Propose a strategy for growth innovation and sustainability in the age of pandemics rising nationalism and uncertainty

A report (2500 words) with a professional formatting

Propose a strategy for growth, innovation and sustainability, in the age of pandemics, rising nationalism and uncertainty

Students will:

(1) Make recommendations for short-term (1 year) and longer-term (5 years) strategies using the “ambidexterity” model, “Blue Ocean Shift”, “Scamper” and Ansoff frameworks; students recommendations for innovation can range from new products, platforms and markets to changes in supply chains, systems, structures or skill building

(2) Recommend Strategies for Managing techno capitalism Risk and the liability of foreign-ness

(3) Using the 7S model, identify key implications of the new strategy in terms of adjustments to skills, staff, systems, structures and style

A good assignment will include:

(1) a fact-based, structured, insightful analysis of

1a the company’s current performance on the triple bottom line (Profit, People, Planet)

1b the company’s core competencies

1c opportunities and threats in its environment

(2) compelling strategy recommendations for

2a short-term (1 year) and

2b longer-term (5 years)

strategies

2c a review of necessary changes in skills, staff, systems, structures and styles needed to successfully implement the recommendations

Students demonstrate they have

(1) mastered the key theoretical frameworks discussed in class,

(2) gathered high quality, internal and external data that help them understand the issues and formulate recommendations; data comes from trustworthy academic and practitioner sources (Hult-library databases, publications by leading thought leaders in HBR, McKinsey, Deloitte, The Economist, FT, and trade press, not random internet searches) and presented in an effective visual format (charts and graphs)

(3) understood the company culture and how it makes decisions based on resources and values; and that recommendations are realistic and specific to the company, leveraging its strengths and working with, rather than against, its culture

(4) mastered the art of developing strategic options, assessing them on a clear range of criteria, and make recommendations

(5) the ability to communicate recommendations and make their case in a compelling and organized way

