Engineering Business and Managementclepics.johnshopkins.edu/660.461.01-02-Izenberg.pdf ·...

of 22

Introduction to Business and Management 660.461 Sections 1 & 2

Fall 2012 Tuesday/Thursday Gilman 400

Section 1: 9 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. Section 2: 10:30 a.m. – 11:45 a.m.

Instructor: Illysa Izenberg [email protected]

Twitter: manage_lead Blog: Managingandleading.blogspot.com

Office hours: 8 - 9 a.m. Thursdays Whitehead 105 or in our classroom (please make an

appointment); TA & CA office hours to be announced.

TA Section 1: Esteban Escobar Gomez: [email protected]

TA Section 2: Austin Baird: [email protected]

CA: Patrick Luckett: [email protected]

Communicating with Illysa: I try to return emails within 24 hours. However, from 3

p.m. Friday until late Saturday I do not check emails. Emails received within that time

may not be responded to until Sunday or even Monday.

I know, I know, this syllabus is insanely long! It covers absolutely everything you need to know for the semester (and there are pictures and white space). For now, read everything but the assignments.

mailto:[email protected]



of 22

Table of Contents (clickable)

Course Description ................................................................................................................... 2

Course Learning Objectives .................................................................................................. 3

Main Learning Modules .......................................................................................................... 3

Required Texts .......................................................................................................................... 4 Textbook and article on e-reserve –link through Bb courseroom: .................................. 4 Purchasing Harvard Business School cases, simulations, articles and online program: ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Finance online program registration process: ........................................................................ 5

Grading ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Complete/incomplete grading: ................................................................................................................ 6

Daily Class Plan and Assignment Deliverable Dates .................................................... 6 Case Study Memos and Learning Groups: .................................................................................. 9 Class contribution grading: .......................................................................................................... 10

Academic and Personal Integrity ..................................................................................... 11

Case and Team Presentation Assignments ................................................................... 12 Army Crew Team ............................................................................................................................. 12 Thomas Green: Power, Office Politics, and a Career in Crisis .......................................... 14 Beechnut A1 ....................................................................................................................................... 15 TerraCog Global Positioning Systems: Conflict and Communication on Project Aerial ................................................................................................................................................................ 17 Fate of the Vasa ................................................................................................................................. 19 Mid-Term Team Presentation ..................................................................................................... 21 5 C Analysis on JHU’s Whiting School, Porter’s 5 Forces, and SWOT ............................. 22 Let’s Talk Science ............................................................................................................................. 22

Course Description When Mechanical Engineers become managers, they must juggle knowledge of and tasks

associated with operations, finance, marketing, strategy, team leadership and projects.

While an engineer’s success may depend on his direct input -- the sweat of his brow – a

manager’s success depends on his ability to enlist the active involvement of others: direct

reports, other managers, other team members, other department employees, and those

above him on the organizational chart. In this course, you will be introduced to strategy,

marketing, finance, project management and people management and you will practice

writing concise persuasive analyses and action plans and verbally defending your ideas.

You will leave this course prepared for the work-world.

of 22

Course Learning Objectives By the end of the course students will be able to:

1. Apply supervisory/managerial skills to correct performance shortfalls,

assign/delegate work, utilize coaching skills and processes, resolve team conflicts,

and provide constructive criticism

2. Identify how team identity, conflict, and trust influence team performance and

recognize the leader’s role in fostering team outcomes

3. Apply a comprehensive decision-making

framework to account for the needs of

disparate stakeholders, business

objectives and ethical principles and

determine how leaders shape team decision-making and performance

4. Conduct a strategic assessment of a business

5. Analyze the economic implications of business decisions, including time to

breakeven, cash flow projection, and net present value of contribution

6. Determine how project scope, resources, and schedule interact

7. Identify customer needs and set a pricing and promotion strategy

8. Understand the patent and intellectual property process (Click here to go to Daily Class Plan)

Main Learning Modules This course is organized around 5 Modules:

Teams and work relationships –leadership, communication, decision-making

Finance

Strategy

Project Management

Intellectual Property

Activities by module:

Team leadership

&

Communication

Everest simulation, Army Crew Team, Identity Issues in Teams,

Managing Oneself, Beechnut A1, Managing your Boss,

TerraCog, Fate of the Vasa, Thomas Green, the 5 Dysfunctions

of a Team

Finance ManageMentor: Financial Essentials

Strategy Marketing Analysis Toolkit: Situation Analysis, Let’s Talk

Science, Textbook

Project

management

Project Management simulation and textbook

Intellectual

property

Textbook and guest speaker from JHU’s Technology Transfer

office

“Management is nothing more than motivating

other people.” -- Lee Iacocca

of 22

Required Texts This course utilizes Harvard Business School cases, simulations, articles, and an online

program, and one textbook. Students must purchase all materials except those on e-

reserve.

