Case Study AnalysisTemplate

[1]               The concepts underlying this analytical methodology are in part based upon the thought of the Czech philosopher Edmund Husserl (1859 - 1938) and his philosophy of phenomenology, which includes a methodology for rigorous analysis in the social sciences.  Husserl, one of the most eminent philosophers of the 20^th Century, was a professor at the University of Freiburg, one of Europe’s oldest and most prestigious universities.                                                                                                                                                                               

To analyze means to examine methodically by separating what is being examined into constituent parts, then searching for essential meanings while also searching to understandthe relationships among the parts.  An analysis puts forward assertions supported by evidence (i.e.[id est], facts linked together within a logically persuasive presentation of what the facts demonstrate or prove).  It avoids assertions made as if self-evidently true.  Logic alone is inherently a weak form of evidence.

                Not all of the answers are given in the text; some must be ferreted out or dug out by analyzing the text—i.e.by asking questions of the text.  Questions, too, must be analyzed to discover their intent and to maintain focus in your response.

                Wherever appropriate, use the concepts and terminology you are studying in this course.  This is important in answering most questions, but is especially important when writing Section V.  To the extent you do not use concepts and terminology from the course, your grade will be correspondingly lower.  The assigned cases involveorganizational sustainability, operations-quality leadership, stakeholder management, moral leadership, and environmental leadership, among many other concepts.

                Use this template with the footnotes included.  Type answers following the paragraph sign ( ¶ ).  Use bullets or numbering, and employ other formatting, if you wish.Single-space.  You may double-space between paragraphs or bulleted points.  If the answer is “Not Applicable” or “None,” state that.  All questions require a response, except sometimes for a few questions containing the words “if any” in italics.  Generally, you should write in complete sentences.                                    (7/10/14 version)

[2] A perspective, as used here, means to place oneself in someone else’s position with that person’s beliefs, education, ethnicity, gender, nationality, race, skills, and history, among other possibilities.  Imagine yourself “standing in their shoes” looking out at the world.  The question asks then that,prior to reading the case study, (a) describe what may be relevant about that person’s perspective to the case study and (b) describe in what way the author’s perspective might turn out to shape or bias the presentation of the case, understanding that we may know too little to have confidence in our answers.  As you then read the case study after determining the author’s perspective, try to be aware of possible biases in the material (see question II(C)).  Critical thinking often requires critical reading as well.

[3]See footnote 8 about bias.

[4] Your perspective as the analyst is very similar:  Ask of yourself, prior to reading the case study, what is relevant about myself that might cause me to be biased or to cause someone else (i.e., your readers) to think that I am biased?  Again, this could include gender, education, ethnicity, beliefs, opinions, or having worked for the company or conflicts of interest (e.g. [exempli gratia], owning stock in the company in the case study).  What is it that I, the analyst, need to disclose in order to protect my credibility?  Critical thinking requires self-analysis.

[5]Bracketing is an internal thought process used by the analyst to set aside her/his personal opinions, information s/he has acquired previously about the situation, beliefs, values, and other attitudes that might prejudice the outcomes of the analysis.  State what it is that you are bracketing and also that you are bracketing those things.  Bracketing must be maintained while completing the analysis inSections II through IV.  If you are successful in bracketing, then what is bracketed will not influence your analysis.  In Section V, it is permissible to un-bracket, but even then you must follow your fact-based analysis (see also footnote 23).  Rigorous analysis requires bracketing.

[6]The analytical approach begins by answering the questions in the Pre-Analysis (see Section I).  Next, after reading the entire case, tentatively identify the key issues (see Section IV).  Then, return to Section II and begin a critical reading of the case, answering questions from Section II through Section III based upon the issues you have identified.  When you have worked through to Section IV, re-evaluate the issues stated in Section IV and modify them if necessary.  Finally, answer Section V.

[7]Facts are data or information based on what is verifiable.  Facts should be distinguished from assumptions, beliefs, conjecture, hearsay, hypotheses, judgments, notions, opinions, speculation, and theories.  Number the facts or use bullet-points.  Most commonly, it is advisable to state the facts in chronological order, beginning with a date where known.  You may also put them into categories to help clarify the situation.The facts stated in this section and the next must be sufficient to provide a foundation for the analysis of the issues you identify in Section IV and for the position you write in Section Vin response to the issues identified.  It is not necessary to state all of the facts in the case study, since many of the facts may be without relevance to the issues identified.

[8]Bias refers to an inclination deriving from a belief or experience that prevents an individual from impartially considering a question or issue.  If you use the word bias, state whether it is a bias for something or against something.  There are many reasons for biases—some consciously held and many unconsciously held.

[9] This question is given greater weight in grading.

[10]The word process refers to how something occurs.  Conflict resolution refers to the process or steps taken to find a solution to disagreements between/amongprincipal parties.  (1) Ask yourself, what are the conflicts and how did the principal parties try to resolve them?  Then, (2)categorizeeach process with a word or phrase.  An example of categorizing might be, “Litigation.”  Then, (3) follow this with a statement that begins, “A process used by [the key party’s name] to resolve the conflict was  . . . .”(4) Follow this statement with an additional, explanatory comment.

