Unit 3 GB520 Case Analysis 1 | P a g e Case Study Analysis Read the Harvard Business Case Study for Unit 3: Eccles, R. G. & Lane, D. D. (May, 2008). Heidrick & struggles international, inc., (Case Study). Retrieved from Harvard Business Online website. Visit Harvard Business Online to acquire the electronic version of the article. Prepare a case analysis on the topic of Interviewing, Selection and Hiring. The case analysis should be a minimum of 3-pages long, double-spaced. Check for correct spelling, grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage. Citations should use APA style. Case Analysis Question: Why is Strategic Recruitment critical to the success of an organization in meeting its goals and mission? Your analysis of this case and your written submission should reflect an understanding of the critical issues of the case; integrate the material covered in the text and present concise and well-reasoned justifications for the stance that you take. Case Analysis Criteria Your case analysis should consist of:  A brief analysis of the situation and pending decision problem, as presented in the case, and as relevant to your answer. This should be exceptionally brief and you should assume the person reading the Assignment is familiar with the details of the case.  Identification of the major issues surrounding the organization or individuals involved with the organization.  Identification of alternate courses of action to address the issues identified.  The decision or recommendation for action, with the appropriate supporting arguments.  The Case Question is designed to guide the direction of your analysis in the case. Your analysis should address and ultimately answer the question. You may discuss your Case Analysis Assignment with the class and Team Members (and you are encouraged to on the Discussion Board or in the Team Area), but you must submit your own original work. Case Analysis Tips Avoid common errors in case analyses, such as: 1. Focusing too heavily on minor issues. 2 | P a g e 2. Lamenting because of insufficient data in the case and ignoring creative alternatives. 3. Rehashing of case data — you should assume the reader knows the case. 4. Not appropriately evaluating the quality of the case's data. 5. Obscuring the quantitative analysis, making it difficult to understand. Typical “minus (-)” grades result from submissions that… • are late. • are not well integrated and lack clarity. • do not address timing issues. • do not recognize the cost implications or are not practical. • get carried away with personal biases and are not pertinent to the key issues. • are not thoroughly proofread and corrected. Case Analysis Submission Before you submit your Case Analysis, you should save your work on your computer in a location that you will remember. Save the document using the n ...

1. Unit 3
GB520 Case Analysis
1 | P a g e
Case Study Analysis
Read the Harvard Business Case Study for Unit 3:
Eccles, R. G. & Lane, D. D. (May, 2008). Heidrick & struggles
international, inc., (Case Study).
Retrieved from Harvard Business Online website.
Visit Harvard Business Online to acquire the electronic version
of the article.
Prepare a case analysis on the topic of Interviewing, Selection
and Hiring.
The case analysis should be a minimum of 3-pages long,
double-spaced. Check for correct spelling,
grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and usage. Citations should
use APA style.
Case Analysis Question: Why is Strategic Recruitment critical
to the success of an organization in
meeting its goals and mission?
Your analysis of this case and your written submission should

2. reflect an understanding of the critical
issues of the case; integrate the material covered in the text and
present concise and well-reasoned
justifications for the stance that you take.
Case Analysis Criteria
Your case analysis should consist of:
problem, as presented in the case, and
as relevant to your answer. This should be exceptionally brief
and you should assume the
person reading the Assignment is familiar with the details of the
case.
organization or individuals involved with the
organization.
on to address the
issues identified.
appropriate supporting arguments.
analysis in the case. Your
analysis should address and ultimately answer the question.
You may discuss your Case Analysis Assignment with the class
and Team Members (and you are
encouraged to on the Discussion Board or in the Team Area),
but you must submit your own original
work.

3. Case Analysis Tips
Avoid common errors in case analyses, such as:
1. Focusing too heavily on minor issues.
2 | P a g e
2. Lamenting because of insufficient data in the case and
ignoring
creative alternatives.
3. Rehashing of case data — you should assume the reader
knows the case.
4. Not appropriately evaluating the quality of the case's data.
5. Obscuring the quantitative analysis, making it difficult to
understand.
Typical “minus (-)” grades result from submissions that…
• are late.
• are not well integrated and lack clarity.
• do not address timing issues.
• do not recognize the cost implications or are not practical.
• get carried away with personal biases and are not pertinent
to the key issues.
• are not thoroughly proofread and corrected.
Case Analysis Submission
Before you submit your Case Analysis, you should save your