Textbook and article on e-reserve –link through Bb courseroom:

1. Product Design and Development, Karl Ulrich and Steven Eppinger. McGraw-

Hill Higher Education 2008. 5th

edition. ISBN: 978007340776

We will read 3 chapters of this book. While it is a good reference book for an

engineering manager, you do not have to purchase the book. All three chapters

are on e-reserve.

2. Managing Your Boss (HBR, R0501J-PDF-ENG)

Purchasing Harvard Business School cases, simulations, articles and online

program:

Purchase the cases and simulations listed below here (prices reflect a 50% discount; if

you purchase these directly from HBS you will pay twice as much):

Section 1 coursepack: http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/access/14380356

Section 2 coursepack: http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/access/14380365

You must choose the right section’s coursepack or

we will not be able to assign you a role in the

simulations. Please purchase these materials by

September 10.

Cases and simulations in coursepack (hyperlinks

will take you to the assignment instructions):

Product

number

Title Price

R0501K Managing Oneself $3.95

UV0116 Note to the Student: how to study and discuss

cases

$3.95

9-403-131 The Army Crew Team $3.95

9-392-084 Beech-Nut A1 $3.95

907A08 Let’s Talk Science $3.95

2095 Thomas Green: Power, Office Politics, and a

Career in Crisis

$3.95

2184 TerraCog Global Positioning Systems: Conflict

and Communication on Project Aerial (brief case)

$3.95

403095 Identity Issues in Teams $3.95

http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/access/14380356

http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/access/14380365

of 22

510079 Marketing Analysis Toolkit: Situation Analysis $3.95

605026 Fate of the Vasa $3.95

3356-HTM Project Management Simulation $11.25

2650-HTM Everest Simulation $11.25

Total Cost of Cases and Simulations $62.00

Finance online program registration process:

Unfortunately, this product cannot be purchased together with the other HBSP materials.

You must register for this program by November 15. You may start and complete this

program and take the quiz (on Bb) any time you wish as long as you complete the quiz by

9 a.m. November 26.

2444C-MMC-ENG ManageMentor: Finance Essentials Module

Registration process:

1. Turn off all pop-up blockers

2. Register at http://elearninghome.hbsp.org.

3. Click on "Sign up here" under New Users

4. Fill out the required information, including Organization ID 00057106, to be

properly associated with your course.

5. Click "Find" to see what's available in your Learning Catalog.

6. Select "Register" - Click "Confirm." You will then be prompted for payment.

You will need a credit card and the cost is $14.

7. Proceed with payment and click "Complete Registration."

8. Your registration is now complete and your course should appear on your

enrollments.

If you experience technical difficulties, please contact HBSP: 1-800-810-8858 (outside

the U.S. and Canada, 1-617-783-7700) [email protected]. Note technical

requirements for all simulations and online programs:

Computer with minimum 1024x768 screen resolution

High speed internet connection (DSL / cable modem quality)

Windows 2000, XP, Vista, Windows 7 / Macintosh OS 10.x operating systems

Internet Explorer 6+ / Firefox 3.0+ web browser with javascript and cookies

enabled

Microsoft Excel 2003+ (optional but several courses and simulations allow

students to export data/files for manipulation in Excel)

Flash Player 9+ browser plug-in

Special notes: Known issues with Chrome browser. Safari browser compatibility

not fully confirmed; Macintosh users are encouraged to use Firefox 3.0+ browser.

Total cost for all course materials: $76.00.

