Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Summary: This is a five-week crash course in business, corporate, and global strategy – developing
an understanding of strategy while exposing you to the challenge and rewards of negotiating your
position as an opportunistic entrepreneur in a complex organization! Each block will provide you
with information about (1) yourself, (2) fundamental perspectives in strategic management and
global strategy, and (3) the interdependence of strategy formulation and implementation. The topics
and concepts covered in each block are outlined below, and detail on your assignments are provided
in the following pages. An integral part of the class will be the application of what you have learned
throughout the program in an independent final project on your firm.
Week One (Jan 12 & 13)
Block
1
S1-Friday:
Intro and Amgen Case
S2-Saturday: Jeffrey Immelt Case
Concepts
An overview of strategic
planning, strategy
formulation and implementation
Week Two (Jan 26 & 27)
Block
2
S3-Friday:
S4-Saturday
IBP Case
Copeland-Bain Case
Delving into Business
Strategy
Week Three (Feb 9 & 10)
Block
3
S5-Friday:
Millennium (A) Case
S6-Saturday: Wendy Simpson Case
Developing and executing
strategy through alliances
Week Four (Feb 23 & 24)
Block
4
S7-Friday:
Masco & Household Furnishings Cases
S8-Saturday: Cisco & Grand Junction Cases
Developing and executing
strategy through M&A
Week Five (Mar 9 & 10)
Block
5
S9-Friday:
Cross-cultural simulation
S10-Saturday: Dennis Hightower Case
Grading:
Experiencing cultural
differences and bringing all the
pieces of strategy together
55% Group Case Projects, 30% Individual written project, 15% Contribution.
Text: Carpenter & Sanders. 2007. Strategic Management: A Dynamic Perspective + Cases.
1
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Data Sheet
Date
Cases
In Packet?
Jan 12
Amgen: Planning the Unplannable (HBS 9-492-052)
Yes
Jan 13
GE’s Growth Strategy: The Immelt Initiative (HBS 9-306-087)
Yes
Jan 26
IBP and the U.S. Meat Industry (HBS 9-391-006)
Yes
Jan 27
Copeland Corporation/Bain & Company: The Scroll Investment
Decision (Darden UWA-BP-0353)
Yes
Feb 9
Millennium (A) (HBS 9-600-038)
Yes
Feb 10
Wendy Simpson in China
No
Feb 23
Masco Corp. (A) & the Household Furniture Industry in 1986
(HBS 9-389-186 & 9-389-189)
Yes
Feb 24
Cisco Systems, Inc.: Acquisition Integration for Manufacturing &
Grand Junction (HBS 9-600-015 & HBS SB186)
Yes
Mar 9
Cross Cultural Simulation
No
Mar 10
Dennis Hightower Taking Charge and Walt Disney’s
Transnational Manager (HBS 9-395-055 & 9-395-056)
Yes
AND THAT’S MY
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY,
ANY COMMENTS?
STRATEGY
IT APPEARS TO BE
A BUNCH OF OBVIOUS DIDN’T TURN
OUT TO BE
GENERALITIES AND
WISHFUL THINKING THE GLAMOUR
COURSE I
WITH NO APPARENT
EXPECTED
BUSINESS VALUE
I CIRCLED
ALL THE
WORDS YOU
WON’T FIND
IN ANY
TEXTBOOK
2
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Course Detail
The pervasive theme of this course will be dynamic strategies for global firms. As a global
strategist you will be responsible for understanding the fundamental aspects of business and
corporate strategy, further complicated by the challenges of global and globalizing operations,
markets, and competitors. We will also use this context to introduce you to the role of the
expatriate manager, an entrepreneurial opportunist tasked with negotiating agreements within and
across levels of the firm, across geographies, and across firms. For that reason, contexts that shed
light on within- and across-firm negotiations will be a regular and integral part of the course, starting
with the strategy implementation framework we study for session #2.
Global strategy is more than analysis. To be sure, strategic analysis is a major part of this
course, and we will explore and apply several analytical techniques for effectively positioning a firm
or a business unit within a competitive environment. But strategic analyses are complicated by the
trade-offs inherent in any situation. These trade-offs reflect the fact that organizations consist of
many players with multiple, competing objectives. When dealing with tradeoffs, the strategist must
confront the judgmental issues involved in establishing organizational purpose and balancing
economic and non-economic objectives. Global contexts always appear to be rife with difficult-toquantify decisions. To the extent possible in each class, we will attempt to balance these trade-offs
and to test our ideas about the appropriate relationship among them.
Finally, global strategic management requires moving beyond analysis and trade-offs into
the realm of strategic action. Once the analytical problem of selecting a strategy has been dealt with,
we should know what to do, or at the very least know in which direction we will take strategic action
and where and where not we will invest scarce resources. Knowing how to execute the selected
strategy is essential to success. To the extent possible in each case, we will concern ourselves with
the various combinations of systems (for example, information, control, reward, etc.), organization
structures, and people necessary to execute a given strategy. We will test our ideas about the
relationships between global strategy and these other elements as we proceed through the course.
Performance Measures and Feedback
Performance evaluation and feedback will be based on your performance in three different
settings—team projects, a final individual project, and class contribution (which requires class
attendance). In general, performance which meets my expectations earns an “A/B;” performance
which surprises me (positively) and exceeds my expectations earns an “A.” Application of the
assigned material to the case questions in a thorough, competent, and professional manner meets my
expectations.
Group Cases (55%)
A portion of your grade is based on group presentations (weighted evenly on the substance
of your recommendations and style points) and cases assignments. Length and other details on these
assignments are provided in the particular session descriptions.
3
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Final Individual Project (30%)
This project involves conducting a strategic audit/competitive analysis of a firm chosen by you,
preferably your firm. If you prefer an external target then go for it, but I expect the same high level
of quality for each. Regardless, you should be sure to have a bibliography to identify your sources of
data. In conducting your analysis, you may want to consider including the following:
1.
Analysis of Industry Structure
- Attractiveness of industry (Porter 5 Forces model) and related businesses along the value
chain (Profit Pools Analysis)
- Key success factors in the industry
- Opportunities or threats
- Relevant industry trends (customer, costs (technology), competitors, and
government/trade) with implications for firm performance and strategy
2.
Assessment of firm strategy (sources of competitive advantage, if any).
- What would a map (using the strategy diamond) of your firm look like?
- What is the firm’s generic strategy, if any? (e.g., cost, mass customization/value,
differentiation)?
o Cost strategy (cost structure analysis, value chain analysis, experience curve)
o Differentiation strategy (customer segmentation, consumption chain)
- What resources and/or capabilities does the firm have (or require) to successfully
implement the strategy?
- Assess the firm’s resources/capabilities relative to key competitors; do these make sense
given the key success factors in the industry?
- Identify growth options to access or acquire needed resources to grow organically or
through cooperative strategy (horizontal or vertical alliances) or acquisition.
3.
Analysis of firm scope
