What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx

What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook for?
You will develop a Strategy Playbook for a publicly traded
company (with more than 100 employees).
What will the Playbook Focus On?
You will write the playbook throughout the course, from the
perspective of a consultant. The “plays” you will develop will
be responses, based on analysis, to the core questions that any
solid business strategy must ask and answer :
· What is your winning aspiration? (What to you stand for and
believe deeply in?)
· Where will you play? (Who will you serve, and who will
either help or compete against you?)
· How will you win?(How will you create unique value?)
· Which capabilities must be in place (to win)? (What skills,
competencies and capabilities do you need now, and in the
future?)
· What management systems are required? (Do you have a
supporting culture, structure, systems, and appropriate measures
to implement a strategy?)
The final compilation of your “Strategy Playbook for
Exceptional Results” will be tangible evidence that you can put
your MBA education to use and it will provide you a template
for how you can help your current organization, or one you hope
to work with in the future, achieve exceptional results.
How will I Develop the Playbook?
Your playbook will be written and developed throughout the
entire course—not all in one week! The process for building
your playbook is the same each week, although the content of
analysis will vary week-to-week. Each week you will examine
and analyze a given case study, and you will then identify key
insights from your analysis, and apply lessons from the case
study, the week’s required readings, and readings you identify
from the MBA Program Capstone Bibliography, into your
Playbook entry for the week.

The table below provides an overview of what you will be
analyzing each week:
Strategy Playbook Elements
Week
Playbook Analysis
Completed?
One
Evaluate candidate companies to study and select a publicly-
traded company
Two
Evaluate the stated mission, vision, and values, within the
context-level of analysis, of your chosen company.
Three
Apply insights from internal strategy analysis tools and
concepts towards the development of relevant portions of your
strategy playbook.
Four
Apply key insights from P.E.S.T. and Stakeholder strategy
analysis tools and concepts towards the development of relevant
portions of your strategy playbook.
Five
Apply key insights from competitive strategy analysis tools and
concepts towards the development of relevant portions of your
strategy playbook.

Six
Apply key insights from Key Success Factor strategy
analysis tools and concepts towards the development of relevant
portions of your strategy playbook.
Seven
Explicitly identify, provide a name for, explain the basics of,
and evaluate, a preliminary company-wide strategy that you
recommend for your company.
Eight
Synthesize all prior entries into a single document, so that it
aligns with your identified strategy.
Write an executive summary that explains your proposed
strategy and how the playbook can help you analyze it further.
Develop a Strategy Playbook Diagram or table that summaries
your playbook elements.
What Will be in the Final Draft of the Playbook?
In week eight you will put together all of the week-by-week
analysis elements into a single appendix. Then you will extract
out the core – most important and interesting elements and
recommendations from those analyses. From that core, you will
write an Executive Summary and develop a Strategy Playbook
diagram. These will be the two primary components of the
Playbook, followed by the analysis appendix and all your
references.
So, the Playbook will consist of:
· A cover page. This should include a title for your strategy
(which becomes the title of your playbook), your name, the
date, and the course number and section and name of the faculty
member.
· A written Executive Summary that Provides Key Highlights of
your Playbook.

· A Strategy Map or other Playbook Summary Diagram.
· An Analysis Appendix: This will be comprised of your
synthesized, integrated work from your previous Playbook
entries.
What Purpose Does the Executive Summary for the Playbook
Serve?
The Executive Summary for your Playbook is where you, in a
single page (of single-spaced writing), explain to your audience
(senior executives at the company you are studying) what you
have found in your analysis that is most interesting, and what it
means in terms of what the future goals, strategies and
initiatives for the company should be. This is very difficult
writing, and it should relate directly to both your appendix
information, and your Strategy Playbook Diagram or Table.
Do I just Re-use or Cut/Paste my Prior Playbook Entries into
the Final Playbook?
No, the appendix should be an integrated, improved version of
all the entries you have made during the course. Since strategic
thinking is an iterative (it repeats itself), non-linear way of
thinking (what you do at the end might mean you re-evaluate
and revise, analyses you made earlier), your playbook entries in
the appendix should all align with one another and reflect all
improvements you have made based on peer and faculty
feedback. It would not be good to just do simple cut and paste
from your original drafts, as then the appendix would not flow
as if it was all written as one piece of analysis—which it should
be.
What will the Format of the Final Playbook be?
GENERAL FORMAT: all sections should be single spaced.
Start with a cover page and then start page numbering with the
Executive Summary. Continue page numbering through the very
end, including the appendix. References should be included
after the appendix and follow APA 6th format.
Note: Your paper should have a cover page with a title for the
recommended strategy that describes the strategy, like "Maru-

C" ("Encircle Caterpillar"), which was a large scale strategy
that Komatsu strove for in the 1980's.
· Lafley, A.G., Martin, R., Riel, J. (2013). A Playbook for
Strategy: The five essential questions at the heart of any
winning strategy. Rotman Magazine, Winter, pp. 5-9.
Rubric Detail
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's layout.
Content
Name: WMBA_6990_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Grid ViewList View
Exemplary
Very Good
Proficient
Opportunity for Improvement
Unacceptable
Element 1: Strategy Title and Cover Page
Points:
3 (3%)

Student provides a logical Strategy Title that communicates
the project effectively on a cover page to his/her Strategy
Playbook.
Feedback:
Points:
2.79 (2.79%)

Student provides a logical Strategy Title that mostly
communicates the project effectively on a cover page to his/her
Strategy Playbook.
Feedback:
Points:
2.55 (2.55%)
Student provides a logical Strategy Title that somewhat
Strategy Playbook.

Feedback:
Points:
2.25 (2.25%)
Student provides a Strategy Title that vaguely communicates
the project on a cover page to his/her Strategy Playbook.
Feedback:

Points:
0 (0%)
Not submitted or little to no evidence of addressing the
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1a: Executive Summary: Summary of Key Highlights
and Most Critical Findings

Points:
5 (5%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed evaluation
summarizing the most important findings based on his/her
evaluation of the critical issues in the playbook, defends
conclusions based on a rationale supported by evidence and
experience, and evaluates issues facing the company to develop
his/her final set of key highlights and most critical findings
using objective criteria, including justifying all assumptions.
Feedback:

Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
Student provides an evaluation summarizing the most
important findings based on his/her evaluation of the critical
issues in the playbook, defends conclusions based on a rationale
supported by evidence and experience, and evaluates issues
facing the company to develop his/her final set of key
highlights and most critical findings using objective criteria,
including justifying all assumptions. One or two details are
missing.
Feedback:
Points:

4.25 (4.25%)
Student provides an evaluation of the key highlights and
important findings based on the critical issues he/she presented
in his/her playbook supported with some rationale as to why
he/she has identified the final set of key highlights and critical
findings, and builds a compelling argument intended to
influence decisions that will be made by the CEO, senior
leadership, or business owner.
Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)

Student provides a cursory explanation identifying a few of the
more important findings, and supports his/her selections with
little or no rationale.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1b: Executive Summary: Recommendations to the
CEO, Senior Leadership, or Business Owner
Points:
5 (5%)

Student presents a thorough and detailed explanation of well-
reasoned, preliminary recommendations to the CEO/business
owner that addresses the most critical issues potentially facing
the organization’s future, makes specific connections between
the recommendations and the issues they address, and states
assumptions and limitations of the recommendations.
Feedback:
Points:
4.65 (4.65%)

assumptions and limitations of the recommendations. Response
is comprehensive but missing one or two details.
Feedback:
Points:
4.25 (4.25%)
Student presents an explanation of preliminary
recommendations to the CEO/business owner that addresses the
issues facing the organization and makes a compelling case as
to why the recommendations will be effective in addressing the
most critical issues.

Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)
Student presents a description of few preliminary
recommendations meant to help the organization and provides
vague or missing details on why the recommendations were
suggested or to which issues they pertain.
Feedback:

Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.
Feedback:

Element 1c: Executive Summary: Recommendations -
Priorities and Road Map
Points:
5 (5%)
Student presents an explicit and thorough explanation of
his/her prioritized order of recommendations, including a road
map that shows what additional analyses and actions would
need to be completed, why, and by whom, in order to develop a
more full and robust set of actionable recommendations.
Feedback:

Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
Student presents an explicit and thorough explanation of
his/her prioritized order of recommendations, including a road
map that shows what additional analyses and actions would
need to be completed, why, and by whom, in order to develop a
more full and robust set of actionable recommendations.
Response is comprehensive but missing one or two details.
Feedback:

Points:
4.25 (4.25%)
Student presents an explanation with some details of his/her
prioritized order of recommendations, including a road map that
shows what additional items would need to be completed to
develop a more full and robust set of actionable
recommendations.
Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)

Student presents a cursory explanation with vague or missing
details of his/her prioritized order of recommendations,
including a road map that shows a few additional items to
develop some actionable recommendations.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1d: - Risks and Mitigation Strategies
Points:
5 (5%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed explanation of the

major risks of both taking action on his/her final set of
recommendations, what could happen if the organization fails to
address the issues it faces or follow the recommendations, ideas
for mitigating the identified risks, a convincing case as to why
such approaches would be effective, and justifies assumptions.
Feedback:
Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
Student provides an explanation of the major risks of both
taking action on his/her final set of recommendations, what
could happen if the organization fails to address the issues it
faces or follow the recommendations, ideas for mitigating the

identified risks, a convincing case as to why such approaches
would be effective, and justifies assumptions. One or two
details are missing.
Feedback:
Points:
4.25 (4.25%)
Student provides an explanation identifying the risks of both
taking action on his/her final set of recommendations as well as
what could happen if the organization fails to address the issues
it faces or follow the recommendations, and explains ideas for
mitigating the identified risks.

Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)
Student provides a cursory description of a few risks to the
organization.
Feedback:

Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 2a: Format of Executive Summary - Beginning

Points:
5 (5%)
Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear and
compelling statement of its purpose and presents a succinct
cohesive summary that focuses on the main outcomes of his/her
strategy review and Strategy Playbook development. Student
makes it clear why he/she chose to highlight the content and
topics and provides supporting details and examples.
Feedback:

Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear statement
of its purpose and presents a succinct cohesive summary that
focuses on the main outcomes of his/her strategy review and
Strategy Playbook development. Student addresses why he/she
chose to highlight the content and topics and provides some
supporting detail.
Feedback:
Points:
4.25 (4.25%)

Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear statement
of its purpose and presents a summary that focuses on the main
outcomes from his/her strategy review and Strategy Playbook
development.
Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)

Student summarizes a few main points from his/her strategy
review and playbook, but does not create an Executive Summary
aligned with the expectations for this type of business
communication document.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 2b: Format of Executive Summary - Ending
Points:
5 (5%)
The Executive Summary is clear, organized, and concise (less
than 4 paragraphs). Student writes in nontechnical language and
defines any language that may not be familiar to his/her
audience. A logical flow is maintained throughout the Executive
Summary, and a brief conclusion at the end of the summary that

enables the reader to synthesize the information provided is
presented.
Feedback:
Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
The Executive Summary is organized and concise (less than 4
paragraphs). Student writes in nontechnical language and
enables the reader to understand the information provided is
presented.

Feedback:
Points:
4.25 (4.25%)
The Executive Summary is concise (less than 4 paragraphs).
Student mostly writes in nontechnical language and defines any
language that may not be familiar to his/her audience. A logical
flow is maintained throughout the Executive Summary,
including a brief conclusion at the end of the summary.

Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)
The Executive Summary includes a brief conclusion at the end
of the summary. Work is vague and lacks detail.
Feedback:

Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 3: Reference List

Points:
7 (7%)
An annotated bibliography of the references that follows APA
style guidelines is included.
Feedback:
Points:
6.51 (6.51%)

style guidelines is included. Annotated bibliography is
comprehensive with one or two minor errors.
Feedback:
Points:
5.95 (5.95%)
An annotated bibliography of the references that partially

follows APA style guidelines is included.
Feedback:
Points:
5.25 (5.25%)
A few references are provided.
Feedback:

Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 4: Strategy Map or other Playbook Summary Diagram

Points:
15 (15%)
Student provides a thorough and detailed analysis including an
easy to read strategy map or other playbook summary diagram
depicting the information most important to the organization in
a logical, straightforward graphical manner and strategy map
follows a balanced scorecard or cascade logic identifying issues
ranging from mission and vision to specific operational items.
Feedback:

Points:
13.95 (13.95%)
One or two details are missing.
Feedback:
Points:

12.75 (12.75%)
Student provides a strategy map or other playbook summary
diagram.
Feedback:
Points:
11.25 (11.25%)

Student provides a cursory strategy map or other playbook
summary diagram that appears to be a rough draft or is
incomplete.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.

Feedback:
Element 5: Appendices
Points:
15 (15%)
Student provides an edited, synthesized, integrated
compilation of all previous playbook entries from each week's
Capstone Forum with the appendix providing transitional
language and analysis to create logic and flow across the
separate entries so that it appears to be a single narrative.

Feedback:
Points:
13.95 (13.95%)
Student provides an edited, synthesized, integrated
compilation of all previous playbook entries from each week's
Capstone Forum with the appendix providing transitional
language and analysis to create logic and flow across the
separate entries so that it appears to be a single narrative.
Response is comprehensive but missing one or two details.

Feedback:
Points:
12.75 (12.75%)
Student provides a synthesized, integrated compilation of all
previous playbook entries from each week's Capstone Forum.
Feedback:

Points:
11.25 (11.25%)
Student provides cursory, unedited Capstone Forum entries
with little or no attempt to synthesize or integrate them into a
cohesive set.
Feedback:
Points:

0 (0%)
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 6: Critical Thinking, Analysis, and Synthesis
Points:
10 (10%)

Student exhibits evidence of thoughtful critical analysis and
thinking; careful examination is made of assumptions and
possible biases, with detailed supporting rationale. Writing
synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes
patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws
logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New
questions may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and
input.
Feedback:
Points:
9.3 (9.3%)

thinking; examination is made of assumptions and possible
biases, with supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the
classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or
connections between theory and practice; and draws logical
conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions
may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.
Feedback:
Points:
8.5 (8.5%)

Student exhibits some evidence of thoughtful critical analysis
and thinking; some examination is made of assumptions and
possible biases, with rationale. Writing somewhat synthesizes
the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or
connections between theory and practice; or draws logical
conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments.
Feedback:
Points:
7.5 (7.5%)

Student exhibits little or no evidence of thoughtful critical
analysis and thinking; minimal examination is made of
assumptions and possible biases, with rationale. Writing
minimally synthesizes the classroom experiences and content;
analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice;
or draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)
criterion.

Feedback:
Element 7: Written Communications
Points:
5 (5%)
Writing is clear, logical, well-organized and appropriate. Work
is free from spelling and grammar/syntax errors. Tone is
professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are
no errors.

Feedback:
Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
Writing is mostly clear, logical, and organized. Few, if any
spelling and grammar/syntax issues are noted. Overall, a few
sections need additional editing, but generally, work appears
proofread. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism,
racism). There are one or two minor errors.
Feedback:

Points:
4.25 (4.25%)
The main points are clear and organized. Some spelling,
grammar/syntax issues are noted. Tone is professional and free
from bias (i.e., sexism, racism).
Feedback:

Points:
3.75 (3.75%)
There are key sections that lack organization or logical flow.
Many spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Work requires
additional proofreading.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 8: Relevance
Points:
10 (10%)

Student provides a thorough and detailed explanation
effectively and directly integrating discussion/assignment
content with relevant and compelling personal experiences,
additional research, or current events from credible news
sources, specifically adding new and/or different insights or
perspectives on the subject area(s) being discussed or treated in
the assignment.
Feedback:
Points:
9.3 (9.3%)

Student offers personal experiences, additional research, or
current events from credible news sources, discussing their
relevance, but does not specifically add new or different
insights or perspectives on the subject areas(s) being discussed
or treated in the assignment.
Feedback:
Points:
8.5 (8.5%)
Student offers some examples of how the content of the
discussion/application applies to real-world scenarios with

general discussion of why those examples are relevant.
Feedback:
Points:
7.5 (7.5%)
Student offers brief or cursory descriptions of personal
experiences, additional research, or current events from credible
news sources.
Feedback:

Element 9: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of
Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations)
Points:
5 (5%)
Student demonstrates full adherence to scholarly or credible
reference requirements and adheres to APA style with respect to
source attribution and references. There are no APA errors.
Feedback:

Points:
4.65 (4.65%)
source attribution and references. There are one or two minor
errors in APA style or format.
Feedback:
Points:
4.25 (4.25%)

Student addresses guidelines for scholarly or credible
references and/or APA style with respect to source attribution
and references. Some errors in APA format and style are
evident.
Feedback:
Points:
3.75 (3.75%)

Student demonstrates inconsistent adherence to scholarly
reference requirements and/or inconsistent adherence to APA
style with respect to source attribution and references.
Significant and/or numerous errors in APA format and style are
evident.
Feedback:
Points:
0 (0%)

criterion.
Feedback:
Show Descriptions
Show Feedback
Element 1: Strategy Title and Cover Page--
Levels of Achievement:
Exemplary
3 (3%) points
Student provides a logical Strategy Title that communicates the

project effectively on a cover page to his/her Strategy Playbook.
Very Good
2.79 (2.79%) points
Student provides a logical Strategy Title that mostly
Strategy Playbook.
Proficient
2.55 (2.55%) points
Student provides a logical Strategy Title that somewhat
Strategy Playbook.
2.25 (2.25%) points
Student provides a Strategy Title that vaguely communicates the
project on a cover page to his/her Strategy Playbook.

Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1a: Executive Summary: Summary of Key Highlights
and Most Critical Findings--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points

Student provides a thorough and detailed evaluation
summarizing the most important findings based on his/her
evaluation of the critical issues in the playbook, defends
conclusions based on a rationale supported by evidence and
experience, and evaluates issues facing the company to develop
his/her final set of key highlights and most critical findings
using objective criteria, including justifying all assumptions.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
Student provides an evaluation summarizing the most important
findings based on his/her evaluation of the critical issues in the
playbook, defends conclusions based on a rationale supported
by evidence and experience, and evaluates issues facing the
company to develop his/her final set of key highlights and most
critical findings using objective criteria, including justifying all
assumptions. One or two details are missing.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student provides an evaluation of the key highlights and
important findings based on the critical issues he/she presented
in his/her playbook supported with some rationale as to why
he/she has identified the final set of key highlights and critical

findings, and builds a compelling argument intended to
influence decisions that will be made by the CEO, senior
leadership, or business owner.
3.75 (3.75%) points
Student provides a cursory explanation identifying a few of the
more important findings, and supports his/her selections with
little or no rationale.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:

Element 1b: Executive Summary: Recommendations to the
CEO, Senior Leadership, or Business Owner--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points
assumptions and limitations of the recommendations.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
assumptions and limitations of the recommendations. Response

is comprehensive but missing one or two details.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student presents an explanation of preliminary
recommendations to the CEO/business owner that addresses the
issues facing the organization and makes a compelling case as
to why the recommendations will be effective in addressing the
most critical issues.
3.75 (3.75%) points
Student presents a description of few preliminary
recommendations meant to help the organization and provides
vague or missing details on why the recommendations were
suggested or to which issues they pertain.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1c: Executive Summary: Recommendations - Priorities
and Road Map--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points
Student presents an explicit and thorough explanation of his/her
shows what additional analyses and actions would need to be
completed, why, and by whom, in order to develop a more full
and robust set of actionable recommendations.

Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
Student presents an explicit and thorough explanation of his/her
shows what additional analyses and actions would need to be
completed, why, and by whom, in order to develop a more full
and robust set of actionable recommendations. Response is
comprehensive but missing one or two details.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student presents an explanation with some details of his/her
shows what additional items would need to be completed to
develop a more full and robust set of actionable
recommendations.
3.75 (3.75%) points
Student presents a cursory explanation with vague or missing

details of his/her prioritized order of recommendations,
including a road map that shows a few additional items to
develop some actionable recommendations.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 1d: - Risks and Mitigation Strategies--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points

Student provides a thorough and detailed explanation of the
major risks of both taking action on his/her final set of
recommendations, what could happen if the organization fails to
address the issues it faces or follow the recommendations, ideas
for mitigating the identified risks, a convincing case as to why
such approaches would be effective, and justifies assumptions.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
Student provides an explanation of the major risks of both
taking action on his/her final set of recommendations, what
could happen if the organization fails to address the issues it
faces or follow the recommendations, ideas for mitigating the
identified risks, a convincing case as to why such approaches
would be effective, and justifies assumptions. One or two
details are missing.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student provides an explanation identifying the risks of both
taking action on his/her final set of recommendations as well as
what could happen if the organization fails to address the issues

it faces or follow the recommendations, and explains ideas for
mitigating the identified risks.
3.75 (3.75%) points
Student provides a cursory description of a few risks to the
organization.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:

Element 2a: Format of Executive Summary - Beginning--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points
Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear and
compelling statement of its purpose and presents a succinct
cohesive summary that focuses on the main outcomes of his/her
strategy review and Strategy Playbook development. Student
makes it clear why he/she chose to highlight the content and
topics and provides supporting details and examples.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear statement of
its purpose and presents a succinct cohesive summary that
focuses on the main outcomes of his/her strategy review and
Strategy Playbook development. Student addresses why he/she
chose to highlight the content and topics and provides some
supporting detail.

Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student begins the Executive Summary with a clear statement of
its purpose and presents a summary that focuses on the main
outcomes from his/her strategy review and Strategy Playbook
development.
3.75 (3.75%) points
Student summarizes a few main points from his/her strategy
review and playbook, but does not create an Executive Summary
aligned with the expectations for this type of business
communication document.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.

Feedback:
Element 2b: Format of Executive Summary - Ending--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points
The Executive Summary is clear, organized, and concise (less
than 4 paragraphs). Student writes in nontechnical language and
enables the reader to synthesize the information provided is
presented.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points

The Executive Summary is organized and concise (less than 4
paragraphs). Student writes in nontechnical language and
enables the reader to understand the information provided is
presented.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
The Executive Summary is concise (less than 4 paragraphs).
Student mostly writes in nontechnical language and defines any
language that may not be familiar to his/her audience. A logical
flow is maintained throughout the Executive Summary,
including a brief conclusion at the end of the summary.
3.75 (3.75%) points
The Executive Summary includes a brief conclusion at the end
of the summary. Work is vague and lacks detail.

Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 3: Reference List--
Exemplary
7 (7%) points
style guidelines is included.

Very Good
6.51 (6.51%) points
style guidelines is included. Annotated bibliography is
comprehensive with one or two minor errors.
Proficient
5.95 (5.95%) points
An annotated bibliography of the references that partially
follows APA style guidelines is included.
5.25 (5.25%) points
A few references are provided.
Unacceptable

0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 4: Strategy Map or other Playbook Summary Diagram--
Exemplary
15 (15%) points

Very Good
13.95 (13.95%) points
One or two details are missing.
Proficient
12.75 (12.75%) points
Student provides a strategy map or other playbook summary
diagram.
11.25 (11.25%) points

Student provides a cursory strategy map or other playbook
summary diagram that appears to be a rough draft or is
incomplete.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 5: Appendices--
Exemplary
15 (15%) points

Student provides an edited, synthesized, integrated compilation
of all previous playbook entries from each week's Capstone
Forum with the appendix providing transitional language and
analysis to create logic and flow across the separate entries so
that it appears to be a single narrative.
Very Good
13.95 (13.95%) points
Student provides an edited, synthesized, integrated compilation
of all previous playbook entries from each week's Capstone
Forum with the appendix providing transitional language and
analysis to create logic and flow across the separate entries so
that it appears to be a single narrative. Response is
comprehensive but missing one or two details.
Proficient
12.75 (12.75%) points
Student provides a synthesized, integrated compilation of all
previous playbook entries from each week's Capstone Forum.

11.25 (11.25%) points
Student provides cursory, unedited Capstone Forum entries with
little or no attempt to synthesize or integrate them into a
cohesive set.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 6: Critical Thinking, Analysis, and Synthesis--

Exemplary
10 (10%) points
thinking; careful examination is made of assumptions and
possible biases, with detailed supporting rationale. Writing
synthesizes the classroom experiences and content; analyzes
patterns or connections between theory and practice; and draws
logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New
questions may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and
input.
Very Good
9.3 (9.3%) points
thinking; examination is made of assumptions and possible
biases, with supporting rationale. Writing synthesizes the
classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or
connections between theory and practice; and draws logical
conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments. New questions
may be presented based on synthesis of ideas and input.

