Strategy: 10 techniques for beating

Competitive strategies   a stronger opponent

Midterm                          Lecture on Alliances  

Unit 5  Week 8

Types of strategies:                   Kostovo and Roth, Social Capital in Multinational

alliances, global                         Corporations    (Read only 297-300)  NO REPORT    

                        Yip,  Global strategy in a world of nations                                                       

Cases:  Hero-Honda, Puma 

Unit 5 Week 9&10              Goold and Luchs, Why Diversify

Types of strategies(con’t):

Diversification   and                  Cascio:  Strategies for responsible downsizing

 Downsizing    C

                    Cases: Ford, Cisco Systems, and “Cisco Systems,  developing a human capital strategy”                                                               

 

Unit 6: Week 11

 Implementation I:        

Structural Issues                       Burgelman and Grove, Strategic Dissonance  HARD 

                                    Randolf and Sashkin, Can organizational empowerment

work in multi-national settings?  

                                                Case: Purdue Chickens                                              

Unit 7:Week 12

Implementation II

Knowledge management           Gupta and Govindarajan, Knowledge management’s

                                                            social dimension: lessons from Nuccor 

Dyer and Nobeoka Creating and managing a hi

performance knowledge sharing network: the Toyota Case 

Unit 8: Week 13

Implementation III

Control                                   Kaplan and Norton, The balanced scorecard: Measures that drive performance 

                                                Brand and Scanlon, Strategic control through core

Competencies HARD  

                                                Case:  Wal-mart

Weeks 14-15                Projects due

Project presentations (voluntary)

back to the top