-Vertical Scope (degree of vertical integration appropriate?)
-Horizontal Scope (degree of product/business diversification appropriate?)
-Growth options (acquisitions, alliances, internal)
-Geographic Scope
4.
Recommendations for future firm strategy/actions
- Do you have recommendations for changes in firm strategy? Are there opportunities to
employ a disruptive/revolutionary strategy?
- Changes in strategy often involve a change in “what” the company is offering, “who” the
company is offering its mix of products and services to, “how” the company is delivering
value to the customer (methods and processes) or “where” the company chooses to
compete. Changes typically relate to all five facets of the strategy diamond.
- In your recommendations, have you taken into account possible competitor responses
(strategic interaction).
- Have you demonstrated the feasibility of your recommendations, in terms of laying out its
implementation pathway?
4
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Strategic Audit Evaluation Criteria
As you prepare to conduct your strategic audit, I thought it would be helpful if I briefly explain what
I consider when grading the strategic audit. I will then identify “common problems”
1. (40 percent) Did you make effective use of class concepts/ frameworks/models in your
analysis of the company and its strategy and competitive position (Did you demonstrate that
you understand when you should use particular concepts/frameworks)? Do you also
demonstrate that you really understand the concept and use it to provide appropriate
insights into the company’s competitive position?). How effective is your analysis of:
a. Industry attractiveness (analysis of attractiveness, profit pools, trends, etc.)
b. Firm strategy (resources/capabilities) and competitive position (analysis of
marketshare position, cost position, resources/capabilities to meet key customer
needs relative to competitors, etc.). How effective (and objective) is the analysis of
company strengths and weaknesses in terms of VRINE?
c. Firm scope (analysis of whether the firm has the appropriate vertical, horizontal, and
global scope).
2. (25 percent) Do you provide effective quantitative (data driven) analysis to support
assertions made throughout the paper? (Are there numerous unsupported assertions or are
the assertions/conclusions always supported by data, theory or effective supporting
arguments?) Are you creative in the way data are analyzed and displayed? Does the data
analysis provide new insights?
3. (20 percent) Do you provide specific and useful (and hopefully novel, creative and doable)
strategic recommendations for the company? (Or are the recommendations largely generic
in nature? e.g., “they should explore an acquisition.”)
4. (15 percent) Is the paper well organized (does the logic flow cleanly from one section to the
next)? Is the paper well-written (clear and interesting prose, no typos, grammatical errors
etc.). Does it make effective use of graphics in the overall presentation of the analysis? Is
the overall presentation professional? Does the paper sell your ideas?
In the past I have found some common mistakes that students tend to make when writing their
strategic audit. While I will not “preview” a paper, here are some suggestions that I have given
students to help them strengthen their strategic audit papers:
1. Provide more effective quantitative, data-driven analysis to support assertions/ conclusions made
throughout the paper. Comments would be made such as: “this is an attractive market,’ “the
company is in a strong position,” “due to the company’s cost advantage,” “the cost of entry is
prohibitive,” “the company has a first mover advantage” without providing data, quantitative
analysis, or other analysis to support the assertions. What criteria were used to determine that the
market was “attractive?” (size, growth, profitability of existing companies, lack of competitors?). If
the cost is “prohibitive” then you need an analysis of the capital requirements to enter the market
and then explain why that would be “prohibitive” for any viable new entrant. If you assert a cost
advantage, then provide an analysis of the source of the cost advantage with your educated estimates
5
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
as to how large the cost advantage might be, and how much of an overall profit advantage this might
create (as a percent of total cost or sales). Most papers would have benefited from creating a chart
that looked at the relative profitability of competitors in the industry and the relative market
share/experience. At least by showing the profitability of each key competitor (and by providing a
brief explanation of the strategies of successful, and unsuccessful competitors) you might have been
able to shed more insight into the key success factors in the industry. Finally, if you assert a first
mover advantage, you must explain the specific source of the first mover advantage (just being first
doesn’t necessarily provide an advantage; many second movers have defeated the market pioneers
(e.g., Sony Playstation beat Atari, Microsoft OS beat Apple OS, Matsushita’s VHS VCR beat Sony’s
Beta). You need to be precise in your explanation of why the 2nd mover cannot replicate the
advantages of the first mover (e.g., Wal-Mart—Natural Geographic monopoly; eBay—Network
effects, etc.).
2. Another common error was conducting a “5 forces + 1 analysis” at the firm level instead of the
industry level. Remember, its called industry analysis because you are analyzing an industry, not the
world through Wal-Mart or another industry player’s eyes. Conversely, students may analyze the
industry without discussing the implications of the analysis for the firm’s strategy. If there is high
buyer power (and a consolidating customer base) how can the company mitigate that high power?
Should they attempt to consolidate their part of the value chain (through acquisitions or alliances),
thereby increasing the market power of the remaining companies? Are there specific things the
company should do to create switching costs? If currently rivalry is high, are there any actions the
firm can take to reduce the amount of rivalry among competitors? What key complementors exist?
The point is that it is critical to think through—and discuss—the implications of any analysis you do
for the firm’s strategy.
3. Provide more creative and novel strategic recommendations. This is, arguably, the most difficult,
and important part of the audit. It also often separates the excellent papers from those that are just
good, since a strategy is useless if it does not foster profitable action. Again, recommendations that
are generic (“they should explore acquisition opportunities”) are not helpful. Effective
recommendations need precision and specificity to provide real substance (e.g., Krispy Kreme
should establish an alliance with Starbucks, selling Starbucks coffee at Krispy Kreme locations and
Starbucks selling fresh Krispy Kreme’s at Starbucks locations; then in big city markets they can
establish a delivery service for company breakfast meetings, etc.). Moreover, if you recommend an
acquisition, be specific about the target and the anticipated synergies (for example, just stating that
an acquisition will provide cost savings and cost advantage isn’t nearly as helpful as analyzing the
specific areas where cost will be reduced and providing an estimate of how the cost structure of the
company will change after the acquisition (e.g., we anticipate G&A to drop by roughly 20 percent,
sales and marketing by 10 percent, etc. for an overall reduction in costs of 3 percent). Of course,
this would also require the supporting analysis.
4. Generally the analysis of the strengths of the company was pretty good, while some individuals