4. work on your computer in a location that
you will remember. Save the document using the naming
convention:
Username_Unit3_CaseAnalysis.doc.
Make sure your document includes:
• Your Name
• Date
• Course Name and Section Number
• Unit Number
• Case Name
• Page Numbers
When you are ready, submit your paper to the Unit 3 Case
Analysis Dropbox.
Consider Case 4.13 involving Tyco International. Develop a
paper that addresses the following:
· How did Tyco’s initial problems establish this connection as a
very real one for the U.S. markets?
· What made Tyco’s stock price fall initially?
· How do you think the spending and the loans were able to go
on for so long?
· What questions could Mr. Kozlowski and Mr. Swartz have
asked themselves to better evaluate their conduct?
· Formulate a list of the lines Mr. Kozlowski crossed in his

5. tenure as CEO.
· Is it difficult for us to see ethical breaches that we ourselves
commit?
Your answers should not simply be your opinion. For each
response, support your thoughts with scholarly research that you
can cite in order to validate your answer.
Support your paper with minimum of three (3) scholarly
resources. In addition to these specified resources, other
appropriate scholarly resources, including older articles, may be
included.
Length: 5-7 pages not including title and reference pages
Your paper should demonstrate thoughtful consideration of the
ideas and concepts presented in the course and provide new
thoughts and insights relating directly to this topic. Your
response should reflect scholarly writing and current APA
standards. Be sure to adhere to Northcentral University's
Academic Integrity Policy.
Upload your assignment using the Upload Assignment button
below.
CASE STUDY
Case Study: Tyco
Tyco Background
Tyco International has operations in over 100 countries and
claims to be the world's largest maker and servicer of electrical
and electronic components; the largest designer and maker of
undersea telecommunications systems; the larger maker of fire
protection systems and electronic security services; the largest

6. maker of specialty valves; and a major player in the disposable
medical products, plastics, and adhesives markets. Since 1986,
Tyco has claimed over 40 major acquisitions as well as many
minor acquisitions.
How the Fraud Happened
According to the Tyco Fraud Information Center, an internal
investigation concluded that there were accounting errors, but
that there was no systematic fraud problem at Tyco. So, what
did happen? Tyco's former CEO Dennis Koslowski, former CFO
Mark Swartz, and former General Counsel Mark Belnick were
accused of giving themselves interest-free or very low interest
loans (sometimes disguised as bonuses) that were never
approved by the Tyco board or repaid. Some of these "loans"
were part of a "Key Employee Loan" program the company
offered. They were also accused of selling their company stock
without telling investors, which is a requirement under SEC
rules. Koslowski, Swartz, and Belnick stole $600 million dollars
from Tyco International through their unapproved bonuses,
loans, and extravagant "company" spending. Rumors of a $6,000
shower curtain, $2,000 trash can, and a $2 million dollar
birthday party for Koslowski's wife in Italy are just a few
examples of the misuse of company funds. As many as 40 Tyco
executives took loans that were later "forgiven" as part of
Tyco's loan-forgiveness program, although it was said that many
did not know they were doing anything wrong. Hush money was
also paid to those the company feared would "rat out"
Kozlowski.
Essentially, they concealed their illegal actions by keeping them
out of the accounting books and away from the eyes of
shareholders and board members.
How it Was Discovered

7. In 1999 the SEC began an investigation after an analyst
reported questionable accounting practices. This investigation
took place from 1999 to 2000 and centered on accounting
practices for the company's many acquisitions, including a
practice known as "spring-loading." In "spring-loading," the
pre-acquisition earnings of an acquired company are
underreported, giving the merged company the appearance of an
earnings boost afterwards. The investigation ended with the
SEC deciding to take no action.
In January 2002, the accuracy of Tyco's bookkeeping and
accounting again came under question after a tip drew attention
to a $20 million payment made to Tyco director Frank Walsh,
Jr. That payment was later explained as a finder's fee for the
Tyco acquisition of CIT. In June 2002, Kozlowski was being
investigated for tax evasion because he failed to pay sales tax
on $13 million in artwork that he had purchased in New York
with company funds. At the same time, Kozlowski resigned
from Tyco "for personal reasons" and was replaced by John
Fort. By September of 2002, all three (Kozlowski, Swartz, and
Belnick) were gone and charges were filed against them for
failure to disclose information on their multimillion dollar loans
to shareholders.
The SEC asked Kozlowski, Swartz, and Belnick to restore the
funds that they took from Tyco in the form of undisclosed loans
and compensations.
Where Are They Now?
Kozlowski and Swartz were found guilty in 2005 of taking
bonuses worth more than $120 million without the approval of
Tyco's directors, abusing an employee loan program, and
misrepresenting the company's financial condition to investors
to boost the stock price, while selling $575 million in stock.
Both are serving 8 1/3-to-25-year prison sentences. Belnick paid

8. a $100,000 civil penalty for his role. Since replacing its Board
Members and several executives, Tyco International has
remained strong.
The difference in the Tyco case and some of the others is that it
is more related to greed than accounting fraud.