You are on page 1of 15


Professor: Seung-Hyun Lee Office: SOM 4.409 Tel: 972-883-6267 E-mail: TA: Ping Wu, or Office Hours: Tuesday 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. Class: Tuesday 7:00-9:45 p.m. Classroom: SOM2.084 Text: Dess, G.G. and Lumpkin, G.T., (2nd edition)—Strategic Management: Creating Competitive Advantages, McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Case book: Harvard Case book available at the UTD bookstore and off-campus bookstore Course Webpage: or alternatively you can visit and click “Lee, Seung-Hyun”. That will lead you to the same page. Course Objective: The emphasis of this course is on developing a general understanding of the administration of business firms from the point of view of top management. The course emphasizes application of theory-based knowledge to real world situations through the use of lecture and case studies. The course is divided into discussions of: 1. the role of strategic management 2. analyzing the industry and macro environment 3. analyzing the internal resources of the organization 4. corporate strategies 5. business-level strategies 6. implementation of strategic decisions By the end of the course, you should have an understanding of how strategic issues are framed, the range of generic strategic decisions that are faced by most organizations, and how some of the concepts learned in other classes (i.e., NPV, breakeven analysis, ratio analysis, etc.) can generate information used for strategic problem solving. Plus, ethics in business will also be covered in the class since it is an important part of strategic management.

Class Format: This class is structured differently from other classes you have taken. There is an emphasis on using case analysis as a way of practicing your business thinking skills, your oral presentation skills, as well as your writing skills. The goals of this class are 1) to learn about strategy and 2) help you make the transition from education to work. Because of this, professionalism and integrative thinking are emphasized. Our use of cases provides a mechanism to help students learn skills and techniques associated with oral presentations and written briefs. These skills can often make the difference between getting and keeping a job and losing one. Most strategic issues are non-routine and unstructured. This is your opportunity to use what you have learned in lecture and other classes to solve problems presented in the case. The quality of

the case analysis usually determines the quality of the solutions. The primary responsibility for the quality of the case analysis comes from the student participants.

Grades: Your grade in the course will be based on objective and subjective criteria. Grades will be curved. Each class will be curved separately. Grades will be based on the following: WSJ article analyses: 1 group oral presentation (20%) Group (written) case analyses (5 cases): Group case oral presentation (1 case) Final Exam (in class): Peer Evaluation: Participation: Total 20% 30% 10% 20% multiplied with the group case evaluations 20% 100%

WSJ article analyses Assignment (presentation): The class will be divided into groups of equal size. You will be either assigned to your group or choose your group members. Your group will be responsible for oral presentation only. The group selection will take place o the second day n of the class and each team will have 4 members. The number of members in a group can vary -5 depending on the class size. Preferably we would want to have 7 teams. WSJ article analysis should be a comprehensive analysis of the facts of the case and application of concepts learned in the lecture and textbook. Your group case analysis grade will be based on the quality of the group's work. Part of your learning experience is managing the coordination of tasks required to create a good product. Part of your grade will be based on each individual's assessment of the relative contribution of each group member (peer evaluation). Each WSJ article analysis will be graded according to the case evaluation criteria shown in the case evaluation sheet. It is important that you make use of library search engines. Only using company homepage and google or its equivalent (e.g. yahoo) is not enough (they are not considered as outside sources). For WSJ article analysis, to address the above issues, students should use a minimum of seven (7) outside sources of information. In addition to using the library search engines, suggested references include Annual Reports, 10-K Forms, Business Week, Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Fortune, Moody’s Industrial Manual, Harvard Business Review, Sloan Management Review, etc. When you use outside sources, make sure that you make the references bold, so the instructor can easily find out how many outside sources (other than company homepage and google) are used. One of the librarians or the instructor will spend some time to explain how to meaningfully use library search engines for analyses. Do not rely too much on the same references—select a variety. You will bring copies of powerpoint slides for the instructor and students. In the copies, source of references should be included in both powerpoint slides and a separate reference appendix. Case analyses: There are written and oral portion of the case analyses. Your group case analysis grade will be based on the quality of the group's work. As mentioned above, part of your grade

