case study
Case Study -Safaricom: Innovative Telecom Solutions to Empower Kenyans.
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1015&context=robins-case-network
Using a MS Word memo format, provide responses to the case rubric criteria.
Please refer to this rubric when constructing your case analysis.
|
Rubric for Case Notes: |
Safaricom: Innovative Telecom Solutions to Empower Kenyans |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Week 3 |
|
Scoring Criteria for Levels of Performance |
||||||
|
Skill Development Case Analysis Tasks |
Learning Outcomes Concepts and Analytical Tools |
Below Expectations: Shows no evidence of or significant gaps in understanding |
Meets Expectations: Demonstrates acceptable level of understanding and competency |
Exceeds Expectations: Demonstrates high level of understanding and competency and makes relevant contributions |
Score |
|||
|
|
|
D |
C |
B |
B+ |
A- |
A |
|
|
Review and synthesize facts of the case |
Discussion of general environment |
Analysis excludes some of the relevant segments in the general environment that have an impact on the company's strategy selection. |
Analysis includes significant segments in the general environment that have an impact on the company's strategy selection. |
Analysis thoroughly describes the relevant segments in the general environment that have an impact on the company's strategy selection. |
|
|||
|
Demonstrate command of relevant concepts and analytical tools applicable to the case |
Discussion of the competitive environment and identify competitors |
Analysis is an insufficient comparison of the industry's major competitors and/or expose of the threats posed by Safaricom's rivals. |
Analysis is a sufficient comparison of the industry's major competitors and expose of the threats posed by Safaricom's rivals. |
Analysis is a strong comparison of the industry's major competitors and expose of the threats posed by Safaricom's rivals. |
|
|||
|
Evaluate and discuss the organization's current situation or existing industry conditions |
Evaluate CEO, Robert Collymore's strategic leadership |
Evaluation fails to sufficiently assess Collymore's fulfillment of his strategic leadership responsibilities. |
Evaluation assesses Collymore's fulfillment of his strategic leadership responsibilities. |
Evaluation fully and accurately assesses Collymore's fulfillment of his strategic leadership responsibilities. |
|
|||
|
Identify conclusions that can be drawn from the analysis |
Describe Safaricom’s next move in terms of growth and expansion and make recommendations |
Review does not fully describe Safaricom's competitive strategy. |
Review describes significant components of Safaricom's competitive strategy. |
Review provides a comprehensive description of the competitive strategy used by Safaricom. |
|
|||
|
Deliver conclusions (written, oral, or discussion) |
Discussion and communication of analysis results through written report, oral presentation, and/or team participation |
Discussion and/or conclusions from the analysis are absent or incomplete. |
Significant discussion and conclusions from the analysis are delivered. |
Excellent discussion and strong conclusions are drawn from the analysis. |
|
|||
|
Identify viable strategic options |
Proposes strategic measures to sustain Safaricom's competitive advantage |
Does not establish adequate strategic proposals for consideration. |
Establishes adequate strategic proposals for consideration. |
Establishes a strong set of strategic proposals for consideration. |
|
|||
|
Weigh relevant decision-making factors |
Specifically factors important variables into strategic decision making |
Excludes important factors that should be weighed in the strategic decision-making process. |
Includes important factors that should be weighed in the strategic decision-making process. |
Thoroughly describes important factors that should be weighed in the strategic decision-making process. |
|
|||
|
Build a position in support of recommended strategic action |
Presents convincing evidence to back strategy selection and recommendations |
Convincing evidence to support recommended strategic action is missing. |
Presents good evidence in support of recommended strategic proposals. |
Presents strong and meaningful evidence in support of recommended strategic proposals. |
|
|||
|
Deliver conclusions and recommendations (written, oral, or discussion) |
Uses written report, oral presentation, and/or team participation to communicate assessment and proposed business strategy |
Assessment and/or business strategy recommendations are incomplete. |
Significant assessment and business strategy recommendations are delivered. |
Excellent assessment and strong business strategy recommendations are delivered. |
|
|||
|
Evaluator Comments |
|