Grading Students will read and write-up case studies, prepare for simulations following directions

on each simulation site, and complete activities as assigned.

http://elearninghome.hbsp.org/


of 22

Concepts learned on a regular, consistent basis stick far longer than anything learned

cramming for midterms and finals. Accordingly, grading categories emphasize weekly

learning:

Description % Total

1. Case write-ups, other written homework,

quiz, presentations

50%

2. Class and Learning Group Contribution 50%

Total 100%

Complete/incomplete grading:

There are three textbook assignments that are graded as complete/incomplete; these will

be evaluated for thought and completeness. To earn an A for the course, all 3 tasks must

be completed satisfactorily; to earn a B, 2 of the 3 must be completed satisfactorily; to

earn a C, 1 must be completed satisfactorily.

These, then, are gateway items: a student with an A average who completes 2 tasks can

earn only a B; a student with a B average who completes only 2 tasks can earn only a C;

etc.

Daily Class Plan and Assignment Deliverable Dates There are specific and different assignment questions for each case and for the

presentation, shown below. Clickable links take you to the Learning Objectives and the

specific assignments. Every deliverable is due by 9 a.m.

Day

Date

Graded

Deliverables

Specific Tasks Before Class

Topics & Learning

Objective (LO) #

T 4-

Sep Read syllabus; bring to class. There will be

an assessment of your knowledge of the

syllabus

Course intro; LO1

TH 6-

Sep

Complete handout pages 7 and 8. Bring

printed handout to class.

Managing others:

understanding conflict;

LO1, LO2

T 11-

Sep

Sign up for a learning group –go to Bb and

follow instructions in the “announcements”

page

Resolving conflicts

productively: LO2

TH 13-

Sep Bring laptop to class. Complete "prepare"

section for Everest simulation -- this is very

important! Don't skim and don't skip this.

Leadership & Team

Simulation; LO2

T 18-

Sep NO CLASS

TH 20-

Sep Watch case analysis e-lecture on Bb;

Read: Note to the Student: how to study

and discuss cases Bring laptop to class

Leadership & Team

Simulation; LO2

of 22

Day

Date

Graded

Deliverables


Topics & Learning

Objective (LO) #

T 25-

Sep Read: Identity Issues in Teams.

Download coaching handout (on Bb) and

complete Coaching Competency

Assessment and the following page,

Coaching Competency Development

Steps; Bring any questions about

analyzing/writing up a case from note and

e-lecture

Managerial

Communications:

building blocks of

productive relationships

& coaching skills; LO1

TH 27-

Sep

LG case

memo: The

Army Crew

Team; LG

rubric

In addition to assigned questions, come to

class prepared to discuss: How would you

compare the Army Crew team to other

types of organizational teams? What are

the key similarities and differences? What

lessons can we learn from the Army Crew

team?

Leading Teams: LO2

T 2-Oct Managerial

Communications:

coaching skills &

process; LO1

TH 4-Oct Bring graded case memo and rubric for

discussion (avail. on your LG homepage

in our Bb site); read two articles:

Managing Oneself; Managing Your Boss

Managerial

Communications:

assertiveness at work;

managing and leading

upward; LO1

T 9-Oct Textbook

exercises 1- 4

write up

answers in a

few

paragraphs

Read Textbook chapter 16: Patents and

Intellectual Property; you may want to go

to http://www.ulrich-eppinger.net/ for

additional research/information and to

complete assignment. Warning --

Beechnut is a very long case; start reading

now!

Guest Lecture:

Intellectual Property --

Ben Gibbs; LO8

TH 11-

Oct

LG case

memo:

Thomas

Green: Power,

Office Poltics,

& a Career in

Crisis; LG

rubric

In addition to the assigned questions,

come to class prepared to discuss: What

are the work styles and personalities of

Thomas Green and Frank Davis?

Managerial

Communications:

coaching in a

challenging situation:

LO1

T 16-

Oct No class -- Monday schedule

TH 18-

Oct

LG case

memo:

Beechnut A1;

LG rubric

Come to class prepared to discuss the

assigned questions

Leadership and ethical

decision-making: LO2,

LO3

of 22

Day

Date

Graded

Deliverables


Topics & Learning

Objective (LO) #

T 23-

Oct Read article 5 Dysfunctions of a Team and

come to class prepared to discuss. Article

posted to Bb.

Communicating and

coaching on a team:

LO1

TH 25-

Oct

LG case memo:

TerraCog

Global

Positioning

Systems; LG

Rubric

In addition to the assigned questions, come

to class prepared to discuss: What are the

strategic and organizational implications

for each of the company's options?

