The document discusses cultural challenges Disney faced when expanding into France with its Euro Disneyland project. It provides context on the Euro Disneyland case study and asks the reader to use Hofstede's cultural dimensions and the business problem solving model to analyze decisions Disney could have made differently. Specifically, it asks the reader to identify problems Disney faced, cultural challenges in expanding to France, potential solutions, the best alternative, and lessons learned about dealing with cultural issues internationally. The document provides several pages of context on cultural dimensions and values to inform the reader's analysis.
dusjagr & nano talk on open tools for agriculture research and learning
In the Euro Disneyland case study (p. 257 in the textbook), many o
1. In the Euro Disneyland case study (p. 257 in the textbook),
many of the issues Disney had from the start related to cultural
challenges expanding into France. Using Hofstede’s four
cultural dimensions as a point of reference, how would you
make the following decisions using the Business Problem
Solving Model in the course content?
1. Discover-Identify the problem: What were two of the three
main issues described in the case that were problematic?
2. Investigate-Gather information to define the problem: What
were the cultural challenges posed by Disney’s expansion into
France?
3. Brainstorm-Produce Alternatives: In your opinion, how could
Disney have resolved these issues?
4. Implement-Put the best solution into effect: Of your
alternatives, which one do you think would work out best?
Why?
5. Review-Assess the effects of the solution: Based on Disney’s
experience, what are the lessons the company should have
learned about how to deal with cultural issues when expanding?
Describe each.
Your well-written paper should meet the following
requirements:
· Be 5-6 pages in length, which does not include the title page,
abstract, or required reference page, which is never a part of the
content minimum requirements.
· Use Saudi Electronic University academic writing standards
and APA (7th ed) style guidelines.
· Support your submission with course material concepts,
principles, and theories from the textbook and at least two
scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles.
· Review the Critical Thinking Grading RubricCritical Thinking
Grading Rubric - Alternative Formats to see how you will be
graded for this assignment.
22. as specified in the assignment.
Meets Expectation - Includes most of the required components,
as specified in the assignment.
Below Expectation - Includes some of the required components,
as specified in the assignment.
Limited Evidence - Includes few of the required components, as
specified in the assignment.
21-25 Points
16-20 Points
11-15 Points
6-10 Points
Content
Exceeds Expectation - Demonstrates substantial and extensive
knowledge of the materials, with no errors or major omissions.
Meets Expectation - Demonstrates adequate knowledge of the
materials; may include some minor errors or omissions.
Below Expectation - Demonstrates fair knowledge of the
materials and/or includes some major errors or omissions.
Limited Evidence - Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the
materials and/or includes many major errors or omissions.
25-30 Points
19-24 Points
13-18 Points
7-12 Points
Analysis
Exceeds Expectation - Provides strong thought, insight, and
analysis of the Business Problem Solving model, concepts and
applications.
Meets Expectation - Provides adequate thought, insight, and
analysis of the Business Problem Solving model, concepts and
applications.
Below Expectation - Provides poor thought, insight, and
analysis of the Business Problem Solving model, concepts and
applications.
23. Limited Evidence - Provides little or no thought, insight, and
analysis of the Business Problem Solving model, concepts and
applications.
13-15 Points
10-12 Points
7-9 Points
4-6 Points
Sources
Exceeds Expectation - Sources go above and beyond required
criteria, and are well chosen to provide effective substance and
perspectives on the issue under examination.
Meets Expectation - Sources meet required criteria and are
adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the
issue under examination.
Below Expectation - Sources meet required criteria, but are
poorly chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the
issue under examination.
Limited Evidence - Source selection and integration of
knowledge from the course is clearly deficient.
Mechanics and Writing
5 Points
4 Points
3 Points
1-2 Points
Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization,
grammar and style.
Exceeds Expectation - Project is clearly organized, well written,
and in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Strong
sentence and paragraph structure; contains no errors in
grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA citations and references.
Meets Expectation - Project is fairly well organized and written,
and is in proper format as outlined in the assignment.
Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; may include
24. a few minor errors in grammar, spelling, APA style, or APA
citations and references.
Below Expectation - Project is poorly organized and written,
and may not follow proper format as outlined in the assignment.
Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development,
and/or includes numerous or major errors in grammar, spelling,
APA style, or APA citations and references.
Limited Evidence - Project is not organized or well written, and
is not in proper format as outlined in the assignment. Poor
quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar, spelling, APA
style, and APA citations and references.
Total points possible = 100