Technische Universität München
Advanced Seminar in Finance and Accounting:
Case Study Seminar
SoSe 2014
Lehrstuhl für Controlling
Prof. Dr. Gunther Friedl, Dr. Andreas Biagosch
Technische Universität München
Technische Universität München
Agenda
I.
Structure and Timeline of the Seminar
II.
Solving Case Studies
III.
Writing Case Studies
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Agenda
I.
Structure and Timeline of the Seminar
II.
Solving Case Studies
III.
Writing Case Studies
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure and Timeline of the Seminar
¨  Advanced Case Study Seminar (4 SWS / 6 Credits)
n  Students
•  TUM-BWL – Master •  TUM-WIN – Master
•  TUM-WITEC - Master
n  Contact for organizational issues: Peter Schäfer (peter.schaefer@tum.de)
n  Tutors: •  Peter Schäfer
•  Gerke Gersema
•  Friedrich Kley
Gunther Friedl
Andreas Biagosch
Peter Schäfer Gerke Gersema Friedrich Kley
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
Case-Study Seminar
A.
B.
C.
Firm cases
Own case study
Case presentation
30% of final grade
40% of final grade
30% of final grade
5
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
A.
Firm Cases: Framework Requirements
¨  All information you need for the firm cases are provided
¨  However, a calculator and some background information about the company might be
helpful…
¨  Criteria for grading:
•  Analysis / solution
•  Teamwork
•  Presentation of solution
•  Contribution to the discussions
6
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Timeline
¨  03.06.2014 – Case I
•
16:00 – 21:00 + get-together
•
Wacker, Hanns-Seidel-Platz 4, 81737 München
¨  12.06.14 – Case II
•
14:00 – 20:00 + get-together
•
Roland Berger, Mies-van-der-Rohe-Str. 6, 80807 München
¨  24.06.2014 – Case III
•
Time tbd.
•
Deloitte, Rosenheimer Platz 4, 81669 München
¨  03.07.2014 – Case IV
•
14:00 – 20:30 + get-together
•
BCG, Ludwigstraße 21, 80539 München
¨  tbd – Case V
•  Hilti, Kaufering
7
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
B.
Own Case Study: Framework Requirements ¨  Case study is written in teams of 3 students
¨  Length of case study: 15 pages
•  Case: 10 pages (+/- 1 page)
•  Solution: 5 pages (+/- 1 page)
¨  Case study has to be written in English
¨  Bear the formal requirements for citations (Formvorschriften) in mind
¨  Criteria for grading:
•  Structure
•  Precision of (key) question
•  Topicality of issue
•  Creativity
•  Theory applied •  Quality and fit of case and solution
•  Format and language
•  Data and references
8
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
EFMD Case Writing Competition
¨
General Information •
•
http://www.efmd.org/index.php/research/awards/case-writing-competition
Submission deadline: October 2014
¨  Your Chance •
•
•
€ 2000 award per category
Visibility of your case across the EFMD network, Publication of your case in the EFMD‘s Global Focus Magazine
¨  What is EFMD?
•
•
•
Leading international network in the field of management development
Over 750 member organizations from academia, business, public service and consultancy in 81
countries. A unique forum for information, research, networking and debate on innovation and the best
practice in management development. ¨  Categories of the case competition (i.a.)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Finance and Banking
9
Family Business
Public Sector Innovations Supply Chain Management
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
EFMD Case Writing Competition
¨  Submission Criteria Case study and assosicated material must:
•  Be presented in English
•  Include an executive summary and teaching notes
•  Be anonymous (no logos, etc.)
•  Deal with real enterprises and/ or organisations
•  Focus on a recent situation
¨  Evaluation Criteria
•  Content: relevance of the topic, ability to create an interesting learning experience.
•  Form: style of writing, quality of presentation, clarity of data, balance between a well told
story and suffiicent data. •  Teaching Notes: pedagogical objectives of the case; possible questions for class
discussion.
•  Innovation: ideas concerning the whole concept of the case and which should improve
teaching and student engagement
¨  All further information available at http://www.efmd.org/index.php/research/awards/casewriting-competition
10
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
C.
¨
¨
¨
¨
Case Presentation: Framework Requirements Presentation of team case and solution
Length of presentation: 30 min
Length of discussion: 15 min
Presentation can be in German or English
¨  Criteria for grading:
•  Content
•
•
•
•
•
Structure and logic
Comprehensibility and vividness
Presentation style
Answers of questions
Guidance of the discussion
11
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Timeline
¨  22.04.2014 – Deadline for handing in your case topic
¨  30.04.2014 – Practitioners Discussion, Dr. Andreas Biagosch
¨  23.05.2014 – Deadline for handing in your written storyline
•  Briefly describe your main question and the basic arguments and ideas of your solution, max.
two pages
•  12:00 ¨  15.06.2014 – Deadline for handing in case presentations
•
12:00
¨  16.06.2014 and 18.06.2014: Case presentations
•
9:00 – 15:00
¨  27.06.2014 – Deadline for handing in own case studies
•
pdf and hard copy to tutor; 12:00
12
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Feedback loops during the seminar
A.
