+1443 776-2705 panelessays@gmail.com

Harvard Case study on GM in China

Case study directions

Students will be assigned a Harvard Case study as their term project. The topic would be GM in China. Emphasis will be placed on the main problem being solved, key issues, and/or root causes. Students will tasked with applying the appropriate analytical tools to case data, both quantitative and qualitative. For some cases, root cause analysis will be used to examine symptoms/key issues to derive alternative solutions mindful of the cause(s). Alternatives will then be critically examined leading to a final solution set. For other cases, the appropriate analytical tools will be used to choose among a set of currently existing alternatives. Finally, some cases will require a combination of both analytical approaches.

Note: Students will be provided a “case coach” and grading rubric to assist in building case study presentations/written analyses. Quality cases are usually in between 6 to 10 pages written, not including visuals such as tables, figures, and graphs. Since cases are self-contained, there is no need for students to use additional research besides information contained in classroom materials. If you do cite the text, case, class materials, etc., please give credit where credit is due by using in-text citations. In this case, you will also have to include a reference page. Please use APA format.


Case Analysis Worksheet

This form can be used to organize your thoughts about a case. As you perform your analysis, remain open to the fact that your interpretation of the facts may change. As a result, you should repeatedly revisit your answers to these sections as you progress through the case.

1. Define the Problem: Describe the type of case and what problem(s) or issue(s) should be the focus of your analysis

2. List any course concepts that can be applied: Write down any principles, frameworks or theories that connect your course to the issues of this case.

3. List relevant qualitative data: Evidence related to or based on the quality or character of something.

4. List relevant quantitative data: Evidence related to or based on the amount or number of something.

5. Describe the results of your analysis: What evidence have you accumulated that supports one interpretation over another.

6. Describe alternative actions: List and prioritize possible recommendations or actions that come out of your analysis.

7. Describe your preferred action plan: Clear statements of what you would recommend. May include short, medium and long-term steps to be carried out.


Rubrics:

Needs Work < 80%

Acceptable 80%-89%

Excellent 90%-100%

Provide clear statement of problem being solved

15%

Problem statement is nonexistent or missing primary elements. No protagonist is identified. Student does not identify key issues/root causes.

Problem statement is nearly accurate but still a little unclear. Includes most elements of the assignment. Protagonist may not be accurately identified. Room for improvement in terms of identifying of key issues, analytical points and root causes.

States problem presented in the case accurately and concisely. Statement includes all of the elements set forth in the assignment. Protagonist is accurately identified and direction of the paper is clear. Key issues, analytical points, and root causes are clearly identified.

Provide in-depth analysis with accurate use of course concepts in explaining the problem

45%

Paper lacks depth of arguments appropriate for assignment. Inaccurate use of some of course concepts. Analysis is primarily based on opinion rather than data.

There is room for improvement in terms of making connections between the problem statement, analysis, alternatives, and solutions. Expand the degree to which analyses critically examine alternatives using appropriate tools, and/or the degree to which root cause analysis is used to generate alternatives. Finally, some arguments need to be better supported with data, analysis, and logic.

Analyses represent direct connections to the problem statement, key issues, and analytical points. Author shows an in depth understanding of concept application. The logic of the analysis is data-based, and appropriate analytical tools are used to evaluate and/or derive alternatives.

Provide a range of relevant, detailed recommendations

25%

Recommendations are not provided in a meaningful way to impact the identified problem. Recommendations are not focused on the protagonist or not realistic. Actions are not thorough. Only one recommendation is offered.

Expand the range/variety of alternative recommendations.

There is room for improvement in terms of a balanced, critical examination of alternatives leading to a final solution set. Solutions consider root cause and/or are examined using appropriate acumen. Better address key assumptions in analyses and recommendations. Also, implementation recommendations may not be realistic given case data.

Recommendations clearly follow the logic of the analysis. Implementation is thorough to the degree allowed by case data. Recommendations are focused and actionable by the protagonist. Actions are based on a clear understanding of the concepts of the course and their application. The range/variety of recommendations indicates a strong level of critical thinking.

Write in a clear in a professional manner

15%

Paper shows little or no attempt at clear writing or preparation as a graduate level assignment. Paper requires many assumptions on the part of the reader to be understood.

Format follows most of the requirements of the assignment. Overall writing is good, however there are sections in the case that can be challenging to follow. There are also too many structural/organizational issues and/or grammatical errors for a graduate level paper.

Format follows the requirements of the assignment. The author’s writing is consistent and easy to follow. Writer uses a vocabulary and voice appropriate for graduate level writing. Grammar and spelling show the effort of the writer in proofreading and polishing the final paper.