will be based on each individual's assessment of the relative contribution of each group member (peer evaluation). Late cases are not accepted. Written portion: There are seven (7) cases we will cover in the class altogether. Each team is responsible to turn in any three (5) (out of 7) case analyses during the term. Each case analysis is due at the beginning of the class that the case is assigned (e.g. Case 3: Microsoft: Competing on talent (A) is due on February 14th at the beginning of the class). Each case analysis cannot exceed 5 pages - double spaced (font 11) excluding figures, tables, and references. No cover sheet is needed. Each written case analysis is worth 6 points (6x5=30). Ensure that the paper has an executive summary and that it is divided into sections and subsections in a logical manner. Written part will be graded as 4/4: excellent, 3.5/4: very good, 3/4: good, 2.5/4: fair 2/4: poor, 1.5/4 very poor, and 1/4: extremely poor. Oral portion: Each team is responsible to present a case in the classroom. Oral presentations should be approximately 20 minutes in length with approximately a 10 minutes discussion period. The oral presentation will count 10% of the assignment grade. The cases will be chosen when you form your groups on the second day of the class. Oral part will be graded using the case evaluation sheet. Class Participation: Class participation is highly encouraged in both the lecture portion as well as the case discussion portion of the class. Quality of class contributions will be weighted more heavily than quantity. Frequent and valuable participants are who attend most of the classes, participate regularly in every class attended, and at least make one significant contribution in each class attended. “Participation and contribution” is a meaningful portion of the total course grade – 20%. To help the instructor learn each student’s name and grade “participation and contribution” as fairly as possible, you will prepare and bring a “nameplate” to each class. Here are some guidelines in participation grades. The instructor has the sole authority in assigning participation grades. 20/20 (excellent participation): attend most of the classes, participate regularly in every class attended, and at least make one significant contribution in each class attended 17.5/20 (very good participation): attend most of the classes, participate regularly in every class attended, and at least make significant contributions in most classes attended 15/20 (good participation): attend most of the classes, participate regularly in most classes attended, and make significant contributions in many classes attended 12.5/20 (fair participation): attend most of the classes, participate regularly in most classes attended, and make significant contribution in several classes attended 10/20 (poor participation): participates in some of the classes attended, and make significant contribution in a couple classes 5/20 (very poor participation): participates in some of the classes attended 0/20 (extremely poor participation): I hope nobody falls in this category

Peer Evaluation: Each team member will evaluate the rest of the team members for their contribution to group work. Details on how to calculate peer evaluation and how to incorporate into the group projects are shown in the peer evaluation sheet. Peer evaluation sheet will be provided on the final exam day with the exam. Exam: One final exam will be given at designated point in the semester. Honor Code Information: No case write-ups, exams, or student's notes from current or previous business school students should be consulted in doing your case analysis. You can, however, consult your notes and reading materials as well as information in he library. Any material t quoted directly or paraphrased should be referenced in your written and oral cases. Plagiarism is a serious infraction and will be dealt with accordingly.

Wall Street Journal Assignment – oral presentation (Groups of 4-5)
The purpose of this assignment is to analyze critically a recent article (dated within four months from the assignment due date) from the Wall Street Journal or its equivalent (e.g. Financial Times) selected by the students. The oral presentation will be done in groups. Each group will present the case as shown in the class schedule. An illustrative list of issues that the WSJ article may focus on includes: Internal Growth Market Development Product Development Innovation/Internal Development Joint Ventures/Strategic Alliances External Acquisition Growth Horizontal Integration Vertical Integration Diversification Disinvestment Retrenchment, Operating Efficiency Turnaround, product/Marketing Refocus Divestiture, Liquidation Internationalization Reorganization, Restructure Strategy Implementation Importance of Industry Context on Organizational Performance You should address issues such as the following (may differ with regard to topic areas): 1. What is the rationale (or lack thereof) for the action/decision? 2. Is the action/decision consistent with the organization's overall strategy? 3. What do you think will be the implications of the action/decision i.e., how should the action/decision improve or detract from the organization’s performance? 4. How does your analysis incorporate strategic management concepts in the textbook and in other sources? The WSJ article should be attached to the oral case presentation materials (powerpoint slides and reference appendix) when you distribute them to the instructor and students on the day the team presents. Note: Oral presentations should be approximately 25-30 minutes in length with approximately a 10-15 minutes discussion period. The oral presentation will count 10% of the assignment grade.



