1) Historical performance analysis.
Analyze the company’s financial performance over the last 5 to 10 years by calculating operating and net margins for each of those years. Compare the company’s performance to the firm’s key competitors (you may want to consider additional financial performance data in your analysis). The point is not necessarily to have you report these data in the paper, but to draw conclusions from analyzing the data. Does the firm have a competitive advantage?
2) Internal analysis
First, identify the critical resources and capabilities of the company and two or three ‘core competencies.’ If you believe the firm has a competitive advantage, it should be clear from your analysis which core competencies or combinations of resources and capabilities make this advantage possible. Is it sustainable?
Second, analyze the firms’ strategies. Explain the company’s corporate level strategy and (main) business-level strategies. Include an analysis of recent alliance/M&A activity if appropriate. Identify challenges and why you expect these efforts to be successful or not. Describe the firm’s international strategy, if appropriate. Are these strategies justified by your internal analysis? Why or why not? Do they make sense given the external environment? Be sure to support your assertions with reasons, evidence, and strong logic.
In sum, your arguments should explain your company’s historical relative performance by drawing on your knowledge of the company’s internal environment and strategies.
3) Key issue
Determine what you believe is the most important strategic challenge or issue your company faces. The issue should follow from (and be strongly supported by) your analysis to this point (including the information on the external environment in Paper #1). There will be numerous issues facing your company, but choose one issue and justify your choice.
4) Recommendations
Finally, develop a compelling set of recommendations for the firm going forward that will address the key issue. In many cases, you will find that your project firm is contemplating implementing – or has already implemented – several specific strategic actions. You may believe these are appropriate actions for the firm, or you may believe the firm should pursue a different path. Develop two or three recommendations about what the firm should do going forward, and describe at least one risk associated with each recommendation. The recommendations should be feasible and should address the key issue and also build clearly on the analyses you offered earlier. Be as specific as possible in explaining the recommendations and how the firm will benefit. For example, instead of saying that ABC company should “acquire a company,” try to suggest possible candidates and be specific about the benefits of a particular candidate. Your recommendations should demonstrate that you understand the firm’s external and internal environments and its strategies, that you understand the frameworks we are studying in the course, and that you have based your conclusions on reasons built from data and other evidence.
————
This paper is a continuation of another paper written earlier in the semester. I will attach it for your easy reference. Please try to make connections to paper 1.
————–
Maximum Grading rubric:
Research/information collection – Exceptional creativity in finding data relevant to the project from multiple sources. Data collected lends itself to a subsequent thorough analysis and conclusions about the company’s internal environment, strategy, and performance.
Analysis and synthesis of research
Application of material/frameworks from the course
– Exceptional synthesis of the collected information and integration with frameworks, concepts, or other material learned in the course. Efforts to analyze the situation go well beyond just a summary of the team’s research. Strong logical connections between the analyses of external environment (in Paper #1), internal environment, strategy, financial performance, and recommendations.
Conclusions and recommendations – The team draws clear and compelling conclusions or recommendations that follow from the data and analysis and clearly address the issues, challenges, or opportunities outlined. Conclusions and recommendations show creativity and are specific and detailed.
Written report – Concise, clear, well-written report that has a unified tone and thesis and consistent logic throughout. Carefully cited sources, includes the required elements, and adheres to the guidelines on formatting and length. Report makes a strong and compelling argument connecting the firm’s internal environment, strategy, and recommendations.
