INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS DECISION-MAKING
Project description
Description of the assignment

The minor assessment is centred around Sony’s annual report. Each student is expected to submit a case report, based also on the analysis of relevant background readings on top of the case study itself, addressing the following issues:

? Discuss the decision-making process at Sony and outline the factors that influence it. Then classify the decisions.

? How would you manage the decision-making process if you were the Chief Executive Officer? Explain each stage of this process.

? Describe and analyse the consumer electronics industry and how Sony’s managers should take it into account in making decisions.

? Apply forecasting models to Sony case study (e.g. provide a 2-year moving average graph by using sales data).

Minor assessmentObjectives of the minor assessment
The aim of this assignment is to give students a chance to test
their ability to apply the tools presented in
the “International Business Decisi
on-Making” course to the anal
ysis of real-world business cases.
Description of the assignment
The minor assessment is centred around Bridgestone Annual Repo
rt . Each student is expected to submit a
case report, based also on the analysis of relevant background
readings on top of the case study itself,
addressing the following issues:
?
Explain the importance of an effective decision-making process
in achieving organisational
objectives.
?
Discuss the decision-making process at Bridgestone.
?
Identify and discuss possible strategic and operational decisio
ns made within the company.
?
Describe and analyse briefly the tire industry and explain how
its dynamics influence Bridgestone’s
managers in making decisions.
?
Apply time-series models to Bridgestone case study (e.g. provid
e a 2-year moving average graph
using sales data).
This is an academic piece of wor
k: your case report is expected
to link theory and practice
You should take care to ensure that the work you submit has a h
igh standard of presentation. You must
acknowledge all sources of information and evidence using the H
arvard Referen
cing System.
The report will count for 25% of the final grade given for the
“International Business-Decision-Making”
course.
2
Structure of the assignment.
Cover page.
It includes the course name, the project title, the students’ f
ull names, the lecturer’s full name and
the submission date.
Table of contents.
It includes all the headings with appropriate page numbers, inc
luding the References and the
Appendices.
Executive summary.
Introduction.
It introduces the reader to the
case you are going to present.
Analysis.
(see under “Description of the assignment”)
Conclusions.
They draw key insights from the case analysis, summarize the ma
in features of the company
presented and propose future dev
elopment for its business and o
rganisational solutions.
References.
Format.
The case report is expected to consist of approximately 2000 wo
rds, not counting tables or inserts,
introduction and conclusions. The report should be prepared as
a neatly typed Word document (Times New
Roman, 12 points), with double spacing and page numbering. Tabl
es or data taken from other sources may
be included in one or more Appendices. All sources must be refe
renced in the text and a full list of references
(including visited websites) must be provided, in compliance wi
th the Harvard Referencing System.
Deadline.
Please submit a printed copy of your assignment to the lecturer
and an electronic cop
y via Turnitin by Week
6.
Lateness policy.
For each day of delay, 5 points will be subtracted to the grade
you earned with your minor assessment
(maximum 25 points). If you subm
it your case report after 5 day
s from the deadline, you will receive a grade
of 0 (zero) for your minor assessment.
3
GENERAL GRADING CRITERIA (UNDERGRADUATE)
Excellent work:
70%
Above satisfactory
work:
60% – 69%
Satisfactorywork:
50 – 59%
Below satisfactory
work:
40% – 49%
Failure:
Below 40%
Relevance
30%
Excellent knowledge
and understanding of
material and an
imaginative sense of
its relevance across a
range of issues, and
context or policy
situation; excellent
use of course
material and other
relevant information
to support argument
Very good use of
course material and
other information;
well chosen to
support arguments
relevant to question
Competent use of
course materials
and other
information to
support most
arguments
Some use of
appropriate course
materials and
experience to
support arguments;
capacity to identify
relevance, but may
be rather narrowly
focused and miss
out important areas
Little or no sign of
relevance
Content
30%
Independent and
creative, and
demonstrates clear
thinking; ability to
analyse and critically
evaluate material
Good knowledge and
understanding of the
material, across a
broad spectrum,
combined with an
ability to evaluate,
analyse and reflect
on key issues
Reasonable
knowledge of the
material and ability
to draw upon more
than one source for
ideas; uses key
themes well.
Adequate
understanding and
use of course and
other relevant
material; mostly
descriptive, but
with some grasp of
key course themes
and issues and a
capacity to discuss
these in context
Very limited
knowledge and
understanding and
the issues involved
Depth
30%
A sensitive
awareness of
conflicting arguments
and ideas and of their
provenance. Clear
grasp of implications.
Well organised use of
most of the major
points with an ability
to draw upon them
creatively and
critically; awareness
of conflicting
arguments and ideas
and attempt to
address them in
context
Capacity to grapple
with conflicting
arguments and
ideas; beginning to
draw together and
synthesise ideas
and perspectives
from a range of
theory
Some attempt to
address the
conflicting
arguments and
ideas from the
course, some signs
of an attempt to
take an evaluative,
analytical and
critical stance;
some appropriate
use of concepts,
but with only
limited evidence of
independent
thinking
Lack of awareness
of conflicting
arguments and
ides
Structure
10%
Excellent
organisation of
material; clear,
logical flow of
argument; good sign-
posting throughout
Good, clear
framework and
reasoned argument
with evidence of
careful thought
Sensible use of
major points
integrated into the
answer; logical flow
of ideas is apparent
Framework is
apparent with an
introduction,
argument and
conclusion, but the
logical flow and
coherence is not
always consistent
and may be difficult
to follow
Little or no
evidence of
planned structure
and organisation