Proficient
8.5 (8.5%) points
Student exhibits some evidence of thoughtful critical analysis
and thinking; some examination is made of assumptions and
possible biases, with rationale. Writing somewhat synthesizes
the classroom experiences and content; analyzes patterns or
connections between theory and practice; or draws logical
conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments.
7.5 (7.5%) points
Student exhibits little or no evidence of thoughtful critical
analysis and thinking; minimal examination is made of
assumptions and possible biases, with rationale. Writing
minimally synthesizes the classroom experiences and content;
analyzes patterns or connections between theory and practice;
or draws logical conclusions based on well-reasoned arguments.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points

criterion.
Feedback:
Element 7: Written Communications--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points
Writing is clear, logical, well-organized and appropriate. Work
is free from spelling and grammar/syntax errors. Tone is
professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism, racism). There are
no errors.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points

Writing is mostly clear, logical, and organized. Few, if any
spelling and grammar/syntax issues are noted. Overall, a few
sections need additional editing, but generally, work appears
proofread. Tone is professional and free from bias (i.e., sexism,
racism). There are one or two minor errors.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
The main points are clear and organized. Some spelling,
grammar/syntax issues are noted. Tone is professional and free
from bias (i.e., sexism, racism).
3.75 (3.75%) points
There are key sections that lack organization or logical flow.
Many spelling, grammar/syntax issues are noted. Work requires
additional proofreading.
Unacceptable

0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 8: Relevance--
Exemplary
10 (10%) points
Student provides a thorough and detailed explanation
effectively and directly integrating discussion/assignment
content with relevant and compelling personal experiences,
additional research, or current events from credible news
sources, specifically adding new and/or different insights or

perspectives on the subject area(s) being discussed or treated in
the assignment.
Very Good
9.3 (9.3%) points
Student offers personal experiences, additional research, or
current events from credible news sources, discussing their
relevance, but does not specifically add new or different
insights or perspectives on the subject areas(s) being discussed
or treated in the assignment.
Proficient
8.5 (8.5%) points
Student offers some examples of how the content of the
discussion/application applies to real-world scenarios with
general discussion of why those examples are relevant.
7.5 (7.5%) points

Student offers brief or cursory descriptions of personal
experiences, additional research, or current events from credible
news sources.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:
Element 9: Formal and Appropriate Documentation of
Evidence, Attribution of Ideas (APA Citations)--
Exemplary
5 (5%) points

source attribution and references. There are no APA errors.
Very Good
4.65 (4.65%) points
source attribution and references. There are one or two minor
errors in APA style or format.
Proficient
4.25 (4.25%) points
Student addresses guidelines for scholarly or credible references
and/or APA style with respect to source attribution and
references. Some errors in APA format and style are evident.

3.75 (3.75%) points
Student demonstrates inconsistent adherence to scholarly
reference requirements and/or inconsistent adherence to APA
style with respect to source attribution and references.
Significant and/or numerous errors in APA format and style are
evident.
Unacceptable
0 (0%) points
criterion.
Feedback:

Name: WMBA_6990_Week8_Assignment_Rubric
Example – Bigger, Better, Faster and Stronger
Student 1
Walden University
WMBA-6990-6, Capstone
Instructor: Dr. Ed Dixon

Table of Contents
Executive Summary
...............................................................................................
..........................1
Summary
...............................................................................................
.....................................1
Recommendations
...............................................................................................
.......................1
Risk and Mitigation Strategies
...............................................................................................
....2
Strategy Map
...............................................................................................
.....................................3
References
...............................................................................................
.........................................4
Appendix
...............................................................................................
...........................................5
Company Selection
...............................................................................................
.....................6
Mission, Vision, and Values
...............................................................................................
.......6
Internal Strategy Analysis Tools
...............................................................................................

.8
P.E.S.T. and Stakeholder Strategy Analysis
............................................................................11
Competitive Strategy Analysis
...............................................................................................
.14
Key Success Factor Strategy Analysis
.....................................................................................16
Company-Wide Strategy
...............................................................................................
...........19
Executive Summary
Summary
Example is service provider to the Health and Human Services
industries of government
entities (Example, 2014). Domestically, the growth of the
industry is very slow. Internationally,
the growth of the industry is increasing. One of the challenges
of working in the industry is the
lack of product differentiation. The services required by the
government are tightly controlled
and, therefore, competitors tend to provide the services in a
very similar manner. The similarity

of the services provided to governments gives a great deal of
leverage to the clients and promotes
competition primarily on price. Through competition on price,
the margins continually decrease
for the competitive field. Example needs to grow the value of
the firm. Achieving an increase in
value requires differentiation of product and service and growth
of the target market. By
focusing on product and service differentiation and growth,
Example can establish a greater
degree of competitive advantage. The implementation of a
bigger, better, faster and stronger
strategy allows Example to work towards achieving these
objectives.
Recommendations
Example needs to establish a strategy for growing the company
and increasing the value
of the services provided through establishing product
differentiation. The growth strategy can be
achieved by focusing on becoming bigger. Growth is
achievable by Example through putting
additional emphasis on the industry available internationally.
Example’ current target market

has a primarily domestic focus. By broadening the international
focus, there will be more clients
that need the services that Example provides. Through
increasing Example’ target market, the
company will have more opportunity to be selective and not feel
compelled to bid on business
that requires lower margins. Domestically, the industry growth
is so slow; and therefore the
competition is primarily judged on costs. The international
Health and Human Services industry
can provide opportunities to Example – allowing them to
become bigger. Analysis of the
international market needs to take place to ensure it is a good fit
for the company. The
international market needs to be in line with the mission and
values of the company.
Additionally, Example should focus strategic efforts on
providing better service. The quality of
the services provided can be increased by increasing the
innovative products developed by the
company. Through standardization of operational functions that
technology helps to drive, the
quality of the services will increase. Example can achieve
product differentiation through being

first-to-market with new and innovative products. In addition
to technology providing product
differentiation, technology can also increase the switching costs
for a client to change to another
competitor. When a client changes from one vendor to another,
the operation’s people and
technology changes for the client. The more the technology is
integrated into the client’s
systems, the more challenging it is to switch to a new
competitor’s system. The Information
Technology team needs to have continual training opportunities
to keep their skills and ideas
fresh to provide innovative solutions to business problems. It is
important to have a well-
rounded team to be able to identify areas of opportunity for
improvement. To provide further
differentiation, Example needs to become faster. Example
needs to become more efficient and
agile. This strategic objective requires leveraging technology to
increase efficiency and
automate functions that are repetitive. Functions that cannot be
automated should be analyzed to

reduce touchpoints and speed the process. Agility can also be
obtained through innovative
software that is flexible, configurable, and scalable to meet the
changing needs to the client base.
If Example can achieve the better and faster objectives, they
should be able to reduce the
number of people each contract requires. People resources are
one of the most expensive costs
in a project. The reduction of people needed for a contract
increases the profit expected.
Finally, Example needs to become stronger. A competitive
advantage for Example is with the
employees. Providing services to government entities requires a
great deal of subject matter
expertise. As Example expands more internationally, it will
become more crucial to be sure and
have expertise on staff that knows the political climate of the
industry for the area. The subject
matter expertise will provide knowledge on how to implement
operations that satisfy the needs
of the client. Example needs to work to achieve high retention
rates to keep and grow expertise
within the company. They also need to focus on recruitment of
the right people for the right

jobs. The employees that provide the services to the
government are a competitive advantage for
Example. They need to be treated as such and have adequate
training and career paths
established to promote retention. The Human Resources and
Management roles need to be
trained on avenues to increase employee satisfaction and
retention. If Example can become
bigger, better, faster and stronger, they will establish
competitive advantages that promote
growth and sustainability.
Risk and Mitigation Strategies
There are some risks to the bigger, better, faster and stronger
strategy. One risk is the
reliance of the industry on politics. The government services
industry heavily relies on political
leaders and the political landscape. When elections occur, the
politics can change quickly,
changing the nature of the business quickly. To mitigate this
risk, the better and stronger
pieces of the strategy come into play. Hiring subject matter
experts will help Example anticipate
and prepare for changes that may be coming. The political

changes should not be looked at as
inconveniences, but be analyzed for ways that new opportunities
can form from them. Agility of
the staff and information technology associated with the
services will allow for Example to pivot
towards new opportunities as they come about. Another risk is
the need to control growth. As
new opportunities are presented, Example needs to choose the
opportunities carefully. The
opportunities need to be sure they are in line with the mission
and values of the company, and
that the company is prepared to take on the growth. The
internal infrastructure of Example will
need to continue to expand as the company grows. A focus on
Human Resources, Information
Technology, and Management in the stronger area of the
strategy helps to mitigate the risk of
rapid growth. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Example
needs to get their values, mission,
and message to employees and clients in alignment. The
alignment will define the opportunities
that are a good fit for the company, and give employees
guidelines and boundaries to use to
make decisions. The company, particularly with ambitious

growth initiatives, needs to create
synergy, and all be working towards the same goals.
Strategy Map
Financial
Market/
Customer
Internal
Busi ness
Learning
Expand Growth
Increase Market
Share
Better Pricing
First to Mark et
Solution

sIncrease
Operational
Performance
Improve R etention
Increase Training Initiatives
Ins pire Innovation
Increase IT S taffDevel op HR Skill s
Hire Subject
Matter Experts
Increase Agility
Devel op IT S kills
Increase Quality
Increase Operational Efficiency
Improve