Group decision-

making: LO1, LO2,

LO4

T 30-

Oct Speaker: Siobhan

Callanan, JHU 2011 --

Life After College as a

Mechanical Engineer

TH 1-

Nov

LG case memo:

Fate of the

Vasa; LG

rubric

Come to class prepared to discuss the

assigned questions

Innovation

management: LO1,

LO2, LO3, LO4, LO7

T 6-

Nov

Midterm Team

presentations

Shared learning

TH 8-

Nov

Bring laptop to class. Complete "prepare"

section for Project Management simulation

Project Management:

Scope, resources,

schedule; LO6

T 13-

Nov

Textbook

exercises 1 -3

write up

answers

Read textbook Chapter 18: Managing

Projects

Project planning tools;

LO6

TH 15-

Nov

LG 5 C's

analysis on

JHU's Whiting

School; LG

rubric

Read: Case note Marketing Analysis

Toolkit: Situation Analysis. The specific

deliverable may change.

Strategic analysis; LO4

T 20-

Nov

Finance Quiz

on Bb –

complete by

11/26

Class attendance not required: complete

ManageMentor: Financial Essentials

Finance: Income/

Balance/cash flow

statements &

Breakeven/ NPV

/budgeting: LO5

TH 22-

Nov No Class -- Thanksgiving

T 27-

Nov

LG case memo:

Let's Talk Science;

LG rubric

In addition to the assignment questions,

come to class prepared to discuss: Will

the proposed promotion plan be

effective? Why? What else could be

done to promote the product? Should

LTS sell SWI in the United States and

the United Kingdom?

Strategic analysis; LO4

of 22

Day

Date

Graded

Deliverables


Topics & Learning

Objective (LO) #

TH 29-

Nov

Textbook exercise

#3 write up answer

in a paragraph or

two; and with LG

Porters 5 Forces &

SWOT

Read textbook chapter 5 Identifying

customer needs. Come to class

prepared to present your 5

Forces/SWOT analyses. Not everyone

will have a chance to present. This

assignment is subject to change;

students will be informed by

Thanksgiving of any change.

Identifying customer

needs: pricing &

promotion strategy;

LO7

T 4-

Dec Eric Hall, Assoc. Dir,

JHU Career Center:

how to network in

person and to use

LinkedIn, write a

good resume, and

prepare for a job

interview.

TH 6-

Dec Communication game;

LO1

Case Study Memos and

Learning Groups:

For each case, students will come

to class prepared to discuss

specific questions (see daily plan

and assignments). When writing

case memos, follow the specific

instructions for each case.

Students will work in Learning

Groups (LG) of three or four to

debate and complete the case

memos. All groupmembers earn

the same grade. On your

assignment, show all LG member

names. Work together with your learning group – don’t split up the work. After each LG

assignment, students will evaluate their LG peers based on traits discussed in our few

weeks of class. You will find the form on our Blackboard site after groups are set up.

For each case, you will find below specific questions, word count and other requirements,

and a rubric. Please write as if you are writing for work, not for an English Lit

course – use concise, professional, direct language, single-space, 12-point font. One

member of your group will upload your assignment through the Bb group assignment

link. You will find your graded group work in this link as well.

of 22

There are several resources available to help you read, analyze, and write up a case:

1) article you’ll read for September 20: Note to the Student: How to Read and

Discuss Cases

2) e-lecture on Bb: How to Analyze a Case (<00:05:00)

3) your TA and/or I will write extensive comments on the first memo (possibly the

first two memos). Read these comments and incorporate ideas shared in future

memos.

Team resources:

Asana.com – team to-do list and project management tools

Dropbox.com – shared document space

Google groups, google+, google chat, google docs, google hangout– shared

document spaces and live online discussion tools

Oovoo.com – Skype-like tool that allows for up to 15 participants on a video-call

with screensharing

Class contribution grading:

Verbally presenting ideas is a key management skill: managers must gain buy-in, inspire

their teammates and direct reports, obtain needed resources from higher ups, and in other

ways be verbally adept at negotiating, persuading, correcting performance shortfalls, and

providing direction. Therefore, students are to use the classes as learning labs for

developing and enhancing communication skills.

