Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 local 2121 / 2221
E-mail Address: coe.alangilan@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering - Department of Electronics Engineering
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE IN ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING
Case Study #1
Second Semester, AY 2024 – 2025
Course Code
ENGG 406
Course Title
Engineering Management
Section
ECE 4203
Date
March 10, 2025
Time
2:00-4:00 PM
SR-Code
21-00838
Name of Student
Levardo, Faith Angela N.
Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives, Building the Nation
​
Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 local 2121 / 2221
E-mail Address: coe.alangilan@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering - Department of Electronics Engineering
Case Study: Decision-Making by an Engineering Manager at TechNova Inc.
Background:
TechNova Inc. is a mid-sized technology company specializing in developing innovative software solutions for
the healthcare industry. The company recently faced a critical decision regarding a new product launch, which is pivotal
for its growth strategy. The Engineering Manager, Sarah Thompson, was tasked with leading this decision-making
process.
TechNova Inc. was preparing to launch a new product called HealthTrack, a comprehensive health management
platform aimed at integrating patient data from various sources and providing actionable insights. The project had been in
development for over a year, and the team was approaching the final stages of testing.
However, a few months before the anticipated launch date, the team encountered significant issues:
1.​ The platform was experiencing performance bottlenecks under high load conditions, which could potentially
impact user experience.
2.​ A recent security audit revealed several vulnerabilities that needed to be addressed before launch.
3.​ During user testing, several key stakeholders requested additional features that were not part of the original scope.
Sarah Thompson needed to make a crucial decision about whether to:
1.​ Release HealthTrack with the current performance and security issues and address them in subsequent updates.
2.​ Postpone the launch to resolve the performance and security issues, as well as to potentially integrate the
requested features.
3.​ Launch HealthTrack with a reduced set of features, focusing on core functionalities, and plan to add additional
features in future updates.
Factors to Consider:
1.​ Delaying the launch could result in lost revenue and missed market opportunities, but releasing a product with
unresolved issues could damage the company’s reputation and lead to customer dissatisfaction.
2.​ Addressing the performance and security issues would require additional resources and time. The engineering
team’s workload and project timeline needed to be carefully managed.
3.​ Competitors were also preparing to release similar products, and timing was crucial to gaining a competitive edge.
4.​ A delay could affect the company's financial projections and investor confidence, while releasing a flawed
product could result in costly post-launch fixes and customer support challenges.
Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives, Building the Nation
Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 local 2121 / 2221
E-mail Address: coe.alangilan@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering - Department of Electronics Engineering
Questions:
1.​ Given the following choices to make a crucial decision, analyze the pros and cons of each choices. Explain
2.​ If you were Sarah Thompson, how would you make your decision regarding the issue? Explain the process of how
you come up with the decision.
TechNova Inc. encountered three significant obstacles before the launch of HealthTrack. First, the system suffered
from performance inefficiencies, leading to slow response times under high user loads, which could result in user
dissatisfaction and a poor user experience. Second, a security assessment identified vulnerabilities that posed a risk to
sensitive patient data. Failing to address these issues could lead to severe consequences, including legal liabilities and
reputational harm. Third, stakeholders requested additional features beyond the original project scope. While these
enhancements could provide a competitive edge, they also demanded extra time and resources. Moreover, postponing the
launch could lead to financial setbacks and give competitors an opportunity to dominate the market. Moreover, releasing
an unfinished product could harm TechNova’s credibility. As the Engineering Manager, I had to critically evaluate these
challenges to determine the most strategic course of action for the company.
As the decision-maker, I considered three possible solutions. The first was to launch HealthTrack as planned,
despite the performance and security concerns. This option would allow TechNova to enter the market quickly and start
generating revenue, but it risked customer dissatisfaction and security breaches. The second option was to delay the
launch to fix the issues and add stakeholder-requested features. While this would result in a stronger product, it could lead
to financial strain, a loss of market opportunity, and frustration among investors. The third and most balanced option was
to launch with core features while addressing security and performance fixes before release, and gradually adding features
through updates. This strategy ensured a timely market entry while maintaining quality and security. My decision was
based on key factors such as security, usability, financial impact, competition, and customer expectations. Since security
was the most critical issue, I prioritized ensuring a stable and safe release while deferring non-essential features for future
updates.
Considering that I am Sarah Thompson, I followed the eight-step decision-making process to ensure a structured
and well-informed choice:
1.​ Recognize the Problem: The main challenges were performance bottlenecks, security vulnerabilities, and
stakeholder feature requests, all of which threatened the success of the HealthTrack launch.
2.​ Define the Key Problem: The system needed to handle high traffic efficiently, protect patient data, and meet
stakeholder expectations while ensuring timely market entry.
