MGT 5512 Case study analysis 1 General instructions This test asks for your response to a situation in a published case study, Venture Capitalism vs

Question

MGT 5512 Case study analysis 1

General instructions

This test asks for your response to a situation in a published case study, Venture Capitalism vs. Indigenous Human Resource Management. You will access the case study in your virtual course pack.

Answer the two questions below by explaining and applying relevant concepts from the course. While no credit can be expected merely for restating case facts, responses should be supported by course concepts and evidence from the case. The test is open book. You may not work with other people. Efforts to research case facts or previous case analyses are prohibited. Using materials outside the course is unnecessary, but if you choose to use them, citations and references are required. To view the evaluation criteria, see the rubric (tab below).

Responses will be evaluated (details in rubric) on the extent and quality of:

Presentation of relevant course knowledge (concepts, principles, and/or good practices)
Analysis of the case situation against course knowledge (e.g., by comparing/contrasting)
Proposals for action that are well supported by knowledge and aligned with the analysis

The total word limit for your response is 800 words, no exceptions, to be allocated across the questions as you wish. You will upload a pdf or Word file with your response on this assignment page. Good luck.

Questions

With the support of one or more theories or models, compare and contrast the organizational culture of Spice Island Cruises before George Barrington took control with the cultural preferences inherent in Barrington's leadership. Now that Bill Miller is in charge, use the Competing Values Framework to explain what culture type(s) would align to SIC's external environment and suggest three practical actions Miller can take to enable the target culture you recommend.
Based on the primary remaining challenges (i.e., in addition to organizational culture) facing Miller at the end of the case, select one or more leadership effectiveness and/or change management concepts from Module 4 that are relevant to Miller's situation and from them develop an action plan to address these challenges. (Your answer should prove compatible with your response to Q1 while not repeating that response.)

Important note

Remember to address items A, B, and C above for each question.

View Rubric

Case study analysis - Summer 2022

Case study analysis - Summer 2022
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
Question 1, Part A view longer description	16 pts Distinguished Extensive course content is explained with complete accuracy, and its relevance to the case situation is fully supported. 14 pts Proficient Considerable course content is explained mostly accurately; relevance to the case situation is shown; minor gaps or errors exist. 12 pts Developing Some course content is explained with uneven accuracy; relevance to the case situation is marginal; major gaps or errors exist. 10 pts Novice Little or no course content is explained, or accuracy or relevance is poor; concepts are unusable for analysis as presented.	/ 16 pts
Question 1, Part B view longer description	20 pts Distinguished Analysis is extensive, flawless, incisive; fully supported; entirely sensible and internally consistent; highly beneficial as a basis for action. 17.5 pts Proficient Analysis is substantial and often well supported; generally internally consistent; beneficial as a basis for action; minor errors or limitations only. 15 pts Developing Analysis is incomplete and only partially supported; often internally inconsistent; of some value for action, but major errors or limitations exist. 12.5 pts Novice Analysis is missing or is poorly supported; generally inconsistent; weak basis for action; not sensible due to severe errors and limitations.	/ 20 pts
Question 1, Part C view longer description	16 pts Distinguished Proposed action is clearly specified, achievable in a reasonable time, and fully supported given the case analysis, without exception. 14 pts Proficient Proposed action is largely specified, mostly achievable in a reasonable time, and largely justified by the case analysis; exceptions are minor. 12 pts Developing Proposed action is vaguely specified, can be only partly achieved in a reasonable time, and/or is weakly supported by the case analysis. 10 pts Novice Proposed action is missing, generally unrealistic, and/or at odds with the case analysis; relevance to the situation in the case is limited.	/ 16 pts
Question 2, Part A view longer description	16 pts Distinguished Extensive course content is explained with complete accuracy, and its relevance to the case situation is fully supported. 14 pts Proficient Considerable course content is explained mostly accurately; relevance to the case situation is shown; minor gaps or errors exist. 12 pts Developing Some course content is explained with uneven accuracy; relevance to the case situation is marginal; major gaps or errors exist. 10 pts Novice Little or no course content is explained, or accuracy or relevance is poor; concepts are unusable for analysis as presented.	/ 16 pts
Question 2, Part B view longer description	16 pts Distinguished Analysis is extensive, flawless, incisive; fully supported; entirely sensible and internally consistent; highly beneficial as a basis for action. 14 pts Proficient Analysis is substantial and often well supported; generally internally consistent; beneficial as a basis for action; minor errors or limitations only. 12 pts Developing Analysis is incomplete and only partially supported; often internally inconsistent; of some value for action, but major errors or limitations exist. 10 pts Novice Analysis is missing or is poorly supported; generally inconsistent; weak basis for action; not sensible due to severe errors and limitations.	/ 16 pts
Question 2, Part C view longer description	16 pts Distinguished Proposed action is clearly specified, achievable in a reasonable time, and fully supported given the case analysis, without exception. 14 pts Proficient Proposed action is largely specified, mostly achievable in a reasonable time, and largely justified by the case analysis; exceptions are minor. 12 pts Developing Proposed action is vaguely specified, can be only partly achieved in a reasonable time, and/or is weakly supported by the case analysis. 10 pts Novice Proposed action is missing, generally unrealistic, and/or at odds with the case analysis; relevance to the situation in the case is limited.	/ 16 pts
Total Points: 0