Students are expected to contribute to in-class discussions in ways that enhance the

learning for all. Grading will be based on comments and contributions that:

Generate quality debate

Build on classmates’ comments

Link textbook reading, case material, outside reading/learning and/or individual

experiences

Demonstrate rigorous and critical thinking

While playing devil’s advocate can help explore options and contingencies, arguing for

the sake of arguing does not enhance learning. Also, we will follow procedures to reduce

the potential for discussion-dominating. Students are expected to participate in all class

activities and exercises.

Because students in this program may not have studied non-technical subjects and may

not have experienced being graded on class contribution, every effort will be made to

ensure all voices are heard and that everyone has an opportunity to share ideas. Further,

of 22

students will be asked to self-grade at the end of some of the classes. We will provide

feedback to any student whose perception of his own class contribution differs

significantly from ours.

We will create an environment conducive to hearing from everyone regardless of first

language, accent, or speaking style. Thus, the class environment will model an inclusive

work environment.

Special note: Tremendous learning happens during student interactions in class that

cannot be replicated for individuals missing class. Students missing a class are expected

to make prior arrangements to learn the material and contribute to others’ learning despite

their absence. Contact the CA if you expect to miss or be late to a class and provide him

with your learning / contribution plan.

Class contribution grading:

Contributed superior comments to:

>90% of classes = A

80 – 90% = B

70 – 80% = C

etc.

Contributed something useful to:

>90% of classes = B

80 – 90% = C

70 – 80% = D

etc.

Academic and Personal Integrity Cheating is wrong. Cheating hurts our community by undermining academic integrity,

creating mistrust, and fostering unfair competition. The university will punish cheaters

with failure on an assignment, failure in a course, permanent transcript notation,

suspension, and/or expulsion. Offenses may be reported to medical, law, or other

professional or graduate schools when a cheater applies.

Violations can include cheating on exams, plagiarism, reuse of assignments without

permission, improper use of the Internet and electronic devices, unauthorized

collaboration, alteration of graded assignments, forgery and falsification, lying,

facilitating academic dishonesty, and unfair competition. Ignorance of these rules is not

an excuse.

You may collaborate with other students in this course, but only under these conditions:

You are encouraged to discuss and debate the cases with other students

You may work with one other student when completing take-home quiz(es).

If you have questions about this policy, please ask the instructor. For more information,

see the guide on “Academic Ethics for Undergraduates” and the Ethics Board web site

(www.jhu.edu/ethics).

I’d like to ensure there is no confusion on this

point: a student can earn an A in this course

only if

1. his grades are at an A average,

2. he has completed satisfactorily all

three complete/incomplete tasks, and

3. he has attended and contributed

superior comments to more than 90%

of classes.

Please review the information in the

appropriate section to determine minimum

requirements for B and C grades.

http://www.jhu.edu/ethics

of 22

Case and Team Presentation Assignments

Please use 12 point font and single space for all memos. In the rubrics below, *ESWE stands for Edited Standard Written English.

Put your Learning Group number and members’ names on the first page of the memo.

Source: much of these rubrics is sourced from Effective Grading: A Tool for Learning and Assessment in College by Barbara E.

Walvoord and Virginia Johnson Anderson.

Army Crew Team

In no more than 600 words, answer these questions:

1) Why does the Varsity Team lose to the JV team in practices?

2) When should Coach P have intervened, if ever? Why then? What should he have done? Why those steps? Be specific about

timing and action steps and how these resolve the specific causes of the challenges as you’ve stated them in the first answer.

Gateway (memo must meet these requirements or it will not be accepted):

Language is used competently, with no more than two departures from ESWE* per page except where deliberate to support humor or

other purpose or to quote another person. There are few or no confusing sentences. Memo does not exceed 600 words.

Your group should grade its own memo using this rubric by highlighting or bolding the words/phrases that best describe your

memo (this is not the same as the Learning Group rubric, which is on our Bb site) and attach this rubric to your memo when

uploading it to Bb:

Not acceptable:

memo returned

for rewrite

Weak Meets Expectations Exceptional

Grade

Causal

Analysis

(Q1)

Does not define

causes.

Causal analysis weak,

unclear, or obvious.