Rubric

BUS 420 Paper (2)BUS 420 Paper (2)CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMastery of strategy concepts and tools30.0 ptsExcellentThe writer has very effectively mastered the strategic analysis by drawing from provided class frameworks and concepts and presents analysis that is very thoughtful, reasonable, and substantive.24.0 ptsGoodThe writer has effectively mastered the strategic analysis by drawing from provided class frameworks and concepts and presents analysis that is thoughtful, reasonable, and substantive.21.0 ptsSatisfactoryThe writer has mastered the strategic analysis by drawing from provided class frameworks and concepts in a satisfactory way, and presents analysis that is somehow thoughtful, reasonable, and substantive.15.0 ptsNeeds WorkThe writer has mastered the strategic analysis by drawing from provided class frameworks and concepts in an unsatisfactory way and presents an analysis that needs substantive additional work.0.0 ptsMissingThe writer has not sufficiently worked on the expectations of the assignment.30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeData and Analysis supporting recommendations20.0 ptsExcellentThe writer offers outstanding supporting evidence and data in the form of charts, tables and excerpts; it is selected from highly appropriate sources, such as company materials (annual reports, investor presentations and CEO speeches, as well as external sources (case studies from highly reputable economic press, such as the Economist and HBR; The report applies the external research sources and online databases very effectively. Evidence is compelling and presented clearly, fully, and in context, and properly sourced and referenced16.0 ptsGoodThe writer offers strong supporting evidence and data in the form of charts, tables and excerpts; it is selected from very appropriate sources, such as company materials as well as external sources (case studies from reputable economic press. The report applies the external research sources and online databases effectively. Evidence is strong, comprehensive and presented clearly, and in context; it is properly sourced and referenced14.0 ptsSatisfactoryThe writer offers appropriate supporting evidence and data in the form of charts, tables and excerpts; it is selected from reputable sources, such as company materials as well as external sources; evidence is somewhat convincing but may have areas that are not fully covered; The report applies the external research sources and online databases somewhat effectively. It is presented clearly, and on the whole, in context, although context could have been more fully fleshed out; it is properly sourced and referenced10.0 ptsNeeds WorkThe writer offers some supporting evidence and data in the form of charts, tables and excerpts; but it is not comprehensive enough or comes from somewhat dubious or unrecognized sources (for example, just lifted off the internet without proper discussion of why this data is accurate; it leaves doubts in the readers’ mind, due to holes or factual inaccuracies/weaknesses; some areas of the argument are backed up by outdated or incomplete data, or not backed up; The report applies few external research sources and online databases. It is presented somewhat clearly, but lacks context; it is properly sourced and referenced0.0 ptsMissingThe writer offers little or supporting evidence and data in the form of charts, tables and excerpts; it lacks a discussion of whether the writer and the company itself has adequate information; The report applies no external research sources and online databases very effectively. Little context and few sources and reference20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of recommendations and ability to make the case persuasively40.0 ptsExcellentWriter offers outstanding analysis of existing data and opportunities/risks, and offers compelling, engaging and innovative recommendations; it is extremely well structured and organized for maximum clarity and persuasion, exhibiting a strong understanding of the art of writing (report includes an abstract; a clear, concise and meaningful introduction presenting the issue and setting the stage; has a clear thesis and well-constructed argumentation, with transitions, clear statements, compelling evidence in the form of data and examples, and a conclusion that states the author’s final thoughts on best options and the limits/risks of these recommendations32.0 ptsGoodWriter offers extremely solid analysis of existing data and opportunities/risks, and offers engaging and well-thought-out recommendation; it is well-structured and organized for good clarity and persuasion, exhibiting a good understanding of the art of writing (report includes an abstract; a solid introduction presenting the issue and setting the stage; has a clear thesis and convincing line of argumentation, with some attempt at transitions, clear statements, strong evidence in the form of data and examples, and a conclusion that states the author’s final thoughts on best options28.0 ptsSatisfactoryWriter offers decent analysis of existing data and opportunities/risks, and some good recommendations; it has a clear, though not optimal, structure and exhibits a satisfactory understanding of the art of writing (report includes an abstract; an introduction presenting the issue and setting the stage; has a clear thesis and reasonably convincing line of argumentation; transitions are there, though often implicit; author provides solid evidence in the form of data and examples, and a conclusion that summarizes recommendations20.0 ptsNeeds WorkWriter offers some analysis of existing data and opportunities/risks, but recommendations are too general, not specific to the company, and weak overall (would not pass the “executive presentation test) ; the structure is somewhat unclear and argumentation weak; report includes an abstract; an introduction presenting the issue but insufficient in contextualization; and/or thesis and line of argumentation are there, though they lack punch, clarity and logical flow; transitions are weak or absent; and/or author provides some evidence in the form of data and examples, but their quality or relevance are not assessed; conclusion lacks a clear statement0.0 ptsMissingWriter offers little or no analysis of existing data and weak or no recommendations; The writing skills need major work, with weak or no introduction, clear thesis, logical flow and line of argumentation; author provides no or subpar evidence for his analysis and recommendation;40.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSentence editing2.0 ptsExcellentThe report contains very few or no errors in spelling, proofreading, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, word choice, and formatting. Also, quotations, paraphrases, and summaries are very carefully documented and introduced with signal phrases that identify the author or speaker. Finally, sentences are very clear, logical, and flow nicely from one to the other.1.6 ptsGoodThe report contains few or no errors in spelling, proofreading, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, word choice, and formatting. Also, quotations, paraphrases, and summaries are carefully documented and introduced with signal phrases that identify the author or speaker. Finally, sentences are clear, logical, and flow nicely from one to the other.1.4 ptsSatisfactoryThe report contains some errors in spelling, proofreading, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, word choice, and formatting. Also, quotations, paraphrases, and summaries are mostly carefully documented and introduced with signal phrases that identify the author or speaker. Finally, sentences are in most places clear, logical, and flow nicely from one to the other.1.0 ptsNeeds WorkThe report contains many errors in spelling, proofreading, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, word choice, and formatting. Also, quotations, paraphrases, and summaries are not always carefully documented and introduced with signal phrases that identify the author or speaker. Finally, sentences are in some places unclear, illogical, and do not flow nicely from one to the other.0.0 ptsMissingThe writer has not adequately refined the assignment in terms of spelling, proofreading, grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, word choice, and formatting. Many sentences are unclear, illogical, and do not flow nicely from one to the other.2.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReferencing and Citations2.0 ptsExcellentThe report very consistently uses the APA format to reference all citations.1.6 ptsGoodThe report consistently uses the APA format to reference all citations.1.4 ptsSatisfactoryThe report somewhat consistently uses the APA format to reference most citations.1.0 ptsNeeds WorkThe report somewhat ineffectively and inconsistently uses the APA format to reference only some citations.0.0 ptsMissingThe report has not been turned in and /or the requested citation style has not been applied adequately.2.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization and flow6.0 ptsFull Marks0.0 ptsNo Marks6.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0