tended to gloss over or minimize the weaknesses of the firm. When conducting this type of
strategic analysis, it is important to focus on the company’s areas of weakness as much as its
strengths. Audits tended to be very complementary about a company’s past strategic moves when it
appeared that those moves led to the advantageous position being described. However, it’s also
important to address the question of whether that advantageous position could be eroded through
6
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
imitation or other competitive moves. What if some generic entrant or competitor simply copied
everything that seems successful about the focal company? Would that competitor be effective in
eroding the focal company’s performance? In the face of such imitative attempts why would or
wouldn’t the company be vulnerable? Pointing out and critically analyzing areas of weakness can be
particularly helpful because most of us (as individuals or executives) tend to be a bit more blind to
our weaknesses, or we don’t think we have a weakness when we really do.
I hope these comments are helpful as you prepare your strategic audits. Best of luck!
Contribution (15%)
I expect each of you to take responsibility for the learning effectiveness of our sessions –
this means that the class as a whole will have learned more because of your comments and
questions. Moreover, the course is somewhat unique in that most of the actual learning takes place
when we are in class together. Because this type of participation and contribution is predicated on
your attendance, attendance is a critical part of your final grade. We have only ten class sessions
together and there are no “make up” assignments for missed classes. Perfect attendance absent any
substantive participation (see below) earns you a “C,” but possibly a lower grade if your attendance
actually detracts from what is learned by the group as a whole. If you miss one session (10% of our
classes) then you risk earning an “A/B” at best for participation. If you miss two sessions (means
you will have missed 20% of our classes) then your final letter grade in the class can be no better
than an “A/B.” I will of course revisit this criterion under exceptional circumstances. Additional
missed sessions have a cumulative negative impact on your total final grade.
Since strategy, unlike some of the functional classes you have taken, is a group-participant
and highly interactive sport, it is helpful for you to think about your level of contribution in the class
or in your groups using the following framework. This is how I calibrate your class contributions if
asked, and the framework also captures my view about your individual and group written work:
Outstanding contributor – A. In-class contributions reflect exceptional preparation. Ideas
offered are always substantive, and provide one or more major insights as well as direction
for the class. Arguments are well supported, persuasively presented, and reveal that this
person is an excellent listener. Comments invariably help others to move their thinking to a
higher plane. If this person were not a member of the class, the quality of our discussions
would be greatly diminished.
Good contributor – A/B. In-class contributions reflect thorough preparation. At a minimum, I
expect and hope that all class members to fall into this category. Ideas offered are usually
substantive, and provide good insights and sometimes direction for the class. Arguments are
generally well supported and often persuasive, and reveal that this person is a good listener.
Comments usually help others to improve their thinking. If this person were not a member
of the class, the quality of our discussions would be diminished considerably.
Adequate contributor – B. Contributions reflect satisfactory preparation. Ideas offered
sometimes provide useful insights, but seldom offer a major new direction for discussion.
Supporting arguments are moderately persuasive. Comments occasionally enhance the
7
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
learning of others, and indicate that this person is a passable listener. If this person were not
a member of the class, the quality of our discussions would be diminished somewhat.
Unsatisfactory contributor - C. Contributions in class reflect inadequate preparation. Ideas
offered are seldom important, often irrelevant, and do not provide insights or a constructive
direction for the class. Integrative comments and higher-order thinking are absent. This
person does very little to further the thinking and potential contributions of others.
Non-participant – C/D. The person has said little or nothing in this class to date and so has
not contributed anything, bordering on detracting from the overall quality of the session.
Such persons are free-riders because they have benefited from the thinking and courage of
their peers but have offered little in return. If this person were not a member of the class,
the quality of the discussion would be unchanged or possibly improved.
Other Administrative Details
Faculty have different expectations as to class behavior and course norms – here are mine.
1. I plan to be prepared for every class and I hope you will do the same. I frequently call on
individuals whose hands are not raised. Please let me know before the start of the class if some
emergency has made it impossible for you to be prepared adequately for that class. This avoids
embarrassment for us both.
2. Given the importance of class participation, I will seek to learn your names as quickly as
possible. To facilitate this I ask that you to use a name card at all times.
3. Please turn off cell phones and live web-access during our sessions together. These external
distractions disrupt class and lower the quality of our discussions and interactions. In-class Webbrowsing affects your ability to participate, and so it will likely affect your final grade.
4. I will be happy to discuss the course, your progress, or any other issues of interest to you on an
individual basis. Please see me in class or call to set up an appointment. My office number is
262-9449. You can call me at home before 9 p.m., 831-8327. E-mail is the surest way to track
me down – mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu, and I will typically respond within 48 hours.
5. Across and within group work is acceptable and encouraged for purposes of general case
preparation. However, the final product of individual and group written assignments must be
solely that individual or group’s own work. The consequences of violating this honor code
are severe. The university deals very harshly with academic dishonesty by students, even
a first-time offense.
6. Unless stated otherwise, written work is due no later than the beginning of the class session
during which the case will be discussed (or as otherwise assigned). Since I’m looking for your
best efforts, please do not ask me to preview your assignment prior to handing it in.
8
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Overarching Frameworks
Two specific frameworks will be employed in this course to describe strategy formulation and
implementation in the face of change, and amplify the interdependence of formulation and
implementation. Each of these frameworks is covered in your readings, and you will be expected to
apply them regularly in your class and written work.. For instance, your group assignment for the
second session requires that you apply the models shown in Figures 1 and 2 below.
9
Course: Global Strategic Management, Class XIII
Web:
http://instruction.bus.wisc.edu/mcarpenter/
Instructor: Mason A. Carpenter
mcarpenter@bus.wisc.edu
(608) 262-9449
Figure 1: The Strategy Diamond
Arenas -- where will we be active?
(and with how much emphasis?)
Arenas