Provides some supporting

details but repeats rather

than analyzes case. Few

links or unclear or illogical

Causal analysis of good quality

and well thought out. Links are

logical and clear. Supporting

details precise and concise.

Demonstrates critical thinking

regarding case characters,

Exceptional -- clear and compelling

presentation of all causes. Linkages and tie-ins

are logical and add value. Supporting details

precise and concise. Demonstrates critical

thinking -- depth, precision, accuracy, logic,

and appropriate breadth -- regarding case

40%

of 22

links. organizational structure or

culture, and/or external forces.

characters, organizational structure or culture,

and external forces.

Plan of

Action

(Q2)

POA not

SMART*

POA partially meets

characteristics of SMART* POA SMART*

POA exceptional -- clear and compelling.

Thoroughly covers all SMART* components.

Targets roots of causes and utilizes available

resources or defines those needed.

40%

Clear

writing

Text barely

comprehensible.

More than 5

grammar or

spelling errors.

Visuals confusing.

Unclear or

difficult to

understand.

Inadequate or

inaccurate use of

vocabulary or

grammar.

Text mostly

comprehensible, requires

reader- interpretation. 3-4

grammar or spelling errors.

Visuals need clarification.

Some inadequate and/or

inaccurate use of

vocabulary and/or

grammar.

Text comprehensible, requiring

minimal reader -interpretation.

1-2 grammar or spelling errors.

Writing is professional.

Adequate and accurate use of

vocabulary and grammar. Uses

visual tools to promote

argument, such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts,

or graphs.

Text readily comprehensible, requiring no

interpretation. No grammar or spelling errors.

Uses visually compelling tools to add richness

to argument such as bulleted/numbered lists,

charts, or graphs. Tools link information, keep

reader focused, clarify points succinctly and

are clear. Writing is unambiguous.

10%

Persuasi

ve No main argument

Argument lacks relevance,

is imprecise, incomplete, or

lacks significance

Argument is relevant, precise,

complete, and significant, yet

presented or stated

unconvincingly -- lacks

intellectual courage, reason,

perseverance, or integrity

Persuasive. Argument is relevant, precise,

complete, and significant and is presented or

stated convincingly

10%

*SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-lined; Clear: free from ambiguity, confusion, or doubt.

Click here to return to Daily Class Plan

of 22

Thomas Green: Power, Office Politics, and a Career in Crisis


1) How do Thomas Green’s actions differ from Davis’ expectations?

2) What is your analysis of Green’s job performance and actions in his first 5 months?

3) What actions would you take if you were Green?




Rubric:

Your group should grade its own memo using this rubric on a 100-point scale (this is not the same as the Learning Group

rubric, which is on our Bb site) and attach this rubric to your memo when uploading it to Bb:

1) The analysis presented in answering questions 1 and 2 is consistent with the material in the case. Most significant issues

presented.

a. Question 1

b. Question 2

2) The plan of action (Q3) is well thought out, logical and clear.

3) Memo presents clear writing, requiring minimal reader interpretation, in one unified voice. Uses ESWE* except for deliberate

departures to support humor or other purpose or to quote another person. Writing is professional and language is used with

control and imagination to keep the reader engaged. Uses visual tools where appropriate to promote argument, such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts, or graphs. The memo is “economically” written: every word pulls its weight.

4) Memo is persuasive and compelling.


of 22

Beechnut A1


1. If you were Andersen, knowing what Andersen knows, what would be your assessment of the situation on June 28?

2. If you were Storer, knowing what Storer knows, what would be your assessment of the situation on June 28?

3. How difficult will it be for Andersen to handle this situation well? What are the sources of difficulty and who is responsible

for them?

4. What would you advise Andersen to do next?

Please collaborate on your responses. The plan of action, and most likely the analysis of Andersen’s difficulties, will be disjointed and

illogical if the questions are divided up among your Learning Group members.

In a few paragraphs below this rubric, answer this question:

How did you use comments on previous memos to improve this memo?

Your group should grade its own paper using this rubric by highlighting or bolding the words/phrases that best describe your


uploading it to Bb:

Not acceptable:

memo returned

for rewrite


Q1 and Q2

Fails to interpret

situation

accurately.

Weak interpretation

of situation.