ACTIVITY/ASSIGNMENT Course Overview/Objectives Chapter 1 CREATING COMPETITIVE ADVNATAGES Chapter 1 CREATING COMPETITIVE ADVNATAGES continued Chapter 2 EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT Selection of groups Meet with the author of the textbook (Dr. Gregory Dess will come and give a talk – 30 minutes)


Jan 17


Jan 24

Chapter 2 EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT continued Chapter 14 CASE ANALYSIS Using library search engine


Jan 31

Chapter 3 INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT Case 1: Saturn corp. in 1998 Chapter 3 INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT continued Read Yoffie, D., & Kwak, M. 2002. Mastering balance: How to meet and beet a stronger opponent, California Management Review, 44(2), 8-24. ß go to UTD library homepage and find “databases” under collections, then click “databases” and find “business source premier”, then use the search engine to locate the article Case 2: Cola wars continue: Coke and Pepsi in the twenty-first century


Feb 7


Feb 14

Chapter 4 INTELLECTUAL ASSETS Case 3: Microsoft: Competing on talent (A) Chapter 5 BUSINESS-LEVEL STRATEGIES Case 4: Yahoo!: Business on internet time Chapter 6 CORPORATE-LEVEL STRATEGIES Case 5: Gucci group N.V. (A) Spring Break Chapter 7 INTERNATIONAL STRATEGIES Case 6: Toys “R” Us Japan Chapter 9 STRAT EGIC CONTROL (first half) Chapter 11 ETHICAL ORGANIZATION (second half)


Feb 21


Feb 28

Mar 7 9 Mar 14


Mar 21



Mar 28

Chapter 13: Reorganizing opportunities and creating new ventures Case 7: Going public Group presentation* (Wall Street Journal article analyses) Group presentation* (Wall Street Journal article analyses) Exam review Final exam (bring Scantron sheet- 882 E)

12 13 14 15

April 4 April 11 April 18 April 25

*The number of presentations will change depending on class sizes.


Case Evaluation Sheet: BPS 6310


Summary of the critical issues (10pts)
Most of the information in the case is not repeated. Identificaton of internal and external issues. Identification of the most important issues

Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Marginally Meets Expectations Does not Meet Expectations

10 pts 8-9 pts 7 pts 5 pts


Strategic Analysis (20 pts)
Suggests realistic options for the company (or industry). Identifies pros and cons of options. Provides realistic, case-based support for the options.

Exceeds Expectations

19- 20 pts 16-18 pts 10-12 pts

Evidence of deeper analysis beyond what is written or presented. Meets Expectations Does not Meet Expectations

Marginally Meets Expectations 13-15 pts


Recommendation (10 pts) Quality and support of the recommended option. Implementation impact of the recommendation.

Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Marginally Meets Expectations Does not Meet Expectations

10 pts 8-9 pts 7 pts 5 pts


Other grading criteria (10 pts) Clarity and logic of ideas Use of exhibits Use of outside materials Grammar, spelling, structure Organization of presentation Speaking style, use of visual aids and handouts, balance of speakers Dress and overall professionalism Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Marginally Meets Expectations Does not Meet Expectations 10 pts 8-9 pts 7 pts 5 pts


Peer Evaluation Sheet
Team # ______________ Name __________________________ Name Score (1-5)* Reasons Self

• • • • • • • • •

• • •

1 (extremely unsatisfactory) – 2 (very unsatisfactory) – 3 (unsatisfactory) – 3.5 (neither satisfactory nor unsatisfactory) - 4 (satisfactory) – 4.5 (very satisfactory) – 5 (extremely satisfactory) if 1, then the person gets 0.2 if 2, then the person gets 0.4 if 3, then the person gets 0.6 if 3.5, then the person gets 0.7 if 4, then the person gets 0.8 if 4.5, then the person gets 0.9 if 5, then the person gets 1 Then the participation score will be multiplied with the score one gets from 2 group projects (WSJ article analysis and case analysis: written and oral). For example, if a student gets 19/20 for WSJ assignment and 28/30 for case analysis as a group for the two group projects and 3 from the peer evaluation, then the actual grade is 47/50*0.6 = 28.2/50, not 47/50. Be objective in evaluating other members in your group and specify reasons. The evaluation should be turned in on the final exam. Peer evaluation sheet will be provided along with the exam booklet. If one fails to turn in the peer evaluation sheet, then everybody in the team gets 4 (0.8).