Which product categories?
Which market segments?
Which channels
Which geographic areas?
Which core technologies?
Which value-creation strategies?
Staging -- what will be our speed
and sequence of moves?




Speed of expansion?
Sequence of initiatives?
Staging
Pacing of initiatives?
Timing of implementation lever
changes and strategic leadership
intervention
Economic
Logic
Vehicles
Vehicles -- how will we get
there?





Internal development?
Joint ventures?
Licensing/franchising?
Alliances?
Acquisitions?
Differentiators
Economic Logic -- how will returns
be obtained?




Lowest costs through scale
advantages?
Lowest costs through scope and
replication advantages
Premium prices due to unmatchable
service?
Premium prices due to proprietary
product features?
Differentiators – how will we win?






Image?
Customization?
Price?
Styling?
Product reliability?
Speed to market?
10
-11-
Figure 2: Strategy Implementation
Implementation Levers:
INTENDED

Organizational structure
STRATEGY

Systems and processes

REALIZED &
EMERGENT
STRATEGIES
People and rewards
Strategic Leadership:

Lever & resource allocation decisions

Selling the strategy to stakeholders
11
-12Spring 2006 -- Detailed Course Calendar & Assignments
Week 1*
Session 1:
January 12
Case:
Amgen, Inc.: Planning the Unplannable (HBS 9-492-052)
Readings:
Syllabus
Text chapters 1-4, and skim 11.
We will use this first session’s readings and case to frame our future sessions and the questions
pertinent to global strategic management. By the early 1990s, Amgen--a pharmaceutical company
started little over a decade before as Applied Molecular Genetics--was within range of becoming a
billion-dollar company. With two extremely successful biotechnology drugs on the market, Amgen
stood as the largest and most powerful independent company of its type in the world. Top
executives in the company viewed long-range planning as an important ingredient in the firm's
success; many others--including some of the firm's scientists--were less sure. With Amgen's sales
expected to continue to grow rapidly, the firm's long-range planning process would be put to the
test. Our first case shows the different, sometimes paradoxical perspectives held within a single,
dynamically changing company toward the issue of long-range planning. You are challenged to
synthesize these views into a coherent picture of a firm's growth amid great uncertainty.
Strategic planning is a pretty common-sense process. The first step is typically analysis (internal and
external), and the second step is strategy development, which starts with a vision. Then you execute
in step 3, which provides feedback into Step 1 again.
Class Preparation:
1. Use the five diamond and implementation models (Exhibits 1.4 and 1.6 in your text) to
summarize Amgen’s situation.
2. What are the firm’s key success factors (term is defined in Chapter 4). What are some of the
contingencies that Amgen has to plan for?
3. What roles does the strategic planning process play at Amgen? How useful is it?
4. Summarize what changes, if any, you would recommend to make the strategic planning process
at Amgen more effective.
Team #1 Assignment: Please prepare a PowerPoint slide summarizing your key recommendations
(in response to question #4).
12
-13Session 2:
January 13
Case:
Jeff Immelt at GE
Readings:
Text chapters 1-4, and skim 11 after reading the GE case to help craft your answer
to the case questions.
This case follows the actions of GE CEO, Jeff Immelt, as he implements a growth strategy for the
$150 billion company in a tough business environment. In four years, he reinvigorates GE's
technology, expands its services, develops a commercial focus, pushes developing countries, and
backs "unstoppable trends" to realign GE's business portfolio around growth platforms. At the
same time, he reorganizes the company, promotes "growth leaders" into top roles, and reorients the
culture around innovation and risk taking. Finally, in 2006, he sees signs of growth, but wonders
whether it is sustainable.
After reading the case, ask yourself whether Immelt has put all the pieces into place to support his
vision and new strategy – what pieces are missing?
Preparation Questions:
1. How difficult was the task facing Immelt assuming the CEO role in 2001? What imperatives are
there for change? What incentives are in place to maintain the past?
2. How different is his approach to taking charge from Jack Welch’s first few years after becoming
CEO in 1981? How similar is the task each man faced?
3. What do you think of the broad objectives Immelt has set for GE? Can a giant global conglomerate
hope to outperform the overall market growth? Can size and diversity be made an asset rather than a
liability?
4. What is your evaluation of the growth strategy Immelt has articulated? Is he betting on the right
things to drive growth?
5. After 4 ½ years, is Immelt succeeding at his objectives? How well is he implementing his strategy?
What are his greatest achievements? What is most worrying you?
6. What advice would you offer to Immelt as he faces the next stage of leadership of GE? What should
his calendar look like the next 90 days?
All Teams Assignment: (Hand in at start of class. No more than three pages, name on first page,
single spaced type, Times New Roman 12-point font). Answer question 6 in the form of a memo
coming from Jeff’s trusted advisor. Be sure to provide a broad vision, as well as the 90-day action
plan.
Team #2 Assignment: Prepare up to five PowerPoint slides walking the class through your
response to the all-teams assignment.
13
-14Week 2*
Session 3: January 26
Case:
IBP and the U.S. Meat Industry (HBS 9-391-006)
Readings:
Text Chapters 5 & 6 (and skim 7)
The IBP case contains more than enough material for a lengthy discussion about the
appropriate strategy and scope of the firm. It provides you with an opportunity to apply the value
chain, concepts from the resource-based theory of the firm, and Porter's five forces analysis, and
industry disruption. Through this case you will come to understand the basic concepts of industry
attractiveness and generic business-level strategy, and eventually to fully understand IBP's
competitive position. You will then move on to grapple with the definition and benefits of broad
scope in the U.S. Meat Industry. Finally, this case allows us to recommend a strategy that is built on
the acquisition of new resources or distinctive competencies. Your ultimate objective will be to
articulate how IBP can build those resources.
Preparation Questions:
1. What has been IBP’s strategy, and what strategic issues does IBP face in 1990?
2. What do the internal and external perspectives (Chapters 3 and 4) help you to say about IBP’s
situation? What do they not explain?
3. What alternatives should IBP be considering? Why are these the best alternatives?
4. What should IBP do? What weaknesses must it overcome to achieve this?
All Teams Assignment: (Hand it at start of class. No more than four pages, names on first page,
single spaced type, Times New Roman 12-point font). Based on your work with questions 1-4,
develop a business case for what IBP should do. Refer to the final project directions for the
essential points such a business case should develop or make.
Team #3 Assignment: Prepare up to five PowerPoint slides walking the class through your
response to the all-teams assignment.
14
-15Session 4:
January 27
Case: Copeland Corporation/Bain & Company
Readings:
Text Chapters 5 & 6 (and skim 7)
The Copeland Corporation/Bain & Company video case address the renewal and
sustainability of competitive advantage. We will emphasize that any such advantage is likely to be
sustained only if management recognizes its bases, and works consciously to defend them. We will
come to understand the critical features of sustainable advantages, discuss the contestability of such
advantages, the effect of historical resource allocation decisions on subsequent choices, and
solutions to management myopia. Importantly too, this case shows us the inner workings behind the
competitive dynamics we see at the market and industry level.
Unlike the other cases we will study, Copeland/Bain is not a traditional written case "story."
In a video we will view together in class, Bain & Co.'s 1989 consulting engagement for Copeland is
profiled. Copeland is a division of Emerson Electric that manufactures compressors for air
conditioning systems. In this video case, Copeland is considering making the largest capital
investment in its history in a new technology, the scroll compressor. Before going to the Emerson
Electric Board for final approval, they have hired Bain & Co., a management consulting firm, to
assess whether Bain believes that it is prudent to make such an investment. You are asked to play
the role of the consultants, and to design a process for answering what they view as the key strategic
questions raised. Prior to class, review the written material provided on Copeland/Bain and use it to
develop a preliminary response to the preparation questions.
Preparation Questions:
1. What are the specific strategic issues facing Copeland management as they prepare to make a
capacity decision for the scroll compressor? What does it tell you about Copeland's "strategic
intent?" (i.e., its long term objectives in terms of what it wants the rules of competition to look like).
2. What analytic techniques might you use to structure your thinking about the issues?
3. What questions remain to be answered?
4. What hypotheses can you develop concerning the answers to those questions?
5. What data do you need to test those hypotheses? How will you obtain it?
6. What should we be listening for during our interviews with the Copeland executives?
Team #4: Two slides. Walk us through a PowerPoint slide of your five, highest yield questions or
listening points for the Copeland executives. On your second slide, outline your team’s “listening”
strategy (i.e., roles, etc.).
15
-16-
Week 3*
Session 5:
February 9
Case:
Millennium Pharmaceuticals (A) (HBS 9-600-038)
Readings:
Chapters 8 & 9
Millennium Pharmaceuticals, a leading biotechnology firm, has pharmaceutical and
technology alliances with large firms, including Bayer AG, Monsanto, and Eli Lilly & Company.
Central to its strategy and success in forming alliances is a technology platform for experimentation
in drug discovery, considered to be one of the finest in the industry. At the same time, Millennium
is using the technology platform to fundamentally rethink how it can discover new drugs and
eventually become an integrated pharmaceutical company. This dual strategy – developing and
selling its technology platform through alliances and leveraging these alliances to build downstream
drug development capabilities – is being challenged in August 1999, when the European
agribusiness conglomerate Lundberg is proposing a technology alliance to Millennium’s senior
management.
Preparations Questions:
1. How has the biotechnology industry changed over the last few years?
2. How has Millennium competed since it was founded in 1993? How has it managed its rapid
growth?
3. Using the five-diamond framework, how would you characterize Millennium 's strategy? How
would you describe the way Millennium brings together technology, strategy, organization, and
culture?
4. What has been Millennium's alliance strategy? How has it differed from other biotechnology firms?
How and why is M able to do this?
5. As CEO Marc Levin, would you pursue the Lundberg alliance? Why or why not? Other than Team
5, come to class prepared to identify the terms under which you would find such an alliance
acceptable.
Team 5: Prepare a five-slide PowerPoint presentation that summarizes your case for the Lundberg
alliance.
16
-17Session 6:
February 10
Case:
Wendy Simpson in China (not in binder, this is a “live” case)
Readings:
Chapters 8 & 9, Alliances in China (from Website)
This multi-faceted, interactive two-part case covers a number of important issues associated with doing
business in China. It provides the opportunity to explore challenges on three different levels:



Country: What should China’s role be in an organization’s global value chain?
Organization/industry: How to grow a Chinese company--an almost 50:50 joint venture
(JV)--on the global stage to benefit both the Chinese and Western parents by blending the
best from the two sides?
Personal: As a middle-management expatriate employed by the Western parent, how to build
bridges between the Western and Chinese sides?
The story is told by the Western parent, a European-based hi-tech global leader operating for more than a
century. It had been operating in China since the early 1980s, primarily through a very successful joint venture
(JV) in which it held a minority interest, as required by Chinese law. To protect its intellectual property, the
company limited its exposure in China to one product through this JV. The Chinese partner was a stateowned enterprise (SOE) and had the strongest national sales and distribution presence for selling the product
in the China market. Although the product technology was well known in China, it was aging. In the early
days, the market was orderly. All profits had historically been retained in the business. The company
essentially neglected the JV. However, in the late 1990s, because the industry worldwide was suffering while
the China market was booming, the JV found itself at a crossroads: Both partners were wondering whether
this JV was the best vehicle to bring newer technologies to China and enhance long-term profitability.
In 1997 Wendy Simpson joined the company as Senior Vice President – Sales, Marketing and
Communications for the Asia Pacific region. With a small team, she presented several strategic scenarios to
the top management. The company approved the option of going into the JV stronger. After much
negotiation, the Chinese government agreed to form a new JV, with a Chinese identity, with the company.
When dealing with the governance and operational issues of the new Chinese company, Simpson faced
challenges arising from the cultural differences between the two sides, and the gap between the mindsets and
behaviors developed in the Chinese SOE environment and those developed in international businesses.
Therefore, during this period, Simpson’s role had expanded from being more traditional to a coaching and
bridging one. And because she was in the field and witnessed the rapid changes in China’s competitive
landscape and the emerging strength of manufacturing and innovation there, she also recommended to
corporate headquarters that China should take on the fabrication/assembly and R&D activities of the
company.
This case raises several issues regarding:




How to handle various governance and operational issues when growing a joint venture that is
almost equally owned by a Chinese SOE and an international company listed on the stock market?
What should China’s role be in an organization’s global value chain?
How do you influence a large, bureaucratic, mature organization when you are not at the very top
and far away from the corporate headquarters?
How do you build bridges between the Chinese and Western sides?
17
-18Week 4*
Session 7: February 23
Cases:
Masco (A) & Household Furnishings Industry
Readings:
Chapters 7 & 10
This session concludes our explicit focus on industry with a discussion of industry
restructuring and serves to bridge competitive strategy and corporate strategy by considering a
specific decision to enter a new industry -- one that, due to its very low average profit margins, most
analysts would describe as undesirable. To facilitate this discussion, we are going to look at the
question of whether Masco should enter the household furnishings industry, and if so should it do
so through acquisition. Masco provides a good example of a firm that has successfully followed a
constrained diversification strategy. Influencing Masco’s decision will be the changing conditions in
the furniture industry, along with an understanding of what resources would give Masco a distinct
competitive advantage. This is a very rich case because you are provided with detailed background
on the furniture industry itself, along with a detailed description of Masco, its historical
metalworking businesses, and its initial efforts at diversification.
Specifically, this case provides you an opportunity to (a) apply Porter's Five Forces Analysis
to the furniture industry; (b) identify leverage points that would lead to profitable industry
restructuring; (c) determine if Masco is the firm to take on that job; and (d) identify what its entry
strategy should be.
Preparation Questions:
1. How can we explain Masco’s success to date?
2. Is the furniture industry attractive for anyone to enter? In your teams, diagram a five-forces+1
analysis of this industry as part of your team assignment below.
3. Should Masco enter the furniture industry?
4. What myths and reality is Masco likely to face?
5. What is the best entry strategy?
6. How well does this entry strategy position Masco for the long term?
All Teams Assignment: Assume that Masco enters the furniture industry and outline an entry
strategy for Masco. Why does your strategy position it best for the long term? Be convincing and
specific in terms of segments and acquisition targets (or de novo approach); hand in your
group's three-page summary (including the industry analysis diagram) at the start of class.
Team 6: In five PowerPoint slides or less, use the strategy diamond to map out your Masco entry
strategy and how this strategy and sequence of actions positions Masco for long-term advantage.
Why would your investment bankers buy into this deal?
18
-19Session 8: February 24
***Turn in network survey (see end of syllabus)***
Cases:
CISCO Systems. Acquisition integration for manufacturing (A) (HBS 9-600-015)
Grand Junction (HBS SB186)
Reading:
Chapters 7 & 10
While Cisco Systems is not the high-flyer it once was, it acquisition integration approach is still
heralded as one of the most sophisticated and successful. We will use this pair of cases to study this
approach as well as look at the acquisition through the eyes of a potential target. Grand Junction
lets us explore the entrepreneur’s dream of often developing a company to a point where one either
takes it public or sells the firm to another company. This second case gives us the opportunity to
explore these questions in a high tech start-up.
Cisco Systems Inc
1.
What is Cisco acquiring when it buys a company in general? What would it be buying with
Summa Four in particular?
2.
Under what conditions does this appear to be an appropriate approach to acquisitions?
Under what conditions might it not be desirable? What aspects of Cisco’s the acquisition integration
strategy would appear to apply to all acquisitions?
All Teams Assignment: Use two pages to summarize a specific acquisition integration plan for
Summa Four that addresses Keller’s concerns and is consistent with Cisco’s acquisition approach.
Be specific. Hand this in at the start of class – two groups will be chosen at random to walk the
class through their acquisition integration strategy.
Grand Junction
1.
Given the representations that Charney and other senior managers had made to everal newly
hired key employees, should they meet with these people to explain their consideration of the Cisco
offer before making a decision? If Grand Junction decides to be acquired, how should Charney and
his management team inform their employees?
2.
What do you think of Charney’s final offer? Is it a fair valuation for Grand Junction?
Explain your reasoning.
3.
From the perspective of the senior management and Board of Cisco Systems, evaluate the
final offer. Should Cisco accept this offer? Why?
4.
Should Grand Junction go public or be acquired? Why? Evaluate the issue from the
perspective of each of the stakeholders in Grand Junction. Who are the relevant stakeholders?
19
-20Week 5*
Session 9:
March 9
Cross cultural simulation
Readings: Skim Negotiating with the Romans (A) & (B) (On our web site)
Session 10:
March 10
Cases:
Dennis Hightower (HBS9-395-055 & 9-395-056)
Readings:
Text – Chapter 12 (and re-skim Chapter 8 after case #1)
This case puts you in the shoes of Dennis Hightower, a Disney manager. As the case states, you are
given the mandate to "Go out and grow the business. Do something different from what has been
done in the past. Develop a strategy and bring it back to us in three months." Follow the directions
accompanying the case and be prepared to dissect Hightower's actions.
One quarter of all managers transition to a new role or job each year. An upwardly mobile manager
can expect to face a transition every 2 1/2 to 3 years. A typical transition in a large organization
affects 12.4 people, and it takes an average of 6.4 months for a new leader to move through his or
her "transition deficit" to become a positive contributor in the new role. Too few managers--and
organizations--approach these transitions with a strategic plan.
First, please read the "Taking Charge" case. Based on this case, prepare answers to the following
questions:
1.
2.
What challenges does Dennis Hightower face in his new position?
Sketch out a detailed plan of action for Dennis Hightower to pursue over the next 3 months.
Next, AFTER HAVING WRITTEN OUT YOUR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS 1 & 2
ABOVE, please review Chapter 8 on global strategy and the Transnational Manager case. After
studying the reading and case, be prepared to discuss the following questions in class:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Evaluate the pacing and sequencing of Hightower's actions from 1988 to 1994.
How would you evaluate Hightower's approach to bringing about change in his organization.
Compare his approach to other approaches you may be familiar with.
What should Hightower do about the apparel business?
Learning from Hightower's experiences, what do you think are some of the challenges of
building a transnational (global) organization?
All Team Assignment: Draft out a detailed three-month action plan (literally, a PDA calendar) for
Hightower and summarize it in two pages or less. Hand it in at the beginning of class. Be specific
about how this strategy is good for Hightower and good for Disney.
20
-21EMBA Global Strategy Class Participation Self-Assessment
NAME: ____________________________
Please take a few moments to reflect on both your own participation and that of others in
the class (turn this in to me or Connie at the end of our last class session).
1. Review the criteria for class participation in the syllabus. Assess your own participation,
indicating the # of classes missed and the value of your contribution by indicating the grade you
think you feel you deserve for class participation (taking into account both the quantity and the
quality of your contribution to our discussions).