Interprets situation accurately, drawing

inferences that are consistent with what

Andersen and Storer know that day and with

their previous actions and decisions.

Presents sufficient and clearly organized

evidence. Links are logical and clear.

Supporting details precise.

Above and beyond expectations.

Exceptional -- compelling

interpretation of situation from

each person’s perspective. Fresh

insight.

Q3

Does not present

accurate

understanding of

Weak analysis of

situation difficulties

and their causes.

Accurate assessment of challenges.

Causation analysis flows logically from

challenges presented. Demonstrates critical


Exceptional.

of 22

challenges to

managing/leading

in this situation.

thinking regarding case characters, and

organizational and industry history, structure

or culture.

Q4 – action

plan

POA is not

SMART (specific,

measureable,

achievable,

relevant or

timelined)

POA fails to meet

one or more SMART

criteria

POA is SMART: specific, measurable,

achievable, relevant, and timelined.

Thoroughly covers all SMART*

components. Targets roots of causes and

utilizes available resources or defines those

needed.

POA SMART as well as

exceptional and compelling.

Clear

writing

Overused quoted

or paraphrased

material rather

than presented

own ideas; use of

ESWE* falls

below standard for

acceptance.

Language is so

confusing the

reader is often at a

loss to understand

Language is used

competently, with no

more than two

departures from

ESWE* per page

except where

deliberate to support

humor or other

purpose or to quote

another person. Few

or no confusing

sentences.

Text comprehensible, requiring minimal

reader -interpretation. Uses ESWE except for

deliberate departures to support humor or

other purpose or to quote another person.

Writing is professional and language is used

with control and imagination to keep the

reader engaged. Uses visual tools where

appropriate to promote argument, such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts, or graphs.

The memo is “economically” written: every

word pulls its weight.


Exceptional.


of 22

TerraCog Global Positioning Systems: Conflict and Communication on Project Aerial


1) What led to the current situation? Consider the organization’s decision-making process and how it has changed, and the

organization’s culture, policies, and procedures. How have departmental and individual objectives led to the current situation?

2) What should Emma Richardson do?




Rubric:



uploading it to Bb:

Not acceptable:

memo returned for

rewrite


Causal

Analysis

(Q1)

Does not define

causes.







links.

Causal analysis of average

quality and well thought out.

Links are logical and clear.

Supporting details precise and

concise. Demonstrates critical

thinking regarding case

characters, organizational

structure or culture, and/or

external forces.


presentation of all causes. Linkages

and tie-ins are logical and add

value. Supporting details precise

and concise. Demonstrates critical

thinking -- depth, precision,

accuracy, logic, and appropriate

breadth -- regarding case characters,

organizational structure or culture,


of 22

Plan of

Action (Q2) POA not SMART*

POA partially meets

characteristics of

SMART*

POA SMART*

POA exceptional -- clear and

compelling. Thoroughly covers all

SMART* components. Targets

roots of causes and utilizes

available resources or defines those

needed.

Clear

writing

Text barely

comprehensible. More

than 5 grammar or

spelling errors. Visuals

confusing. Unclear or

difficult to understand.

Inadequate or

inaccurate use of

vocabulary or

grammar.

Text mostly



grammar or spelling

errors. Visuals need

clarification. Writing

clear. Some inadequate

and/or inaccurate use of

vocabulary and/or

grammar.


minimal reader -interpretation. 1-

2 grammar or spelling errors.





argument, such as


or graphs.

Text readily comprehensible,

requiring no interpretation. No

grammar or spelling errors. Uses

visually compelling tools to add

richness to argument such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts, or

graphs. Tools link information,

keep reader focused, clarify points

succinctly and are clear. Writing is

unambiguous.

Persuasive No main argument


is imprecise, incomplete,

or lacks significance



presented or stated




Persuasive. Argument is relevant,

precise, complete, and significant

and is presented or stated

convincingly

SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timelined; Clear: free from ambiguity, confusion, or doubt.


of 22

Fate of the Vasa


1) Why did the Vasa meet this fate? Consider the management of innovation, design, and production as well as managerial,

communication, and leadership factors.

2) What, if anything, could have been done to prevent this?

Please collaborate on your responses. The situational analysis and prevention plan will be disjointed and illogical if the questions are

divided up among your Learning Group members.

