case study 1

Final Cases

www.euruni.edu

WHAT IS A

CASE?

 A CASE ACADEMICALLY DEVELOPED AND RESEARCHED SOLUTION TO A COMPLEX BUSINESS SITUATION

 STUDENTS MUST SUBMIT THE FINAL CASES AFTER THE FINAL DISSERTATION SUBMISSION

 THE FINAL CASES MUST BE PRESENTED DURING THE DEFENSE SESSION OF THE DISSERTATION

THE FINAL CASE MUST CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS:

1. Case Introduction

2. Problem opportunities / challenge identification / dilemma

3. Main facts and events of the core study

4. Research and analysis of the situation

5. Formulation of solutions / answers

6. Discussion and selection of solutions / answers

7. Referencing

HOW SHOULD A CASE BE STRUCTURED?

1. CASE INTRODUCTION

• General overview of the situation

• Definition of the business context

• Identification of the main actors

• Key elements that define the challenge

2. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROBLEM AS A STATEMENT

DEFINITION OF THE QUANTITATIVE ELEMENTS

THAT REPRESENT IT

DEFINITION OF THE QUALITATIVE ASPECTS THAT

MUST BE CONSIDERED

3. MAIN FACTS AND EVENTS

WHAT ARE THE

SIGNS THAT REVEAL

THE CHALLENGE?

HOW COULD THE

PROBLEM BE

MEASURED?

WHAT ARE THE MAIN

FACTORS THAT

HAVE PRODUCED

THIS SITUATION?

4. RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS OF THE SITUATION

Use of additional

sources of external

information

Tools for the

analysis of the

problem

Identification of

external factors

Identification of

internal factors

5. FORMULATION

OF SOLUTIONS

• Based on:

✓ The business context

✓ Your conclusions from the situational analysis

✓ The available resources

6. DISCUSSION AND SELECTION OF SOLUTIONS

Define the pros and cons of the proposed solutions

Determine the different expected scenarios

Justify your selection, according to benefits / risks

7. REFERENCING

• Used Bibligraphy

• Additional data sources

(Harvard style)

1

GUIDELINES FOR FINAL CASES

STYLE GUIDE

Overall document length: 3000 - 5000 words (excluding bibliography)

DOCUMENT STRUCTURE

- Cover page

- Table of Contents

- Main Body: Case Analysis

- Conclusion

- Bibliography

DOCUMENT STYLE

- Font: Arial or Times New Roman

- Text size 12 pt

- Layout Align left (flush-left ragged-right)/Do not use “Justify”

- Line spacing 1.5l

- Hyphenation Off: do not hyphenate

- Page numbers Bottom right

- References Reference Footnotes only. No endnotes. Students should follow the Harvard referencing

style.

- Numbering Consecutive throughout the document, beginning with 1 on the introductory page. Pages

prior to the introduction must appear in roman numerals Font Arial or Times New Roman

- Footnote size 10pt

- Location Bottom left of each page

- Language use/spelling style Students are free to use either U.K. or USA English, but they must be

consistent. A spelling and grammar check can help students. Marks will be deducted when ‘red

and/or green lines’ appear in the digital copy.

DEADLINES

DEFENCE DETAILS

- 8-10 minutes per case

- 5 minutes Q&A

- Context

- Conclusion

- 5- 10 slide – Visual (avoid too much text)

- Defence (online or on campus)

2

FINANCIAL CASE RUBRICS: CRITICAL THINKING

Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially Proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)

Problem Identification

The student failed to correctly identify the issue(s); analysis was incorrect or too superficial to be of use; information was misinterpreted

The student correctly identified the issue(s) but analysis was weak. An absence of context – the work is basically descriptive with little analysis.

The student correctly identified the case (issues), taking into account obvious environmental/contextual drivers. There is evidence of analysis but it lacks depth.

The student correctly identified the issue(s), taking into account a variety of environmental and contextual drivers. Key case information has been identified and analyzed.

The business issue has been correctly identified, with a competent and comprehensive explanation of the financial problem and its considerations. Impact on company operations and financial situation has been correctly identified. Thorough analysis of the issue is presented.

Information

Gathering

Information was taken at face value

with no questioning of its relevance

or value. Gaps in the information

were not identified or were incorrect.

An information gap was identified

and the student found additional

information to fill it. However, this

was limited in scope. Weak criteria

for the selection of necessary

information.

The student correctly identified at

least one information gap and found

relevant information, but which was

limited in scope. Some evidence of

sound criteria for selecting

information but not consistent

throughout. Needs expansion

Relevant information gaps were

identified and additional relevant

information was found to fill them. At

least two different types of sources

were used. The student

demonstrates coherent criteria for

selecting information but needs

greater depth.

Thestudent showed skill in gathering

information and analyzing it for the

purposes of filling the information

gaps identified. Comprehensive and

relevant

Conclusions The student formed a conclusion, but

it was not reasonable. It was either

unjustified, incorrect or unrelated to

the case in hand.

The conclusion was reasonable but

lacked depth and would not be a

basis for suitable financial strategy

development

The student reached conclusions but

they were limited and provided

minimal direction for decision-making

and solutions.

The student evaluated, analyzed and

synthesized to create a conclusion(s)

which support decisions and

solutions.