Number of classes missed: ______________
Participation Grade you think you deserved: _______________ (A, A/B, B, C, etc.)
2. Please identify up to 6 of your classmates that you feel significantly contributed to the class
discussions as a result of their thorough analysis or by adding insights or moving the discussion in a
meaningful direction.
______________________________
_____________________________
______________________________
_____________________________
______________________________
_____________________________
3. Allocate 100 points based on the contribution of you and your group members on the
final project (strategic audit).
Points
yourself
_________
__________________________________
_________
__________________________________
_________
__________________________________
_________
__________________________________
_________
__________________________________
_________
__________________________________
_________
100 Points
21
-22APPENDIX: WHY WE USE THE CASE METHOD IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT
The case method is one of the most effective means of management education. It is widely
used in schools of business throughout the world, and this use is predicated upon the belief that
tackling real business problems is the best way to develop practitioners. Real problems are messy,
complex, and very interesting.
Unlike other pedagogical techniques, many of which make you the recipient of large
amounts of information but do not require its use, the case method requires you to be an active
participant in the closest thing to the real situation. It is a way of gaining a great deal of experience
without spending a lot of time. It is also a way to learn a great deal about how certain businesses
operate, and how managers manage. There are few programmable, textbook solutions to the kinds
of problems faced by real general managers. When a problem becomes programmable, the general
manager gives it to someone else to solve on a repeated basis using the guidelines he or she has set
down. Thus the case situations that you will face will require the use of analytical tools and the
application of your personal judgment.
Sources of Cases
All the cases in this course are about real companies. You will recognize many of the
names of the companies although some of them may be new to you. These cases were developed in
several different ways. Occasionally, a company will come to a business school professor and
request that a case be written on that company. In other situations, a professor will seek out a
company because he or she knows that the company is in an interesting or difficult situation. Often,
the company will agree to allow a case to be written.
Occasionally, cases will be written solely from public sources. This is perhaps the most
difficult type of case writing because of the lack of primary data sources.
In those situations where a company has agreed to have a case written, the company must
“release” the case. This means that they have final approval of the content of a given case. The
company and the case writer are thus protected from any possibility of releasing data that might be
competitively or personally sensitive. Public source cases, obviously, do not need a release. Given
the requirement for release, however, it is amazing the amount of information that companies will
allow to be placed in a case. Many companies do this because of their belief in the effectiveness of
the case method.
Preparing for Class
When you prepare for class, it is recommended that you plan on reading the case at least
three times. The first reading should be a quick run-through of the text in the case. It should give
you a feeling for what the case is about and the types of data that are contained in the case. For
example, you will want to differentiate between facts and opinions that may be expressed. In every
industry, there is a certain amount of “conventional wisdom” that may or may not reflect the truth.
On your second reading you should read in more depth. Many people like to underline or otherwise
mark up their cases to pick out important points that they know will be needed later. Your major
effort on a second reading should be to understand the business and the situation. You should ask
yourself questions like: (1) Why has this company survived? (2) How does this business work? (3)
What are the economics of this business?
On your second reading, you should carefully examine the exhibits in the case. It is
generally true that the case writer has put the exhibit there for a purpose. It contains some
information that will be useful to you in analyzing the situation. Ask yourself what the information
is when you study each exhibit. You will often find that you will need to apply some analytical
22
-23technique (for example, ratio analysis, growth rate analysis, etc.) to the exhibit in order to benefit
from the information in the raw data.
On your third reading, you should have a good idea of the fundamentals of the case. Now
you will be searching to understand the specific situation. You will want to get at the root causes of
problems and gather data from the case that will allow you to make specific action
recommendations. Before the third reading, you may want to review the assignment questions in
the course description. It is during and after the third reading that you should be able to prepare
your outlined answers to the assignment questions.
There is only one secret to good case teaching and that is good preparation on the part of
the participants. Since the course has been designed to “build” as it progresses, class attendance is
also very important.
Class Discussions
In each class, I will ask one or several people to lead off the discussion. If you have
prepared the case, and are capable of answering the assignment question, you should have no
difficulty with this lead-off assignment. An effective lead-off can do a great deal to enhance a class
discussion. It sets a tone for the class that allows that class to probe more deeply into the issues of
the case.
The instructor’s role in the class discussion is to help, through intensive questioning, to
develop your ideas. This use of the Socratic method has proved to be an effective way to develop
thinking capability in individuals. The instructor’s primary role is to manage the class process and to
insure that the class achieves an understanding of the case situation. There is no single correct
solution to any of these problems. There are, however, a lot of wrong solutions. Therefore, I will
try to come up with a solution that will enable us to deal effectively with the problems presented in
the case.
After the individual lead-off presentation, the discussion will be opened to the remainder of
the group. It is during this time that you will have an opportunity to present and develop your ideas
about the way the situation should be handled. It will be important for you to relate your ideas to
the case situation and to the ideas of others as they are presented in the class. The instructor’s role
is to help you do this.
The Use of Extra- or Post-Case Data
You are encouraged to deal with the case as it is presented. You should put yourself in the
position of the general manager involved in the situation and look at the situation through his or her
eyes. Part of the unique job of being a general manager is that many of your problems are dilemmas.
There is no way to come out a winner on all counts. Although additional data might be interesting
or useful, the “Monday morning quarterback” syndrome is not an effective way to learn about
strategic management. Therefore, you are strongly discouraged from acquiring or using extra- or
post-case data.
Some case method purists argue that a class should never be told what actually happened in
a situation. Each person should leave the classroom situation with his or her plan for solving the
problem, and none should be falsely legitimized. The outcome of a situation may not reflect what is,
or is not, a good solution. You must remember that because a company did something different
from your recommendations and was successful or unsuccessful, this is not an indication of the
value of your approach. It is, however, interesting and occasionally useful to know what actually
occurred. Therefore, whenever possible, I will tell you what happened to a company since the time
of the case, but you should draw your own conclusions from that.
23
-24-
Network Assessment Exercise: Executive Version
Introduction
This exercise is based on network instruments designed to help you identify
patterns in your approach to developing networks of relationships. Your "network"
refers to the set of relationships that help you advance professionally, get things
done, and more generally, develop personally and professionally.
Directions
Follow the instructions for Steps 1 through 5 on the following pages. When you
have completed the exercise, hand in Step 5 (page 6) and only Step 5. The
information you turn in will be anonymous, so please DO NOT write your name on
page 6.
Please DO NOT turn to page 6 (Step 5) until you have completed pages 2 to 4
of this exercise.
24
-25-
Step 1: List Your Network Contacts
In answering the following questions, you may list people from ANY context. It is not necessary
to limit yourself to individuals who work for your company. People with whom you have more
than one kind of relationship can be listed more than once. In the blanks that follow each
question, please list their names or initials. You may list as few or as many as you wish, or leave
a question blank if no one comes to mind.
1. Discussing important work matters If you look back over the last two to three years, who
are the people with whom you have discussed important work matters? This may have been
for bouncing ideas for important projects, getting support or cooperation for your initiatives,
evaluating opportunities or any other matters of importance to you.
2. Getting the job done What people have been most helpful and useful in accomplishing your
job? Consider people who have provided leads, made introductions, offered advice in your
decision making, or provided resources.
3. Advancing your career List those people who have contributed most significantly to your
professional development and career advancement during the past two to three years.
25
-26-
Step 2: Consolidate Your List
Consolidate the names listed in Step 1 onto the Network Grid on page 4. No one person should
be listed twice.
Step 3: Describe the Closeness of the Relationship
For each person listed on the network grid, indicate the closeness of your relationship with them
by placing an "X" on a continuum from "very close" to "close" and "not very close," to "distant."
Very close relationships are those characterized by high degrees of liking, trust, and mutual
commitment. Distant relationships are those characterized by not knowing the person very well,
or by having very little liking, trust, and mutual commitment (i.e., problematic relationships).
For an example of how to complete this step, see the Sample Network Grid on page 5, entitled
"Pat's Network."
Step 4: Compute the Density of Your Network
Density refers to the extent to which the people in your network know each other. Using the grid
on the next page, indicate who knows who in your network by placing a checkmark in the cells
corresponding to each acquainted pair. Leave a cell blank if the pair do not know each other, or
if you do not know whether they know each other.
Start with person 1, for example Lisa in the Sample Network Grid on page 5. Going across the
grid, Lisa knows Jack (2), Jeff (3), and Samantha (8), but no one else in Pat's Network. Go on to
person 2, Jack. Jack knows Rick (5), Linda (6), Samantha (8), and David (10). Go on to person
3, and so on. Once you have finished checkmarking who knows who, compute the density of
YOUR network through the following steps:
a)
Total number of people in your network
To follow our example, Pat's N = 10
b)
Maximum Density (i.e., if everyone in your network knew
each other). Pat's maximum density is (10*9) ÷ 2 = 45.
c)
d)
N = ________
[N * (N - 1)] ÷ 2 = M
M = ________
Total number of checkmarks on your network grid (i.e., the
Number of relationships among people in your network).
Pat's C = 19.
C = ________
Density of Your Network. Pat's D = 19 ÷ 45 = .42
C÷M=D
D = ________
When you have completed Steps 2, 3, and 4, go to page 6 and complete Step 5.
26
-27Network Grid
Step 3: Relationship
Very
Close
Close
Not
Very
Close
Step 2: List Names
Distant
Step 4: Density of Network
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
USE ONLY UPPER RIGHTHAND
DIAGONAL TO COUNT AND CALCULATE
YOUR NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
27
-28SAMPLE Network Grid: Pat's Network
Step 3: Relationship
Very
Close
Close
Not
Very
Close
Step 2: List Names
Distant
Step 4: Density of Network
2
X
1.Lisa
X
2.Jack
X
3.Jeff
3
4
5
6
 