1. Your position is that of a business consultant to the chief executive officer of the company. You have been hired to do a strategic analysis of the company and the industry using case materials, library research, electronic data sources, and tools suggested by the text. The goal is to determine what direction the company should take and make specific recommendations about what the company should do next and why. Sometimes the printed case will call attention to certain problems that exist and other times you’ll be on your own to determine problem areas. In all of your presentations you should be addressing the company (i.e. “This is what YOU should do.” Not “This is what THEY should do.”) The basic question is “ What must this company do to improve it’s performance in the long run?” 2. Identify the current position of the company using concepts from Chapter 2 and information from the library and electronic resources. • What is its current strategy to compete in the industry? • What are the key characteristics of the industry and the industry competitors? • What forces shape the industry? • Identify key threats and opportunities that exist in the environment. 3. Identify the internal characteristics of the company. What gives the firm an advantage over its competitors? Use concepts from Chapter 3 as well as information from the case and your research to understand this. • What are the tangible and intangible resources that the firm has? • How does the financial strength of the firm stack up against other firms in the industry? Other potential competitors? • What core capabilities and core competencies give the firm a competitive advantage? • Is the competitive advantage sustainable over time? Is it valuable, inimitable, rare, hardly substitutable, and organizationally exploitable? (e.g. exhibit 3.7 from Ch.3.) • Identify the key strengths and weaknesses apparent from your internal analysis. • How do the strengths and weaknesses compare to the threats and opportunities apparent in the environment? 4. From the analysis above, identify the KEY STRATEGIC ISSUE or PROBLEM the company must face. To what extent will this key issue affect or be affected by the current strategic orientation of the company. Is there a problem with the current strategy? Should it be changed? Or does the problem concern how well the company is implementing a strategy that should work? The strategic orientation of the company can be identified as: • Business Level Strategies: Low cost, differentiation, or focus (See Chapter 5 in the text.) These categories are broad and you should be able to discuss specific tactical strategies that fall into the categories. • If you embark upon a strategy, what is the probability that a competitor will respond? How will they respond? How should your company respond to the competitor?


Corporate Level Strategy: Related or Unrelated Diversifications are strategic categories. Under these broad categories are decisions to emphasize one industry over another within the company. Acquisitions and divestitures are corporate level strategies. Comparing one division to another and trying to improve overall performance also come under this category. See Chapter 6 for descriptions of the strategies and tools to evaluate information.

5. Once you have evaluated the case, identified the strategic problem, and evaluated the impact of the problem on current and/or future strategy, you must form some conclusions and recommendations regarding the future position of the company. Support your evaluation with appropriate research. • What alternatives can the company consider? Alternatives should be mutually exclusive. Mutually exclusive means the company can go down only one road. It cannot pursue both strategies simultaneously. • What are the tradeoffs associated with the alternatives? You should NOT think in terms of “good” versus “bad”, but rather what does the company GAIN from an alternative and what does it LOSE. That way you can compare gains and losses across the alternatives. Gains and losses may be in terms of customers, revenue, cost competitiveness, market share, profitability, core competence, time to market, future growth, survival, etc. • Select an alternative to recommend. Make a logical, clear, and integrated argument, backed by research to support why the gain and loss tradeoff from this alternative is better than the other alternatives. • Recommendations should be made only if backed by analysis and logic. Trivial or unrealistic recommendations or recommendations that are inconsistent with the firm’s goals, resources, the industry environment, and the culture of the company must be avoided. 6. FINALLY, go back to the strategic issue or problem you identified earlier. How does your solution SOLVE or at least improve the strategic problem? Will your recommendation allow your firm to improve its financial performance in the long run? What implementation issues might come up? What is the realistic probability of success if the company follows your plan?

INFORMATION FOR THE ORAL PRESENTATION 1. Each team is scheduled for two oral presentations. Visual aids must be employed, including the use of handouts, overhead projectors, PowerPoint, crash carts, etc. Ask the instructor about equipment availability. You are encouraged to use slides on disk rather than printed color transparencies. 2. Oral Presentation Teams are required to dress professionally and exhibit the same level of decorum and consideration that you would in a real business setting.


3. All team members must be involved in the oral presentation with each team member presenting a segment. Segment definition is the responsibility of the team. A printout of your slides as well as a bibliography (references) should be given to your instructor and other class members (include a copy of the newspaper clip). The title page of your presentation should list the case name, the date, the names of each team member, and the segment each member will cover. The instructor in each cl ss may ask for full sized black and white a copies of the slides. 4. Library and online research beyond the case are REQUIRED. Analysis in hindsight is not permitted in either oral or written reports. “What a company did” is not justification. There are many possibilities that companies do not consider. Also, in the long run, the company’s action may not be successful. Just searching company website and/or citing free web information is not enough. Take advantage of the paid search engines in the library homepage. It contains the following search engines. Should you have further questions, contact liaison librarians in the library (Loreen Phillips, or visit
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Business and Company Resource Center Business Source Premier Business & Management Practices CCH Internet Tax Research Network (tax service) Wall Street Journal (1984-current) Academic Universe Lexis Nexis (then under Business) Disclosure Data from Academic Universe Click on Business, then Company Financial (company financial info) Mergent Online (formerly Moody's FIS Online) (company financial information) National Trade Data Bank (NTDB) EconLit (economics) ECONbase PAIS (public affairs) Business Dateline (index to regional business publications) Business Organizations Regional Business News (from TexShare) EDGAR Financial Reports (company financial information) Social Sciences Abstracts Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Science/Web of Knowledge) Essay & General Literature Index Web of Science (Web of Knowledge) (citation indexes)


