Marketing Case

case_instructions_.docx

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Marketing homework help >Marketing Case

MKT 412

Lancer Gallery Case Instructions

You will analyze the Lancer Gallery case using the basics of the IFAAR method (attached as IFAAR guidelines). Consider all the case data, plus what we discussed in class, in your analysis. Though there is very little financial data in the case, you can consider what is there in the Issue, Factors, Alternatives, and Recommendation sections of your write-up.

Because of the limited financial data in the case, however, you will not be performing a spreadsheet analysis for the Analytics section. Instead, this section will consist of the types of quantitative and financial data you would need to support each of your alternatives. Be specific about what you need. For example, “prices” and “costs” would not be enough; you would need to include what items/categories you need prices for and what type(s) of cost data you would be looking for. Think about the types of financial analyses we’ve discussed in class and determine which ones would be appropriate for your alternatives along with the financial data that is available in the case. Because there will be no actual Analytics section in this case analysis, your Recommendations should be based on what you’ve developed from the available case data in your Issue, Factors, and Alternatives sections.

Your case write-up will still follow the original case mechanics (no more than four pages, double spaced, 12 point font, one inch margins) for the Issue, Factors, Alternatives, and Recommendations sections. The four pages will not include the Analytics section. Instead you will attach this section as an appendix (using the same basic mechanics i.e. double space, 12 point font, etc.). Like the spreadsheet analysis this Analytics appendix is not page limited, but can be as long as you need to cover the appropriate information. Because this case is different than our standard IFAAR analysis, grading will be done using the revised rubric.

(S16)

MKT 412

Lancer Case Grading Rubric

	0 (0%)	1 (65%)	2 (75%)	3 (85%)	4 (100%)
Issue (15%)	Does not identify an issue	Identifies something but not clear or relevant	Identifies major issue but not in insightful manner	Identifies major issue; evidences some insight	Succinctly and insightfully identifies major issue
Factors (20%)	Does not identify any factors	Identifies few factors; factors not relevant to case analysis	Identifies some factors but factors not relevant or sufficient	Identifies most major factors	Clearly identifies all major factors
Alternatives (20%)	Does not list any alternatives	Lists too few, too many, or inappropriate alternatives	Lists several alternatives but weak or inappropriate	Lists most major alternatives	Lists major alternatives clearly and insightfully
Analytics (20%)	Includes no analytics data needs	Includes some analytics data needs, but inappropriate or insufficient	Adequate analytics data needs, would support most alternatives and recommendations	Good analytics data needs, would support most alternatives and conclusions	Appropriate and complete analytics data needs, relevant to alternatives and recommendation
Recommen-dation (15%)	Does not make a recommendation	Recommendation not clear or relevant	Makes a generally on-base recommendation	Good recommendation, evidence of thought	Appropriate and well thought out recommendation
Mechanics (10%)	Unreadable and incomprehensible, many errors, has not followed directions	Difficult to read and understand, many errors, follows some directions	Mostly readable and comprehensible, some errors, follows directions	Readable and comprehensible, organized, few errors, follows directions	Very readable and comprehensible, almost no errors, follows all directions

(S16)