Assessment 2: Case study report (35%)
• Assignment 2 Case Study.pdf (79.136 KB)
This is an individual assessment which involves a detailed critique of a case study that focuses on emerging markets. The case study will be posted on vUWS for students to access.
The case study will focus on various issues covered in the seminars. Students are required to identify critical strategic success factors for this case and assess how these conform to theory or concepts as covered in the seminars. Conciseness and focus in approaching this case analysis is crucial. There will be a set of accompanying questions for the case study.
Essays should not exceed 1,500 words, using size 12 point font with 1.5 line spacing format. Essays must be fully and accurately referenced or they will not be graded. Students should aim for a 10 per cent to 15 per cent Turnitin similarity index with direct quotes properly referenced with quotation marks, source and page number (please contact the instructor if you need advice regarding Harvard referencing). The case analysis should be in an essay format.
? Week 6: Submission of case study via Turnitin.
CASE STUDY QUESTIONS
1. Identify and explain the different forces driving the changing landscape of the music industry.
2. Using relevant theories and concepts from the lectures, clearly outline key innovation strategic issues that emerge from this case study. Use examples to illustrate your mapping of the key strategic issues
3. What lessons emerge from this case study that could be used by a potential new player in the sector and what insights does this case provide for established players who have to defend their market positions?
Marking criteria and standards(follow this marking criteria to achieve best marks)
To score good marks
EXPECTATIONS NOT MEET
Discussion and analysis of case. Minimal or no discussion and analysis of case. Good discussion and analysis based on the facts of the case. Superior and comprehensive discussion and analysis based on the facts of the case.
0-2 3 4-5
Identification of critical strategic success factors that are consistent with sound understanding of the case’s issues and dynamics. Minimal or no critical strategic success factors identified.
Limited critical strategic success factors identified which do not follow clearly from analysis. Good critical strategic success factors identified which sometimes logically flow from the analysis. Very good and superior critical strategic success factors identified and rigorously supported by logical analysis.
0-4 5-7 8-10
Application of relevant theories and concepts to analysis. No or minimal linking of theories and concepts to analysis.
Limited use of theories and concepts incorrectly applied to analysis. Good use of theories and concepts superficially linked to the analysis. Very good and Superior application of relevant theories and concepts to analysis.
0-4 5-7 8-10
Outlines relevant innovative recommendations. Minimal or no discussion of recommendations. Good discussion of recommendations that address the key issues of the case. Superior and comprehensive discussion of recommendations that address the key issues of the case.
0-2 3 4-5
Overall essay presentation, structure and logic. Basic paper with no reader engagement. There is no obvious logic or structure and essay is hard to follow. Paper is interesting and easy to read, but could be better structured as a logical essay. Good presentation and layout. Paper has consistent logical flow of thought, is very well structured and presented as an essay.
0.2 3 4-5