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

 


  

4.Noah
X
5.Rick
X
6.Linda
X
X
7.Jay
8.Samantha
X
 
 




9.Stacy
X
X
10.David
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
USE ONLY UPPER RIGHTHAND
DIAGONAL TO COUNT AND CALCULATE
YOUR NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
28
-29-
Step 5: Summarize the Network Information
Complete the sections below, make a photocopy, and hand in this page and only this page. To
maintain anonymity, please DO NOT write your name on this sheet.
Individual Information (circle applicable)
Gender
Male
Female
Race/Ethnicity
White
African or
African-American
Asian or
Asian-American
Hispanic
Other ______
Nationality (by region)
U.S. and Canada
Latin America (Mexico, South, and Central America)
Europe
Africa and the Middle East
Asia
Australia and New Zealand
Tenure
Years in this industry ______
Years with this employer ______
Years in present position ______
Network Information
1.
Total number of people listed on the Network Grid (from Step 2) _____
2.
Number of "Very Close" relationships listed on the Network Grid (from Step 3) _____
3.
Density of your network (D from Step 4) _____ (needs to be less than or equal to 1)
4.
Look over your Network Grid and determine the number of people who are:
a)
b)
c)
Your senior (higher up in your or another organization)
Your peer (at your level in your or another organization)
Your junior (below you in your or another organization)
_____
_____
_____
d)
e)
f)
From a different functional or product area
From a different business unit, division, or office in your firm
From a different firm
_____
_____
_____
g)
h)
i)
The same gender as you are
Members of the same racial or ethnic group as you are
The same nationality as you are
_____
_____
_____
Keep a photocopy of this page so that you can refer to it later.
29
-30-
Step 5: Summarize the Network Information
Complete the sections below, make a photocopy, and hand in this page and only this page. To
maintain anonymity, please DO NOT write your name on this sheet.
Individual Information (circle applicable)
Gender
Male
Female
Race/Ethnicity
White
African or
African-American
Asian or
Asian-American
Hispanic
Other ______
Nationality (by region)
U.S. and Canada
Latin America (Mexico, South, and Central America)
Europe
Africa and the Middle East
Asia
Australia and New Zealand
Tenure
Years in this industry ______
Years with this employer ______
Years in present position ______
Network Information
1.
Total number of people listed on the Network Grid (from Step 2) _____
2.
Number of "Very Close" relationships listed on the Network Grid (from Step 3) _____
3.
Density of your network (D from Step 4) _____ (needs to be less than or equal to 1)
4.
Look over your Network Grid and determine the number of people who are:
a)
b)
c)
Your senior (higher up in your or another organization)
Your peer (at your level in your or another organization)
Your junior (below you in your or another organization)
_____
_____
_____
d)
e)
f)
From a different functional or product area
From a different business unit, division, or office in your firm
From a different firm
_____
_____
_____
g)
h)
i)
The same gender as you are
Members of the same racial or ethnic group as you are
The same nationality as you are
_____
_____
_____
Keep a photocopy of this page so that you can refer to it later.
30