In a few paragraphs below the rubric, answer this question:

How did you use comments on previous memos to improve this memo?






uploading it to Bb:

Not acceptable:

memo returned for

rewrite


Causal

Analysis

(Q1)

Does not define

causes.







links.

Causal analysis of average

quality and well thought out.

Links are logical and clear.

Supporting details precise and

concise. Demonstrates critical

thinking regarding case

characters, organizational

structure or culture, and/or


presentation of all causes. Linkages

and tie-ins are logical and add

value. Supporting details precise

and concise. Demonstrates critical

thinking -- depth, precision,

accuracy, logic, and appropriate

breadth -- regarding case characters,

of 22

external forces. organizational structure or culture,


Plan of

Action (Q2) POA not SMART*

POA partially meets

characteristics of

SMART*

POA SMART*

POA exceptional -- clear and

compelling. Thoroughly covers all

SMART* components. Targets

roots of causes and utilizes

available resources or defines those

needed.

Clear

writing

Text barely

comprehensible. More

than 5 grammar or

spelling errors. Visuals

confusing. Unclear or

difficult to understand.

Inadequate or

inaccurate use of

vocabulary or

grammar.

Text mostly



grammar or spelling

errors. Visuals need

clarification. Writing

clear. Some inadequate

and/or inaccurate use of

vocabulary and/or

grammar.


minimal reader -interpretation. 1-

2 grammar or spelling errors.





argument, such as


or graphs.

Text readily comprehensible,

requiring no interpretation. No

grammar or spelling errors. Uses

visually compelling tools to add

richness to argument such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts, or

graphs. Tools link information,

keep reader focused, clarify points

succinctly and are clear. Writing is

unambiguous.

Persuasive No main argument


is imprecise, incomplete,

or lacks significance



presented or stated




Persuasive. Argument is relevant,

precise, complete, and significant

and is presented or stated

convincingly

SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timelined; Clear: free from ambiguity, confusion, or doubt.


of 22

Mid-Term Team Presentation

In groups of 4-5 (choose your own members), prepare presentation demonstrating:

1) key learnings from the semester thus far

2) how you will use what you learned.

Specifically, compare the team decision-making, conflict, upward leadership, and coaching learning from Everest, Beechnut,

TerraCog, Vasa, Thomas Green, and our class discussions and determine what you will do differently as a team member and team

leader as a result of this learning.

You may be as creative as you wish; for example, you might write/present a song or skit, deliver a professional presentation, or create

and explain a poster.

Presentations may take no more than 8 minutes; all members must speak. Please practice with a timer so that you can ensure you

won't go over the 8-minute limit.

Rubric (you do not need to turn this in)

Demonstrated concepts learned and accurate application of learning = 50%

Clear, engaging presentation = 40%

Did not exceed 8 minute limit = 10%


of 22

5 C Analysis on JHU’s Whiting School, Porter’s 5 Forces, and SWOT

The 5C, 5 Forces, and SWOT analyses assignments will be clarified by early November. Click here to return to Daily Class Plan

Let’s Talk Science


1. What marketing challenge does LTS face?

2. Does the training package, Science with Impact, meet the needs of its target audience? Does it fit with the company's overall

strategy?

3. What does LTS need to consider when determining the price of Science with Impact? Do you agree with the proposed price?

Justify your position.




Rubric:

Your group should grade its own paper using this rubric on a 100-point scale (this is not the same as the Learning Group rubric,

which is on our Bb site) and attach this rubric to your memo when uploading it to Bb:

1) The analysis presented in each answer is consistent with the material in the case. Most significant issues presented.

a. Question 1:

b. Question 2:

c. Question 3:

2) Memo presents clear writing, requiring minimal reader interpretation, in one unified voice. Uses ESWE* except for deliberate

departures to support humor or other purpose or to quote another person. Writing is professional and language is used with

control and imagination to keep the reader engaged. Uses visual tools where appropriate to promote argument, such as

bulleted/numbered lists, charts, or graphs. The memo is “economically” written: every word pulls its weight.

3) Memo is persuasive and compelling.

Engineering Business and Managementclepics.johnshopkins.edu/660.461.01-02-Izenberg.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Engineering Business and Managementclepics.johnshopkins.edu/660.461.01-02-Izenberg.pdf ·...