Profitability
Increase
Customer Bas e
Devel op
Management
Skills
References
Ager, D. L., & Roberto, M. A. (2013). Trader Joe's (Harvard
Business School Case No. 9-714-
419). Retrieved from
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28636590/b5fa59a8
f4a8d6877be2d2ccdefa

9f3e
Callanan, L., Wei-Skillern, J., & Onayemi, P. (2014). James
Houghton and Signature
Theatre (Haas School of Business Case No. B5798). Retrieved
fromhttps://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28636589/4d48
22a1aab5ad1390b3b25
ab1d140d8
Carpenter, Rob. (2014). How to Calculate Customer Retention.
Retrieved from:
http://www.evergage.com/blog/how-calculate-customer-
retention/
Collis, D. J., & Rukstard, M. G. (2008). Can you say what your
strategy is? Harvard Business
Review, 86(4), 82–90. Retrieved from
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644118/a0fa58fcd
a86692847a484b57789

085f
Davenport, T. H., Mule, L. D., & Lucker, J. (2011). Know What
Your Customers Want Before
They Do. Harvard Business Review, 89(12), 84-92.
Goleman, D. (2000). LEADERSHIP THAT GETS RESULTS.
Harvard Business
Review, 78(2), 78-90.
Jacob, D., Bergland, S., & Cox, J. (2010). Velocity: Combining
Lean, Six Sigma, and the
theory of constraints to achieve breakthrough performance. New
York, NY: Free Press.
Jeffrey, S. (2009). Are You Killing Creativity?. Sales & Service
Excellence, 9(5), 5.
Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2004). Blue ocean strategy.
Harvard Business Review, 82(10),

76–84. Retrieved from
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644112/b76fd4d3
8e57dd041f680807fb9
3f2be
Lafley, A. G., Martin, R., & Riel, J. (2013). A playbook for
strategy: The five essential
questions at the heart of any winning strategy. Rotman
Management, 4–9.
Lencioni, P. M. (2002). Make Your Values Mean Something.
Harvard Business Review, 80(7),
113-117.
Levitt, T. (2004). Marketing myopia. Harvard Business Review,
82(7/8), 138–149. Retrieved
fromhttps://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644111/c209
df73cb1b3eba21d137d
e9b1e03de

f4a8d6877be2d2ccdefa9f3e
f4a8d6877be2d2ccdefa9f3e
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28636589/4d4822a1
aab5ad1390b3b25ab1d140d8
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28636589/4d4822a1
aab5ad1390b3b25ab1d140d8
http://www.evergage.com/blog/how-calculate-customer-
retention/
a86692847a484b57789085f
a86692847a484b57789085f
8e57dd041f680807fb93f2be
8e57dd041f680807fb93f2be
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644111/c209df73
cb1b3eba21d137de9b1e03de
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644111/c209df73
cb1b3eba21d137de9b1e03de

Example, Inc. (2014). Example, Inc. Form 10-K. Retrieved
from:
http://investor.Example.com/sites/Example.investorhq.business
wire.com/files/report/fil
e/EXAMPLE_AnnualReport_FY2014.pdf
Example Inc. SWOT Analysis. (2015). EXAMPLE, Inc. SWOT
Analysis, 1-9.
Montgomery, C. A. (2008). Putting leadership back into
strategy. Harvard Business Review,
86(1), 54–60. Retrieved from
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/web/pl/product.seam?c=2033126
6&i=20331397&cs=f68
1723ce94064afdc9f567c211557e3
Pfeffer, J., & Veiga, J. F. (1999). Putting people first for

organizational success. Academy Of
Management Executive, 13(2), 37-48.
doi:10.5465/AME.1999.1899547
Porter, M. E. (1983). Note on the structural analysis of
industries [Industry and Background
note]. Retrieved
fromhttps://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644116/e94b
c0593b2ab35046b839e
8732d70ac
Porter, M. E. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business
Review, 74(6), 61–78. Retrieved
fromhttps://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644110/1c6d
5c20554e3448b476e95
caee1379f
Raynor, M. E., & Ahmed, M. (2013). THREE RULES FOR
MAKING A COMPANY

REALLY GREAT. (cover story). Harvard Business Review,
91(4), 108-117.
Rothaermel, F. T. (2014). Apple (in 2013): How to sustain a
competitive
advantage? (McGraw-Hill Education Case No. 0077645065).
Retrieved from
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28636592/e37ff563
5161c90740b6f0c11c48
2537
Shanks, G., Jagielska, I., & Jayaganesh, M. (2009). A
Framework for Understanding Customer
Relationship Management Systems Benefits. Communications
Of The Association For
Information Systems, 25263-287.
SHRM. (2005). Turnover: How do we calculate monthly

turnover rates for our company?
Retrieved from:
http://www.shrm.org/templatestools/hrqa/pages/turnovercalculat
ions.aspx
Spenner, P., & Freeman, K. (2012). To Keep Your Customers,
Keep It Simple. Harvard Business
Review, 90(5), 108-114.
Wolfe, N. (2011). The living organization: Transforming
business to create extraordinary
results. Irvine, CA: Quantum Leaders Publishing.
http://investor.maximus.com/sites/maximus.investorhq.business
wire.com/files/report/file/MAXIMUS_AnnualReport_FY2014.p
df
http://investor.maximus.com/sites/maximus.investorhq.business

wire.com/files/report/file/MAXIMUS_AnnualReport_FY2014.p
df
6&i=20331397&cs=f681723ce94064afdc9f567c211557e3
6&i=20331397&cs=f681723ce94064afdc9f567c211557e3
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644116/e94bc059
3b2ab35046b839e8732d70ac
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644116/e94bc059
3b2ab35046b839e8732d70ac
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644110/1c6d5c20
554e3448b476e95caee1379f
https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/pl/28623611/28644110/1c6d5c20
554e3448b476e95caee1379f
5161c90740b6f0c11c482537
5161c90740b6f0c11c482537
http://www.shrm.org/templatestools/hrqa/pages/turnovercalculat
ions.aspx
https://class.waldenu.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/USW1/201620
_02/MS_WMBA/WMBA_6990/readings/USW1_WMBA_6990_T
he%20Living%20Organization.pdf

Appendix
Company Selection
Example is a public company that provides government
services. Example is my
company’s largest competitor. I think analyzing how Example
does things will provide some
interesting insights. My organization is a small, privately
owned company. When we go
against them in a Request for Proposal (RFP), it almost feels
like a David and Goliath scenario.

They are a large company with many resources and a high
overhead. My company, in
comparison, has far fewer employees and much lower overhead.
I anticipate finding that the
differences in the two companies go far beyond just the high-
level statistics. Both my company
and Example are very successful in our industry. It will be
interesting to see how different
strategies for different companies play into the successes we
both enjoy.
Example is in the Hoovers Company Listing. Additionally, the
Example website
(http://www.Example.com/) has a great deal of information on
the company. The Business
Source Complete database also has several articles on Example
that I think will prove to be
useful in my analysis. There is a Example SWOT analysis

document that I believe will be
helpful as well.
Mission, Vision, and Values
The mission, vision and values of an organization define what
Lafley, Martin, and Riel,
(2013) refer to an organization’s “winning aspiration”. This is
one of the five pieces of a
strategy for a company.
Strong Foundation to a Soulful Purpose
The mission statement of Example (2014) is, “Helping
Government Serve the People” (p.
4). The direction of the mission statement is to the client and
the end-users of the services
provided by the company. Wolfe (2011) describes a Soulful
Purpose as defining, “ what role

that particular company will play on the stage of business, the
unique contribution it will make to
our community as a whole and the market that company can best
serve” (p. 86). The mission
statement by itself does not provide clarity on the role the
business will play or the specific
market that it works within. The General section of the
Example Annual Report does go a bit
further and explains the problems that the company attempts to
solve and why it is important.
The Example (2014) annual report states one of the problems
the services provided by the
company solves as, “Aging populations that place a greater
strain on health care and welfare
systems” (p. 4). The company helping to resolve these types of
issues gives insight into their
Soulful Purpose. The problems they solve explain why the

company is meaningful to the
markets in which they participate. The mission and values
together do explain their Soulful
Purpose.
http://www.maximus.com/
Strength and Weaknesses of the Mission, Vision, and Value
One of the major weaknesses of the Mission and Vision is that
there seem to be two sets.
The website does not echo the same mission as the annual
report. It is odd they would want the
shareholders to understand what the company does and why, and
not want the potential clients to
have that same information. The website (www.Example.com)
also lists some points about