[11] The word constraint, in this context, means restricted or confined by a boundary (i.e., by the constraint).  Constraints are barriers or limitations to making decisions.  There are commonly many constraints, which typically might include ethical beliefs or problems, lawsuits, survivability issues, etc.  .  (1) Ask yourself, what constraints might keep the primary corporation from making major strategic decisions?  (2) Then,categorize each constraint using a word or phrase.  An example of a category for a constraint might be, “Lack of profit.”  (3) Then, for each constraint listed, begin by stating:  “A constraint restricting [the firm’s name] decision-making was  . . . .”(4) Follow this statement with additional, explanatory comments.

[12]Values refer to the ethical (and, sometimes, the cultural) ideals of a firm or group or individual.  Think of values as rules for behavior (and morals as how we judge others and ethics as professional standards or systems of beliefs).  Ask yourself, from the information available, what does “X” appear to value or believe?  Values may be foundin mission statements, value statements, or other writings (e.g., the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and religious dogma), but a firm’s actions are the fundamental test of what its values actually are, regardless of anything that may be claimed.When a firm’s actions contradict or appear to contradict its stated values, explain that situation.  This question is given greater weight in grading.

[13]Use only the ethical theories discussed in class lectures.  This question is given greater weight in grading.

[14]Refer to your lecture outlines and notes about the type of cognitive biases that scientific research has shown to produce errors in decision-making.Useonly cognitive biases and similar concepts that have been discussed in class.  See also footnote 8.

[15]  This question is given greater weight in grading.

[16] A presupposition is a reality or fact that underlies an action or decision.  If the presupposition was not considered by the decision-makers, only then is the presupposition an unexaminedpresupposition.  An unexamined presupposition is one that was overlooked.  Unexamined presuppositions are a major cause of poor outcomes from decisions.  Rarely are unexamined presuppositions presented in the case study; it is the task of the analyst to ferret them out.  For each unexamined presupposition listed, begin by stating:  “An unexamined presupposition for [name of key firm] is that . . . .”  This question is given greater weight.

[17] Organizations sometimes rationalize why they make particular decisions.  For instance, a corporation may claim to make decisions in order to increase the efficiency or profitability of the organization, when in realitythe firm has made decisions that will predictably decrease the long-term efficiency or profitability of the organization.  The questions in this section attempt to draw out these types of distinctions that may become problems.  More so than in previous questions, the questions in this section call for speculative conclusions, but ones based upon the evidence (facts plus logic) in the case.  All of your responses to the questions in this section must, using evidence, justify or explain why you have reached your conclusions.            

[18]Efficacy is a word used here to mean the balance between effectiveness and efficiency (efficiency being used here in the sense of low costs).  What that balance should be varies depending on the needs of the corporation and the strategy chosen by that firm.  Organizations should strive for an optimal balance between effectiveness and efficiency, meaning the best balance for the needs of the organization given the strategy chosen.

[19]In the questions in this section, the first question asks you to assess the level of risk "at the time of the actions under analysis."  For instance, what was the level of risk at the beginning of the case study prior to whatever event takes place?  The second question refers to the level of risk after the event has occurred. 

These two questions concerning risk ask the analyst to think about whether the decisions made by the firm in the case study increased or decreased their risk for being in business.  All businesses are at risk all of the time; risk is the very essence of business.  The optimal level of risk is the level that (a) is no higher than what is necessary to create competitiveness, but (b) no lower than what will permit the company to be sustainable, which includes being competitive, but much more too.  Risk involves more than profit.

[20]This question cannot be well answered without discussing the implementation and the use of systematic processes.  This question is given greater weight in grading.

[21] This question asks that you determine in what ways and to what extent the decisions and outcomes from the events described in the case study affected the larger society beyond the primary business organization and other key parties.Write from the perspective of a society looking at the actions of the principal parties.

[22] State one to four key issues in the form of a question.  A key issue is one that reflects central issues in the case study that are at the same time majorissues in the course.Theseissue-based questions, then, are what you should respond to in section V.  Do not ask a question that cannot be answered from the facts within the case study.

[23] Section V—the analyst’s position—is the conclusion or culmination of the analysis.Evidence, for the purposes of this analysis, is a set of facts within a logically persuasive presentation of what the facts demonstrate or prove.  Avoid assertions made as if self-evidently true (i.e., not supported by evidence).Your analyst’s position should be fully developed, comprehensive, and include alternative approaches, solutions, strategies or ways of thinking that the primary firm could possibly have used, if appropriate.  Your answer to this question will constitute 25% of the grade on the paper.

A helpful simile:  The Issues (Section IV) identify the “hypotheses.”The Situation (Section II) is the selection of information that occurs during the first part of the “research” stage.  The Analysis (Section III) preceding Section IV is the analysis of the selected information that occurs during the second stage of “research.”  The analysis must be used to support your Position Statementas you writeSection V, which is what we normally think of as a “term paper.”