MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper
Critical Thinking: Strategic Recommendations (115 points)
Managing the multi-business corporation to meet high performance expectations is problematic. Publicly traded companies are pressured to return favorable quarterly results and as corporations grow larger and more complex, it becomes harder to manage such corporations effectively. General Electric (GE) was once one of the most admired corporations in the world. Today, GE is facing a much-reduced outlook. For this week’s assignment, read the case study found in your textbook (Case 20): Restructuring General Electric.
Remember, a case study is a puzzle to be solved, so before reading and answering the specific case and study questions, develop your proposed solution by following these five steps:
Read the case study to identify the key issues and underlying issues. These issues are the principles and concepts of the course area which apply to the situation described in the case study.
MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper
Record the facts from the case study which are relevant to the principles and concepts of the course area issues. The case may have extraneous information not relevant to the current course area. Your ability to differentiate between relevant and irrelevant information is an important aspect of case analysis, as it will inform the focus of your answers.
Describe in some detail the actions that would address or correct the situation.
Consider how you would support your solution with examples from experience or current real-life examples or cases from textbooks.
Complete this initial analysis and then read the discussion questions. Typically, you will already have the answers to the questions but with a broader consideration. At this point, you can add the details and/or analytical tools required to solve the case.
Case Study Questions:
Why was GE considered to be such an exemplary organization? (Discuss GE’s management systems and performance.)
Discuss the nature of GE’s corporate portfolio under Welch and Imelt. Did the nature of GE’s portfolio under Welch and Imelt provide superior results?
If GE’s portfolio mix gave superior results, why was it necessary to restructure the portfolio?
Why is GE’s performance no longer superior? What are the reasons for the collapse in GE’s financial performance during 2016-2018?
What should be done to return GE to higher levels of performance? Does GE need to refocus? Which businesses or products would you recommend abandoning or divesting, if any? Does GE need to make additional acquisitions to supplement existing GE assets?
MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper
|
MGT 510 Strategy Planning Critical Thinking Paper