“Why Example”. These vision statements do not match the ones
in the Annual Report. Neither
set of statements includes the role of the employees or
shareholders. Goleman (2000) states,
“six key factors that influence an organization's working
environment: its flexibility- that
is, how free employees feel to innovate unencumbered by red
tape,- their sense of
responsibility to the organization; the level of standards that
people set; the sense of
accuracy about performance feedback and aptness of rewards;
the clarity people have
about mission and values; and finally, the level of commitment
to a common purpose” (p.
81)

This gap between the website and the annual report create
ambiguity that likely impacts the level
of commitment to the mission and values. The lack of clarity in
the mission and vision
statements is not at all like the Signature Theatre experienced
under the leadership of Houghton
(Callanan, Wei-Skillern, and Onayemi, 2014). Houghton had a
clear, concise and consistent
message that was reiterated to the stakeholders and assisted in
maintaining the vision of the
company (Callanan et al., 2014). The message within the
Example mission and vision are not
consistent. The differences in the website and the annual report
make me question if perhaps
they have changed their mission statement since the Annual
Report was released. Another

explanation is that the Annual Report is written with the
audience of shareholders in mind (with
one mission statement and one set of vision), and the website is
written to an audience of
potential clients and end-users.
A strength of the mission and vision statements is that if the
sets from the website and the
Annual Report are all taken together, they do explain the
purpose of the company from the
perspective of the shareholder, the client and the end-user. This
covers the major stakeholders in
the company except the employees. The groups that are
addressed know why the company is
important, and the role the company (and the stakeholder) plays
in their market and the
community. What the mission and vision statement together
provide is the purpose of the

company, whom they serve, and why it is important to the
market.
Revisions to the Mission and Vision Statements
To improve the mission and vision statement, Example should
revise them to have a
single set throughout all of the company literature. Lencioni
(2002) states, “a vision that isn’t
shared is an unrealized dream; a strategy without organizational
commitment is a delusion” (p.
5). The ambiguity between the two sets can lead to questions as
to what the true mission and
values are and devalue them. Consideration of the role the
employees play in the company
would also add value to the mission statement. The Example
(2014) Annual Report lists the
following as a risk: “We may be unable to attract and retain

sufficient qualified personnel to
sustain our business” (p. 99.1). If attracting good employees
are a risk to the company; the
employees can also be a competitive advantage and an
important stakeholder to the company.
Another addition to consider is to include the specific markets
that the company works within.
The Annual Report references that the company divested other
lines of business to focus on the
two markets of Health and Human Services (Example, 2014).
These two markets are where their
specialty is and where the competitive advantage lies with their
experience. Wolfe (2011) states,
“The idea was to have a well-defined Mission/Vision/Value to

deeply engage all employees, to
energize and motivate them and to have a force that draws them
into the future like a magnet” (p.
120). Changes to the mission and value statements to be more
inclusive of all stakeholders will
need to be made to reach that level of engagement and
motivation with the entire set of
stakeholders.
Internal Strategy Analysis Tools
An internal strategy analysis defines for a company what
capabilities they must have in
place to compete and win in their field. This is looked at as the
company’s core capabilities.
The analysis of the internal strategy shows where Example
needs to improve their capabilities to
win.

Recommendation: Monitor Retention Rates
Example provides services instead of selling products. The
services that are provided by
Example are “labor intensive” (Example, 2014). Example
(2014) states that one of their
competitive advantages is subject matter expertise in their field.
Like the Trader Joe’s case
study, retention of employees is very important to the company.
Example (2014) states one of
their risks as not being able to retain the personnel they need to
run their business. In a service
provider business, your employees are a key to the success of
the organization. Pfeffer and
Veiga (1999) state, “Companies which place workers at the core
of their strategies produce
higher long-term returns to shareholders than their industry

peers” (p. 37). Strategically,
maximizing employee retention provides increased long-term
results and also reduces costs on
hiring and the ramp-up for new employees. Employee retention
helps to keep the organization
viable and healthy.
There are three quantitative metrics and one qualitative metric
that are useful in analyzing
the retention and turnover of the company. The first
quantitative metric is the turnover rate. The
turnover rate is the number of separations divided by the
number of employees within the same
period (SHRM, 2005). However, the number of separations
should be considered carefully. If
someone leaves your company, it could be because of
dissatisfaction, but it could also be for

reasons beyond the company’s control such as retirement.
Another quantitative metric that can
be used is the retention rate. This rate is the percentage of
employees who were employed at the
beginning of a period and remain with the company at the end
of the period (Carpenter, 2014).
Ideally, this number would be a high percentage. The retention
calculation describes what the
“churn” is on employees. A third quantitative metric that can
be used is the average tenure of
employees. The average tenure is the sum of the months
worked by all current employees,
divided by the number of employees. Ideally, this number
would also be high. In addition to
these quantitative measures, a qualitative measure of employee
retention is exit interviews. Exit
interviews will give a company insight into why the average

tenure may be low and may point to
a specific issue such as compensation, training, and
advancement. Identifying trends allows for a
business to work towards rectifying the situation. However,
this information is a challenge to
get real answers on. Employees may be truthful, and they may
not. Monitoring the set of
statistics discussed will alert the company to potential employee
issues that have the possibility
of being a critical risk to the company. Davenport, Mule, and
Lucker (2011) state, “Combining
human judgment with predictive models can be more effective
than simply following a model’s
recommendation” (p. 91). Using both qualitative and

quantitative data will yield more effective
results. Trends upwards or downwards in the metrics can give
management the opportunity to
make the appropriate changes. These changes are necessary to
maintain the health of the
company.
Recommendation: Improving Cost and Time Estimates for
Pricing
Example (2014) identifies the following risk, “If we fail to
accurately estimate the factors
upon which we base our contract pricing, we may generate less
profit than expected or incur
losses on those contracts” (p. 85). Example derived
approximately 72% of revenue from fixed
price and performance based contracts (Example, 2014). These
contracts require estimation of

expected price and performance when bidding for the work
through the RFP process. If the cost
estimates are inflated, the company may not win the business.
If the cost estimates are too low,
the company may not be able to make an adequate amount of
profit or take a loss on the project.
Wolfe (2011) states, “Profit is the foundational metric and a
critically important component of
the feedback loop” (p. 57). The monitoring and examination
of this feedback loop can help
improve the estimates both in the short and long-term. While
the Trader Joe’s case study did not
cover this type of capability, the ability to estimate accurately
impacts the bottom line directly
for Example.
There are several metrics that can be used to monitor the
estimated versus actual pricing

and to improve the estimation over time. The first metric is to
compare the actual costs to the
budgeted costs. The comparison is typically performed at the
end of a project, but could be
performed throughout the project to track progress and detect
trends that might cause concern.
One problem with looking at the budget versus actuals
throughout the project is that the service
contracts typically have many upfront costs to establish the
service with the client (Example,
2014). Thus, it cannot be assumed the consumption of the
budget will occur at the same rate for
the length of the project. This needs to be kept in consideration
when tracking the progress
through the life cycle of the contract. If the budgets versus
actuals are compared only at the end

of the project, the opportunity to make changes for that contract
is lost. If any negative trends
are noted through the tracking, the management team should
discuss the trend and decide if any
action is required. Another metric used in pricing estimation is
the number of man hours a
contract will require to work to completion. When providing
services, the costs of people are
one of the largest costs the project will incur. As such,
estimation should occur in much the
same manner as the costs. Estimations of man hours should be
performed when pricing a
contract for an RFP. The budgeted man hours should be
monitored both throughout the contract
and also at the end in a review of the project. As any negative
trends begin to develop, the
management team can respond with changes in the plan if

necessary. For both metrics,
performing a retrospective at the end of each project will help
improve the estimating over time
by looking at the lessons learned.
To further strengthen the validity of the estimates and thus the
health of the company, a
risk analysis should take place when pricing a contract. A list
of potential risks should be
developed. These risks should be scored in two ways: with a
probability of occurrence and an
anticipated impact. Development of mitigation plans are needed
for the risks that have a high
probability and a high impact to the project. The mitigation
plans should have cost and man-