3.​ Gather Essential Information: I would analyze engineering reports, security audits, competitor offerings, financial
risks, and customer expectations to understand the full impact of each issue.
4.​ Develop a Decision Framework: I would prioritize security and performance as non-negotiable aspects while
balancing financial and competitive factors to determine the best course of action.
5.​ Generate Possible Solutions: The three options were: (1) launching as scheduled with existing issues, (2) delaying
Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives, Building the Nation
Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 local 2121 / 2221
E-mail Address: coe.alangilan@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering - Department of Electronics Engineering
the launch for improvements, or (3) releasing a core version with critical fixes and gradual feature additions.
6.​ Assess and Compare Alternatives: I would weigh the risks and benefits of each option, focusing on security,
financial impact, user experience, and competitive positioning.
7.​ Implement the Best Choice: I would choose to launch HealthTrack with core features while ensuring stability and
security, followed by structured post-launch updates.
8.​ Evaluate and Refine the Decision: After launch, I would track system performance, gather user feedback, and
refine future updates based on customer needs and business goals.
​
With the phased launch approach in place, I would develop a clear action plan. The first priority would be to
resolve the most urgent security and performance issues before the official release. The engineering team would focus on
optimizing system performance under high traffic conditions and strengthening security protocols to protect patient data.
A quality assurance (QA) process would be implemented to ensure thorough testing before deployment. To address
missing features, I would collaborate with the product management team to create a post-launch roadmap, ensuring that
future updates would incorporate stakeholder requests in a structured manner. To keep stakeholders informed, a
communication plan would be developed to explain the phased rollout strategy and set clear expectations. The customer
support team would be trained to assist users with any post-launch concerns. Additionally, I would define Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs) to measure success, including system stability, user satisfaction, and adoption rates.
Regular performance reviews would be scheduled to ensure continuous improvements aligned with customer feedback
and market trends. By following a structured decision-making approach, I would ensure that TechNova made a strategic
and well-balanced choice in launching HealthTrack with core features while planning future updates (option 3). This
decision would allow the company to remain competitive, generate early revenue, and reduce security risks while
continuing to enhance the product. This case study highlights the importance of risk assessment, structured planning, and
phased implementation in managing complex product launches. Through this process, I would ensure that TechNova
maintained its reputation for quality while meeting business objectives and customer expectations.
References:
Watson, K. (2011). D. Kahneman. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 499 pages..
The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 26(2), 111–113. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.26.010
Hammond, J., Keeney, R., & Raiffa, H. (2015). Smart Choices. Retrieved March 6, 2025, from Google Books website:
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=OlpkCQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Hammond
Anderson,
R.
(2025).
Security
Engineering.
Retrieved March 6, 2025, from Google Books website:
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eo4Otm_TcW8C&oi=fnd&pg=PT14&dq=Anderson
Christensen,
C.
(2015).
The
Innovator’s
Dilemma.
Retrieved
from
Google
Books
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=lURBCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR4&dq=Christense
Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives, Building the Nation
website:
Republic of the Philippines
BATANGAS STATE UNIVERSITY
The National Engineering University
Alangilan Campus
Golden Country Homes, Alangilan Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines 4200
Tel Nos.: (+63 43) 425-0139 local 2121 / 2221
E-mail Address: coe.alangilan@g.batstate-u.edu.ph | Website Address: http://www.batstate-u.edu.ph
College of Engineering - Department of Electronics Engineering
Prepared by:
Engr. Norxine L. Montalbo
Associate Professor
Engr. Adrian Ferdinand M. Melo
Associate Professor
Rubrics
Criteria
Level 4
Level 3
Level 2
Level 1
Identifies and
Identification of the understands all of
main
the main issues
issues/problems
of the case (15
points)
Identifies and
understands most
of the main
issues of the case
(10-14 points)
Identifies and
understands few
the main issues
of the case.
(0-4 points)
Insightful and
thorough analysis
of all the issues
(15 points)
Thorough
analysis of most
in the case
(10-14 points)
Identifies and
understands
some of the main
issues of the
case. (5-9 points)
Superficial
analysis of some
of the issues of
the case (5-9
points)
Analysis of the
issues
Well
Documented,
reasoned and
Comments on
pedagogically
Effective
appropriate
Solutions/Strategies
comments on
solutions (20
points)
Appropriate, well
thought out
comments about
the solutions.
(15-19 points)
Superficial or
inappropriate
solutions to some
of the issues of
the case study
(8-14 points)
Incomplete
analysis of some
of the issues.
(0-4 points)
Little or no
actions suggested
to all the issues
of the case study
(0-7 points)
Leading Innovations, Transforming Lives, Building the Nation