Firm Cases
¨  You are always welcome to pick up your feedback ¨  Please contact your tutor
B.
Own Case Study
¨  Take your chance and discuss your own case study with your tutor
¨  Two to three meetings with your tutor are advisable
•  One meeting before handing in your topic
•  One meeting before handing in your own case study
13
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Agenda
I.
Structure and Timeline of the Seminar
II.
Solving Case Studies
III.
Writing Case Studies
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Introduction: Case-Studies
What is a case?
What is your task?
§  Imitates or simulates a real situation
§
Construct conclusions from the
information in the text
§
Filter out irrelevant or low-value portions
of the text
§
Furnish missing information through
inferences
§
Associate evidence from different parts
of the case and integrate it into a
conclusion
§  Contains uncertainty §  Does not necessarily present selected and
sorted information
§  Includes irrelevancies, sideshows,
misconceptions
Cases require active readers and structured problem solving!
15
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Five basic steps for working on cases
1
Situation
§  What is the topic about?
§  How does it work?
2
Questions
§  Explicitly state the problem you are trying to solve
3
Hypothesis
§  Which possibility is most plausible?
4
Proof and action
§  Action Plan §  What do we need to know? 5
Alternatives
§  Critically review your hypothesis
§  What are strengths and weaknesses of your solution?
Prepare, clarify
and align
Specify,
structure and
act
Review
16
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
1. Situation
1
Establish an understanding: What is the topic about? What is the
situation? 2
•  Understand the big picture first - then fill it in with details! à Read systematically (e.g. opening and closing section at first) •  Think, Think, Think 3
•  Discuss with your group members!
4
5
17
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Step 2: Questions
1
Explicitly state and define the problem you want to solve!
à Formulate the key question: What problem are we trying to solve?
Situation
2
Recognized
situation
Complication
Something went wrong
Something could go wrong
3
Something changed
We need to decide
between three options
…
4
Key Question
→
→
→
Answer
What do we do?
How can we prevent it?
What should we do?
Which one should we
take?
→
…
Think about: What do I need to know about
the situation? What
information is necessary to answer the key question?
à  Scan the case for all relevant information à  Mark high-value sections, numbers, facts, …
5
à  Use available external sources of information 18
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Step 2: Questions
1
2
3
§  Depending on the problem-level, you can use different frameworks
to support your analysis of the situation
Internal Problem
Internal and
External Problem •  SWOT-Analysis
•  Logic-Tree
•  Value-Chain
•  BCG Matrix
External Problem •  Porter‘s Five Forces
4
5
19
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Step 3: Hypothesis
§  You narrow the possibilities to the one that seems most
plausible for you. 1
2
§  A hypothesis drives a different approach to the case: you
want to prove something, not look for something to prove!
§  Always follow your hypothesis – iteration is key
3
Sharpen or falsify your
hypotheses over time!
Example:
→ “It is likely to be either a cost or a revenue mix problem”
Belief as to cause of problem
→ “We think it’s a cost problem”
Preliminary diagnosis
4
Fully supported
Quantified
5
“It looks to be a scale issue”
Remedy determined
→ “You are subscale in distribution relative to competitors”
→ “You have a 15 – 20% cost disadvantage overall”
→ “A product differentiation strategy will enable you to
overcome your cost disadvantage”
20
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Step 4: Proof and Action
§
1
Proof your hypothesis: Questions: 2
•
What evidence do I have that supports the hypothesis? •
What additional evidence do I need?
Show that you can apply your theoretical knowledge in a practical
context
§
Show how you would implement the decision you’re recommending
§
Think about tangible actions and make an action-plan
3
§
Tips:
4
à  Think in practical terms
à  Think out of the box
à  „Surprising solutions come from the inspiration to think the
5
unthinkable“
21
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Step 5: Alternatives
1
Question your own hypothesis! §
take a step back and look critically at the hypothesis and the
evidence.
§
What is the greatest weakness of the hypothesis? §
What is the strongest alternative to do?
2
This step shall not undermine your work - but: every position has a
3
weakness à you should be the one who recognizes it, not the professor or
4
tutor
5
22
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Agenda
I.
Structure and Timeline of the Seminar
II.
Solving Case Studies
III.
Writing Case Studies
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
General remarks
□  Case studies are reported from real life
à choose an existing company facing
an interesting, real challenge or problem
(e.g. restructuring, acquisition, productstrategy, entering a new market)
Examples of previous seminars:
Coca Cola: Coke buys into Innocent
smoothies
•
Übernahme von VW Truck & Bus durch
MAN: Glücksgriff oder riskantes
Manöver?