hour estimates associated with them. Management can then
make educated decisions about
additional costs and hours that may occur throughout the life of
the contract, and that may need
to be considered when developing pricing for the RFP. While a
risk analysis will strengthen the
estimating process, there are still some significant challenges.
The projects typically span
multiple years and are subject to changes within the government
(Example, 2014). It is difficult
to predict the landscape of the challenges that might occur that
far out in the future. Another
difficulty in learning from the past is that many of the RFP’s
presented to the company vary a
great deal in how to execute them. At times, to learn from the
past contracts may be like

comparing apples to oranges. However, if the operations are
broken down into sets of repeatable
tasks that are applicable across multiple projects, then trending
and a retrospective become more
valuable. As the gap between actuals and budgets begin to
close through these analyses, the
company can more accurately anticipate the profit to be
expected.
Recommendation: Improve Operational Efficiencies
As mentioned above, the cost of people involved providing the
services is a very
expensive part of a contract. It is important to try reducing the
number of people needed to work
a contract so that the bid in the RFP can be more competitive.
To reduce the number of people,
but maintain a high degree of quality, the service operations
need to be optimized. Optimization

could occur within a business in any industry such as a grocer,
but it is particularly necessary
with a services contract. Efficient, repeatable processes are
needed to optimize the services
provided. Wolfe (2011) states, “The ultimate determinant of an
organization’s success if how
well these four domains – leadership, people, process, and
customers – are optimized and in
balance with each other” (p. 104). Optimization of processes
can occur in several ways. The
first is by reorganizing the work to be done in a way that makes
the processes within the
operations require less manpower. Another way is by
automating through technology as many
of the processes as possible. Raynor and Ahmed (2013) state,
“…outstanding performance is

caused by greater value and not by lower price” (p. 113).
Finding efficiencies will increase the
performance that can be achieved and feed the value and
viability of the organization.
There are several ways to determine where there is an
opportunity for optimization. The
first is to survey the employees for their thoughts on
optimization. While they are closest to the
work being accomplished, they may have fears of optimizing
themselves out of a job. Another
way to determine where efficiencies can be gained is in
customer surveys. Determining where
they think a company excels and where there is room for
improvement will give management
some key places to concentrate on. Some quantitative analysis
can be performed as well. Key
workflow processes within the operations can be identified and

analyzed. Adopting a Lean and
Six Sigma approach will reduce waste and increase value
(Jacob, Bergland, and Cox, 2010).
Using Lean and Six Sigma approaches; efficiencies through
automation or re-organization of the
process can be made. The process can then be analyzed again to
see if the desired results were
obtained. An additional way to determine where efficiencies
can be gained is through Service
Level Agreement (SLA) analysis. If the company is not
meeting the established SLA’s, then a
root cause analysis can be performed and then remediation plans
developed. Driving efficiencies
into processes can be somewhat labor intensive itself.

However, the labor of analysis and
remediation is needed only for the duration of creating the
efficiency. The company can then
benefit from them over the long-term.
P.E.S.T. and Stakeholder Strategy Analysis
Lafley, Martin, and Riel (2013) define a third area of strategy
as “Where will you play?”
The P.E.S.T and Stakeholder analysis define who the people are
that need to be satisfied for the
company to be successful and the factors that influence the
company and the stakeholders. The
analysis revealed some areas of weakness that could be
strengthened to create more competitive
advantage.
Recommendation: Encourage Target Market Growth through

Building a Coalition of
Service Providers to Talk with Governments about the Service
Options that are Available
Just as Tesla was experiencing issues getting their target
market fully committed to
electric cars, Example experiences issues with getting their
target market (governments) to
consider outsourcing services. The primary target market for
Example is the Health and Human
Services divisions of governments (Example, Inc., 2014).
Example (2014) believes the target
market has an “aging population that places a greater strain on
the health care and welfare
systems” (p. 4). While there is a growing need for services
within the government to be filled,
governments have the option to manage the growth themselves
or to outsource services.

Governments tend to want to keep the services within the
government. For the workers within
the government agencies, outsourcing poses a threat to their
employment. There are many
reasons why governments should consider outsourcing services.
One is that the private sector
has demonstrated an ability to perform the services more
efficiently at a smaller cost (Example,
2014). Another is that the performance of the private sector
managing the services can provide
an increase in quality of the services provided to the public
(Example, 2014). If Example
combined their expertise with the expertise of their competitors,
they would have a more
compelling story to tell to the government and the public. They
could explicitly state why

outsourcing is a viable alternative and help to ease fears that the
government may have by
providing alternative remediation actions. Without more
government entities willing to
outsource, there is a finite amount of the market to service. A
coalition could be the impetus
needed for governments to change their views on the
management of government services. The
growth in the industry would allow growth for the companies
competing within the industry.
There are a couple of metrics that could help to measure the
implementation of this
strategy. The first is measuring the trending of government
functions across the states that are
being outsourced. This information is reasonably easy to
obtain, as most of it is public
information. Through analysis of this information, new target

markets within the government
arena may be identified as a growth opportunity. The analysis
would also demonstrate which
states are more willing to outsource and which are less likely to
outsource. Knowing which
states may outsource allows for more emphasis of sales of
services to be placed with that
potential client. Another metric to analyze is the performance
metrics of the services provided.
By trending the performance metrics per service type, per state,
Example would be able to tell
which government entities are succeeding with their current
strategy, and which may be more
primed for a change because performance goals are not being

met. Not meeting performance
goals could mean a change in the outsourcing vendor (if the
government entity is already
outsourcing) or a growth opportunity in the industry of a
government that is willing to begin to
outsource. This information is largely public information and
can be easily obtained.
Recommendation: Work with Publications to Publish the
Performance Objectives
Achieved through Outsourcing Government Functions
In today’s world, much of the news published is negative. If
Example is not meeting
performance goals for a government entity, it will likely be in
the newspapers. The customer’s
perspective is formed according to the publicity it receives.
Tesla experiences the same

phenomenon. Although negative press (particularly for valid
reasons) is challenging to control;
positive press can be released championing the successes that
are a result of outsourcing
government functions. Relaying the success stories will help
get the Example name out in the
industry and have it associated with positive results. Another
positive impact is that other
government entities that have chosen not to outsource will begin
to see potential benefits of
outsourcing the services they provide. A third benefit is that
promoting positive press has the
potential to get the public involved. The public is the ones that
elect the government leaders that
make the decisions on how their services should be managed
and maintained. If the public
understood the issues and were able to see the success stories

from it, they could rally their
support around more government entities outsourcing. In this
way, the press could be used to
influence both the potential clients and end users. Spenner and
Freeman(2012) state, “The
marketer’s goal is to help customers feel confident about their
choice” (p. 113). Through the use
of publications, trust and confidence can be built up for the
option of outsourcing services. The
potential government clients, existing government clients and
the end users of the services are
the agents for change in the industry.
One metric that can be used to measure the success of utilizing
the press to promote
growth in the industry is by measuring the number of
publications or stories that are related to

Example and categorize them as positive or negative. There
should be many more positive
publications and stories over time if the strategy is successful.
Additionally, if the strategy of
positive publications does begin to influence the government
agencies and the public that utilize
the services, growth within the industry should occur. There is
a challenge in making the
assertion that if growth in the industry is experienced, that it is
due in part of the positive
publications. There is only an indirect link that can be assumed
in the analysis. Another way to
measure the success of the strategy is to monitor upward trends
in customer satisfaction surveys.
Surveys can be sent to both the government client and the end-
user. If the positive press is
influencing these groups appropriately, there is an expectation

that customer satisfaction will
improve. The reverse should be true as well – negative press
should cause a decrease in
customer satisfaction. There is an assumption made that
customer satisfaction increasing is in
part a result of positive press. Positive press should help to
increase the field of the target market
as well as increase customer satisfaction experienced by the
clients and end users.
Recommendation: Attend Industry Conferences to Develop
Relationships with Potential
Clients
As with the other recommendations, this recommendation of
attending industry

conferences is being made to support the growth strategy of the
company by growing the target
market and strengthening the relationships in the current
market. The recommendation for
Example to have attendees at industry conferences is to
advocate the use of outsourcing and to
build the relationships needed to win the business. The ability
to get the Example name
embedded into the industry along with the successes that can be
expected through outsourcing
can be powerful to the growth of the industry and the company.
Relationships are needed to
encourage the outsourcing message in a politically charged
market like governments. Wolfe
(2011) states, “It is the energy you project in what you say or
do that creates the experience that