The student evaluated, analyzed,

synthesized all information provided

to create a perceptive set of

conclusions to support the decisions

and solutions

Solutions The student attempte,

unsuccessfully, to solve problems.

The student used problem solving

techniques to make decisions about

simpler issues but disregarded more

complex issues. Implications of the

decision were not considered.

Alternatives were not offered.

The student used financial techniques

to make appropriate decisions about

simpler issues. The solution has

limited benefit but does show

understanding of implications of the

decision. Alternatives were

mentioned but not explored.

The student used financial techniques

to make appropriate decisions about

complex issues. Relevant questions

were asked and answered. A realistic

solution was chosen. Alternatives

were identified, explored and ruled

out

The student used problem solving

techniques to make thoughful,

justified decisions about difficult and

conflicting issues. A realistic solution

was chosen which would provide

maximum benefit to the company.

Alternative solutions were explored

and ruled out.

3

CASE RUBRICS: CRITICAL THINKING SCORE GUIDE

Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially Proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)

Problem

Identification

The student failed to correctly

identify the issue(s); analysis was

incorrect or too superficial to be

of use; information was

misinterpreted

The student correctly identified the

issue(s) but analysis was weak. An

absence of context – the work is

basically descriptive with little

analysis.

The student correctly identified the

case (issues), taking into account

obvious environmental/contextual

drivers. There is evidence of analysis

but it lacks depth.

The student correctly identified the

issue(s), taking into account a variety

of environmental and contextual

drivers. Key case information has

been identified and analyzed.

The business issue has been correctly

identified, with a competent and

comprehensive explanation of key

driving forces and considerations.

Impact on company operations has

been correctly identified. Thorough

analysis of the issue is presented.

Information

Gathering

Information was taken at face

value with no questioning of its

relevance or value. Gaps in the

information were not identified

or were incorrect.

An information gap was identified

and the student found additional

information to fill it. However, this

was limited in scope. Weak criteria

for the selection of necessary

information.

The student correctly identified at

least one information gap and found

relevant information, but which was

limited in scope. Some evidence of

sound criteria for selecting

information but not consistent

throughout. Needs expansion

Relevant information gaps were

identified and additional relevant

information was found to fill them. At

least two different types of sources

were used. The student

demonstrates coherent criteria for

selecting information but needs

greater depth.

The student showed skill in gathering

information and analyzing it for the

purposes of filling the information

gaps identified. Comprehensive and

relevant

Conclusions The student formed a conclusion,

but it was not reasonable. It was

either unjustified, incorrect or

unrelated to the case in hand.

The conclusion was reasonable but

lacked depth and would not be a

basis for suitable strategy

development

The student reached conclusions but

they were limited and provided

minimal direction for decision-making

and solutions.

The student evaluated, analyzed and

synthesized to create a conclusion(s)

which support decisions and

solutions.

The student evaluated, analyzed,

synthesized all information provided

to create a perceptive set of

conclusions to support the decisions

and solutions

Solutions The student attempte,

unsuccessfully, to solve problems.

The student used problem solving

techniques to make decisions about

simpler issues but disregarded more

complex issues. Implications of the

decision were not considered.

Alternatives were not offered.

The student used problem-solving

techniques to make appropriate

decisions about simpler issues. The

solution has limited benefit but does

show understanding of implications

of the decision. Alternatives were

mentioned but not explored.

The student used problem solving

techniques to make appropriate

decisions about complex issues.

Relevant questions were asked and

answered. A realistic solution was

chosen. Alternatives were identified,

explored and ruled out

The student used problem solving

techniques to make thoughtful,

justified decisions about difficult and

conflicting issues. A realistic solution

was chosen which would provide

maximum benefit to the company.

Alternative solutions were explored

and ruled out.

4

PRESENTATION GRADING

Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)

Visuals Visuals are poorly designed,

containing only words and are

used as notes. More than 5

spelling mistakes. Relevance is not

clear

Visuals are fairly mundane and not

always relevant to the presentation

development. Fewer than 5 spelling

mistakes

Visuals are well designed. Generally,

support the argument, but some are

irrelevant or unclear

Professionally designed but there are

too many (some irrelevant) or are

missing. Support the development of

the presentation

Professionally designed. Attractive,

relevant and add to understanding.

Support the development of the

presentation

Content The content is a simple repetition

of written work with no

amendments to language or style.

The development is confusing and

does not justify conclusions

The content is generally clear but

there are gaps in the development

or information which is not relevant

is given too much importance

The content is clear showing

knowledge of the area. Improvements

would help to justify conclusions

Competent development of content

showing in-depth knowledge of subject

area.

The content is clear, well developed

and interesting. Conclusions are clearly

justified. Appropriate language style

and shows thorough, in-depth

understanding of the subject area

Questions and

answers

The candidate was unprepared

and unable to answer pertinent

questions

The candidate attempted to answer

the questions but not always

appropriately

The candidate was able to answer the

questions, but did not expand on

question areas

The candidate was well prepared to

answer questions and showed in-depth

knowledge of the subject area.

Expanded on answers

The candidate showed in-depth

knowledge, was well-prepared for the

questions and expanded answers in-

depth showing ownership of the subject

area.