•
Toyota: Produktstrategie zur
Erschließung neuer Marktsegmente
•
MyMuesli.de: Erfolgsfaktoren und
Wachstum eines Startups •
Universal/YouTube: Erfordert das digitale
Zeitalter neue Geschäftsmodelle in der
Musikindustrie?
•
Hochtief: Struggle against hostile
takeover
•
Apple: What would you do with $25
billion cash?
•
□  Each case has a purpose/ learning
objective: decide upon the functional
purpose of your case and your message
for the reader □  Two basic questions may help you to
identify and select a successful case
subject:
1.  In the situation described, is there a
call for a significant decision?
2.  At the end of the analysis, will the
reader be able to respond to the
question “what would you do”? 24
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Rules and Principles
Tips
Point of view
§
Objectivity:
§
§
Neutral observer/ reporter who is
describing the situation
à  grab and hold the interest of the reader
§
Quotes are always favorable
§
Stay true to the facts - but up to your
purpose, you can highlight or downplay
certain points
§
Don’t provide any analysis or “lessons
learned” in the case – that is content of
the solution/ teaching notes
§
Exhibits (charts, maps, diagrams, …) can
hold down the length of your case – a
picture is worth a thousand words
Avoid value-laden statements, such as:
“the manager made an excellent choice,
given the situation”
§
Do not lead the reader in the interpretation
of data, information, and facts
§
Adjectives are particularly problematic,
e.g.: “successful” manager
Always keep the reader in mind Tense: §
Past Tense: All of the events presented in
the case have already occurred 25
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
§
Outline the issues and draw the reader’s interest.
§
Paint a concise and interesting picture of the main issues in
1. Opening
Paragraph
the case:
2. Main Part
what
when
where
3. Conclusion
§
4. Appendix
5. Solution
who
why
If possible, use a statement or a description of a manager
facing a difficult situation as a hook to capture the reader’s
interest à  E.g. “John Smith, CEO of … stared out of the window of
his office at the gently falling snow. The final board
meeting was just one hour away and he was concerned
about …“
26
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
1. Opening
Paragraph
2. Main Part
3. Conclusion
4. Appendix
5. Solution
§  Build up the context that is necessary to understand and solve
the case
§  Describe the industry and market, organization (vision,
structure, culture), core product (potential, competitors, … ),
timeline, etc. §  Tell more than only one side of the story so that the reader can
think of competing alternatives Choose the right level of information provided
•  Sufficient information for the reader to carry out your desired
analysis
•  Add information that is not absolutely necessary to the
development of the case and “noise” (information that is more
distracting than helpful) to make your case more realistic Choose the right level of direction
•  Too much direction à subsequent analysis becomes limited/
eliminated
•  Too little directionà reader becomes frustrated and loses
interest and involvement
27
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Structure
Conclusion
1. Opening
Paragraph
§
The final paragraph generally returns to the issues raised
in the opening paragraph
§
2. Main Part
Provide a short synthesis to reiterate the main issues, or
even to raise new questions
§
Possible technique: return to the decision maker you
quoted/ talked about in the beginning
3. Conclusion
4. Appendix
Appendix §
Includes necessary notes, tabulations, calculations,
references, etc. which are relevant but too long or too
5. Solution
technical to be included in the main body of the report
28
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Checklist:
Elements of a well-written case
Message
q Is there a hook?
q What are the key issues or learning objectives that the reader should identify?
q Are there linkages to theory or models in your field?
Details
q Is there sufficient information for the reader to carry out your desired analysis?
q Is there more information than needed? If so, is it with intention? q To lend realistic complexity?
q To add interesting details?
q To allow the reader to follow “red herrings” and make judgments?
q Are there characters with whom readers can identify?
q Do the characters speak in their own words, when possible?
q Is the material organized in a logical fashion?
q Are there exhibits, with detailed explanatory material? If not, should there be exhibits?
q Is the timing of events clear?
Style
q Is the case entirely in past tense (except for direct quotes)?
q Is the tone objective (i.e. no value judgments such as “obviously”, “excellent manager”)
q Does the case have “life”?
Source: Naumes (2006), p. 146.
29
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Literature
Solving Cases Studies
§
Ellet, William (2007): The Case Study Handbook, Boston 2007. §
Lippl, Christian (2011): Perspektive Unternehmensberatung 2012, München 2011. Writing Case Studies
§
Naumes, William / Naumes, Margaret J. (2006): The Art & Craft of Case Writing, 2nd Edition,
Armonk 2006. §
N.U. (1999): Writing Case Studies: A Manual, URL: http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/de/pd/instr/strats/
casestd/casestds.pdf, 24.04.2012, 15:21.
30
© Gunther Friedl
Technische Universität München
Good luck, have fun with the seminar!
31
© Gunther Friedl