is felt” (p. 78). The face-to-face interactions in a conference
setting are a way to energize the
industry about the services offered and the value they provide.
Industry conferences are where
government agencies come together to discuss alternatives.
Outsourcing needs to be on their
agenda along with the competitive advantages that Example has
to offer.
One way to track the implementation of this recommendation is
to collect data on the
connections made at the conferences. There can be some
challenges in data collection. The data
must be given from the new connection to the Example
employee and then tracked. While this
may be electronically executed, there are manual ways to
implement this as well - such as
collecting business cards. In either a somewhat automated

manner or through manual entry, the
information should be entered into a Customer Relationship
Management (CRM) system for
storage. The CRM can also help to facilitate other metrics
collected such as how many times and
by what method each potential client has been communicated
with. Shanks, Jagielska, and
Jayaganesh (2009) describe a CRM as, “managing and
improving relationships with customers
in the areas of sales, marketing, and customer support and
service” (p. 264). The assumption
being made is that the efforts of communication will increase
awareness of the options and thus
increase the growth of the industry and the company.
Conclusion – P.E.S.T and Stakeholder Strategy
All three recommendations have the same objective – to

increase the target market and to
increase growth for the company leveraging external
stakeholders. Montgomery (2008) states
that a company “must keep one eye on how the company is
currently adding value and the other
eye on changes, both inside and outside the company, that either
threaten its position or present
some new opportunity for adding value” (p. 6). Working
together with the external stakeholders,
the recommendations made could help facilitate the
relationships and influence needed to create
opportunities for the company and the industry.

Competitive Strategy Analysis
Lafley, Martin, and Riel (2013) define a fourth area of strategy
as “How will you win?”
The competitive analysis is an analysis of the potential
competition. The recommendations focus
on areas where Example’s strengths can be used to their
advantage in competition and minimize
their weaknesses.
Critical Competitive Forces
The most critical competitive force for Example is the buyers.
From the case study this
week, Apple should also feel a threat from the competitive force
of the buyers. In Apple’s
scenario, the switching costs are low, and buyers have the
luxury of multiple choices that are all
fairly similar. Porter (1983) states, “consumers tend to be more

price sensitive if they are
purchasing products that are undifferentiated” (p. 15). For
Apple within the smartphone
industry, the products offered by different companies have
similar functionality. With Example,
the same holds true. The competitors in the Health and Human
Services industry all offer similar
functionality. The Health and Human Services industry is
strictly controlled by the
governments. This makes differentiation between competitors a
challenge and gives buyers
some leverage. Unlike Apple where the switching costs to
another competitor is low; the
switching costs for Example is high. When companies win
business within the industry, the
services delivered include employees to provide the services as
well as the technology and

infrastructure to support the services provided (Example Inc.,
2015). When a buyer chooses a
different vendor, the whole service provided is implemented
again – likely with different
employees, process, and technology.
Comparison of Competitive Forces between Apple and Example
For Apple and Example, the threat of new entrants is low.
There are high start-up costs
within both industries. To compete with the current industry
leaders, a new company must have
funding to manage the capital requirements (Porter, 1983).
Additionally, in the Health and
Human Services industry, to win business, you have to have
references of prior successful
implementations of similar size and scope. This requirement by
the government eliminates most

new entrants. Both Apple and Example enjoy strong branding
within their industries. Apple
benefits from “brand equity that lasts for decades” (Kim and
Mauborgne, 2004). Example
Inc.(2015) claims they have, “been operating large scale
program management operations on
behalf of government agencies since 1975 and enjoys brand
recognition as a proven partner with
government agencies” (p. 5). The strong brand images make it
a challenge for customers to
choose a new player in the market over one that has a proven
reputation.
A difference in the competitive forces between Apple and
Example is the threat of direct
competition. Apple’s direct competition is high. The switching
costs are low, and the

aggressiveness of other firms is high. For Example, the
switching costs are high, and the
aggressiveness of other firms is moderate. Since the Health and
Human Services industry is won
through Request for Proposals (RFP) that become public record,
the competitors each can easily
see what each other has to offer potential clients. The ability to
know what the competitive
advantages are of each competitor lowers the threat of direct
competitors.
Recommendation: Focus on International Growth
The growth of outsourcing is slow within the Health and
Human Services industry in the
United States. The lack of industry growth causes the number

of buyers to be stagnant. An
increase in the number of buyers should provide opportunities
for growth of the company. With
the growth being slow, competitors tend to have to compete on
price to win the business from
another competitor. Example Inc. (2015) has seen that there is
“robust demand in the UK
public sector outsourcing market” (p. 4). The increase in
demand internationally provides
opportunities for company growth that can likely not be
achieved within the United States.
Market growth internationally needs to be measured to watch
for trends upward or downward in
the growth of outsourcing public services. This information is
public information and is not a
challenge to obtain. Example also should track the number of
contracts and revenue generated

from winning international business. This metric will show the
trends in growth within the
company that can be attributed to the focus on the international
market. Finding ways to
increase the numbers of buyers available to purchase the
services, increases the ability for a
company to grow.
Recommendation: Hire Employees with Industry Knowledge
The Health and Human Services industry is “specialized in
nature” (Example Inc., 2015).
Employees that have subject matter expertise in the field should
be recruited to help facilitate
and operate the new business that is obtained by the company.
The depth of knowledge and
understanding Example has within the industry is a competitive
advantage. This advantage

provides differentiation needed to keep the threat of new entry
low. Pfeffer and Veiga (1999)
state, “Companies which place workers at the core of their
strategies produce higher long-term
returns to shareholders than their industry peers” (p. 38). The
goal of hiring people with subject
matter expertise can be measured by Human Resources through
the hiring process. One
challenge in using this metric as a measure of success is that
each employee could have varying
skills and expertise in the industry. Having ten people with a
low degree of industry expertise
may be equivalent in creating competitive advantage to having
one person with extensive
expertise. The metric is a count and not a complete measure of
how subject matter expertise

impacts the company. Another metric to be measured is the
ability for Example to reach and
exceed the performance goals. The company should become
more adept at meeting the
performance goals with the more industry expertise they have
on staff. The performance goals
are not challenging to obtain; however, meeting the
performance goals may not be as a direct
result of hiring employees with the specific expertise.
Recommendation: Leverage Technology to Create
Differentiation between Competitors
The recommendation for Example is similar to
recommendations that could benefit
Apple – increase switching costs and increase product
differentiation as much as possible. In an
industry where the services that are provided are so similar, any
product differentiation could

become a large competitive advantage. Product differentiation
for both Apple and Example can
be obtained through technology innovations. A creative and
innovative work environment will
translate into more efficient and higher quality operations of the
services provided. Developing a
creative work environment requires creating, “an atmosphere
where people are inspired to
succeed rather than afraid to fail” (Jeffrey, 2009). Apple was
able to cultivate this type of
atmosphere through the leadership of Steve Jobs (Rothaermel,
2014). In addition to product
differentiation, switching costs should be considered. The more
tied the customer is through

technology integration, the higher the switching costs. The
higher the switching costs, the less
likely it is for a client to switch vendors. For Example, the
technology innovations can be
measured through the number of products and technology
enhancements released. The more
releases there are, the higher the innovation should be, which
should translate into quality and
efficiency. Although this metric is not challenging to obtain,
not all releases will carry similar
impacts to the operations. Another metric that can be used is
measuring quality and efficiencies
within the operations. With more efficient tools, employees
should be able to complete their
jobs in a shorter amount of time with increased quality. The
metrics can be analyzed for trends

over time. Innovation areas that have a positive impact on
operations can be focused on for
additional tuning of the tools.
Conclusion – the Competitive Environment
Example needs to focus on maintaining high switching costs,
increasing the focus and
scope of where they compete and provide innovative product
differentiation. By keeping the
switching costs high, the buyers are more likely to stay with the
same vendor. The focus on
international business will give the company a chance at more
opportunities and allow them to
grow in an industry that has slow growth in the United States.
Example must also find ways to
differentiate themselves from other competitors. Differentiation
can be through hiring subject

matter expertise that can be leveraged to win and improve the
business. Product differentiation
can also be accomplished through innovative technology
choices and design that increase their
ability to meet performance goals and to drive efficiency into
the operations.
Key Success Factor Strategy Analysis
The Key Success Factor analysis reveals the ways to create
competitive advantages and
value within the company. Example should devote attention to
the areas in the recommendations
to leverage and build their key success factors.
Recommendation: International Growth
From the five forces analysis on Example, the buyers pose the
highest threat. This is
different from the forces that Trader Joe’s would find

What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx

What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx

Similar to What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx (9)

More from kendalfarrier

More from kendalfarrier (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

What Kind of Organization will you Create Your Playbook forYou .docx