• • •

WorldCat (OCLC) General Databases (multidisciplinary)

For psychology in the workplace: Psychology and Human Development Databases

5. When presenting, indicate the outside sources used. If you present industry averages, for example, or demographic data, indicate where you got them both in the slides and in the reference appendix. 6. After you have presented; be prepared to receive questions regarding your assumptions, your use of data, your conclusions, your logic, and your recommendations. Other class members may not agree with your analysis. Your instructor may challenge your evaluation of environmental or internal characteristics. DO NOT BECOME DEFENSIVE. This is a natural part of the process. You are being asked to think on your feet and demonstrate that you have a deep understanding of the case issues. ALL team members should participate in the question and answer session. Rigorous probing by the instructor reflects the high expectations that he/she has for the class. Everyone learns from this experience, even class members who are not presenting.

INFORMATION FOR THE WRITTEN PRESENTATION 1. The individually written analyses of the assigned cases are due at the start of class. Exhibits may use charts, tables, and professional strategic planning tools found in the text. DO NOT add charts just to the sake of length. All exhibits should ADD VALUE to the written analysis. Summarizing facts of the case through a SWOT analysis or using tables for evaluation of alternatives can save space and improve clarity. 2. Hand in one copy of your written report. Keep an addi ional copy for yourself. Graded copy t will be returned. DO NOT USE REPORT BINDERS OR COVER SHEETS. 3. Suggested format: Course Number and Section Class Time Group Number Your Names Date Name of Case (centered) A. Introduction B. Analysis of Environment, Company, Current Strategy, Competitors C. Identification and Justification of Key Strategic Issue that comes from the Analysis


D. Identification and Evaluation of Alternatives E. Selection of Recommendation and Justification F. Exhibits and References. (Exhibits should be labeled sequentially and in the order they are discussed in the text. If you do NOT talk about an exhibit in the text, it probably isn’t doing anything except taking up space.)

STRONG POINTS IN REPORTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Evidence of thorough case study. Judgments supported by evidence from the case or outside sources. Organization and clarity of the presentation (whether orally or in writing). Identification of the key drivers and/or forces in the external environment and how that may affect the future of the firm or the industry. 5. Identification and evaluation of pertinent company’s capabilities, weaknesses, resources, and sources of competitive advantage in the context of the industry and competitive environment. 6. Clear articulation of the strategic issue you are addressing. 7. Use of professional tools and concepts from the text and lectures. (This includes tools used in other courses such as ratio analysis or market share analysis.) – a sample of ratios are available at 8. Alternatives that are realistic and fall from the analysis. 9. Examination of tradeoffs associated with alternatives. 10. Justification for the recommendation that is consistent with company strategy and resources. 11. Use of a “company-wide” view…not just a functional, short-term perspective.

WEAKNESSES IN REPORTS 1. Not well organized or presented clearly. 2. Failure to proofread ANY written material (in written or oral presentation) and correct obvious misspellings, errors, and sloppy grammar. 3. Mere repetition of case facts without analysis. (I.e. Rehash of the facts of the case is not value added.) 4. Failure to identify outside sources. 5. Exhibits that are extraneous to the analysis. The reader or viewer is left to draw his/her own conclusions and wonder why the exhibit is there. 6. Failure to ANALYZE. Don’t just give facts, do ANALYSIS! 7. Lack of consideration of non-economic issues (i.e. culture, values, ethics, etc.) if it is relevant. 8. Failure to support opinions by evidence or logical explanation. 9. Failure to perceive or present an “organizational” or “strategic” viewpoint.


10. Lack of adequate outside research. 11. For oral presentations: Lack of coordination, rehearsal, and preparation. 12. For oral presentations: Dominance by one individual. 13. For oral presentations: Speaking too quietly and/or too quickly.