ADMS 3900 York Nike Faced Challenge of Falling Sales Attributed to Coronavirus Analysis

User Generated

jvyyyrrr

Business Finance

ADMS 3900

York University

ADMS

Description

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1q_RXGdaXMq837K96gwPrV43HwDK1X-dT/view?usp=sharing

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Course director: Dr. David Weitzner david.weitzner@yorku.ca AP/ADMS 3900 N 3.0 The Practice of General Management Online course – Winter 2021 This course develops the required organizational skills and practices of managers to meet their objectives in small, medium and large organizations. Theoretical instruction is combined with cases and experiential exercises to help students develop a comprehensive understanding of the subject and the integration of functional areas in strategic analysis. The course is divided into three four-week modules. We will start by exploring purpose, principles and leadership in management. We will then move on to studying the process of managing the activities of a competitive firm, from planning to execution. We will end by looking at the challenges associated with managing change, innovation and risk. The majority of the course readings are cutting edge articles that you will download from the York library website for free. The exceptions are the book Fifteen Paths and the cases/simulations/course kit, which will be available for purchase through the bookstore or online. The supporting videos can be accessed via the links below. All but one are hosted on YouTube. The professor will also post slides to guide your reading, thinking and watching. The professor will offer scheduled interactive mini-lectures and conversations online every week. These conversations are meant to simulate a real-time classroom environment where students and the professor can explore the module topics in greater detail. The sessions will be recorded and posted for all students, including those who did not participate, to access and review at their leisure. While participation in the session is optional (although strongly encouraged), listening to the recording is mandatory and should be considered an extension of the required readings. Prerequisites for this course: ADMS 2400 Required purchases: 1) Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Toronto: ECW Press – Hardcopy available through the York Bookstore. Hard and e-copies available via Amazon, Indigo, etc. 2) ADMS 3900 Course Kit – Hard copy available through the York Bookstore. E-copy available via Harvard: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/import/785644 3) Simulations – E-access via Harvard: https://hbsp.harvard.edu/import/785645 Grading: Case assignments - 25% Students will be expected to submit full-length written solutions to 2 assigned cases (12.5% per case). Those cases are due in weeks 5 and 11. Each case should be a minimum of 7 typed, 12point font, double-spaced pages. A detailed outline of how to write a case is included in this course outline. Simulations – 5% Students are also required to complete two simulations (2.5% each). You must pay for it directly through the Harvard website. Mid-term assignment – 30% The mid-term is a written assignment due in week 7 where students will choose a company that they aspire to work for, find a recent (past 6 months) story about them in the business press that highlights a challenge faced by their management team and propose a path forward. The assignment should be a maximum of 10 typed, 12-point font, double-spaced pages. A detailed grading rubric will be posted on Moodle. Final exam - 40% Students will write a take-home final exam that will test comprehension of the assigned material. The exam will be cumulative, consist of three essay questions and the time/date will be set by the University. Bonus Marks: Students who are regularly active on Moodle message boards posting about the weekly readings will receive 2 bonus points towards their final grade. You must post on ALL the readings, EACH week, on time to qualify. Please note: Late assignments will not be accepted. How to write a case When analyzing cases, it is important to isolate critical facts, evaluate whether assumptions are useful or faulty, and distinguish between good and bad information. Cases are to be written in essay format, not point form. When you use tools that require extensive analysis (like the Five Forces, Shared Value Creation or Stakeholder Theory), do the work in an appendix and only talk about the most relevant findings in the body of the text (i.e. the industry forces or stakeholders that matter most to the development of your analysis). Every case should include each of the following steps (but not as subject headers – incorporate them into a narrative): 1) Identify your role: CEO? Board member? Outside consultant? Etc. One sentence max. 2) Identify the problem: Write a concise problem statement. This should just be one or two sentences, and appear at the very beginning of your work. Use it as a reference point as you proceed through the analysis. The process of thinking about possible solutions may lead you away from the initial problem. Don’t fall into this trap. Make sure your recommendation actually addresses the problem you have identified. There generally is not one “correct” problem to be identified. Instead, you are graded based on how well you analyze and solve the problem you chose to work with. 3) Conduct your analysis: Use the analytical tools from the course reading. DO NOT do external research. The point of the exercise is to see how you apply the tools of the course to a real-world challenge, NOT to see if you can find out what the company actually did. Very often a strong case will make recommendations that are quite different from what the company did because you are working with different information than they were. The analysis should be the longest section of your write-up, at least one full page per tool plus the work you do in the appendix. Each assigned reading has at least one tool (like shared value, stakeholder theory, five forces, etc.). Use at least two tools. ONLY use tools from our readings, NOT tools from other courses (like SWOT or PESTEL). Furthermore, you must use one of the specific tools assigned in the same week that case is due. Make sure the tool you use fits the problem – i.e. five forces looks at the industry, while other tools, like those on organizational culture, look within the firm. Also, ask yourself why you have chosen one type of analysis over another. Assumption checking can also help determine if you have gotten to the heart of the problem or are still just dealing with symptoms. 4) Propose alternative solutions: Generally, three. Make sure each alternative is justified and supported by your analysis. It is important to remember that in management cases there is rarely one right answer or one best way. Even when members of a class or a team agree on what the problem is, you may not agree on how to solve the problem. Therefore, it is helpful to consider several different solutions. 5) Make recommendations: Choose ONE of the three alternatives. Describe exactly what needs to be done. Explain why this course of action will solve the problem. The recommendation should also include suggestions for how best to implement the proposed solution because the recommended actions and their implications for the performance and future of the firm are interrelated. The solution you propose must solve the problem you identified. This point cannot be overemphasized; too often, students make recommendations that treat only symptoms or fail to tackle the central problems in the case. Make a logical argument that shows how the problem led to the analysis and how the analysis led to the recommendations you are proposing. Remember, an analysis is not an end in itself; it is useful only if it leads to a solution. The actions you propose should describe the very next steps that the company needs to take. Module 1: Purpose, Principles and Leadership W1: Managing with Purpose Blount, S. & Leinwand, P. 2019. Why Are We Here? Harvard Business Review, 97(6):132-139. Quinn, R.E. & Thakor, A.V. 2018. Creating a Purpose-Driven Organization. Harvard Business Review, 96 (4):78-85. Video: IHMA Necessary Conversation with Ed Freeman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leDhu6XXr3Q W2: Responsible Management Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Chapter 5: Trade Fairly. ECW Press. Weitzner, D., & Deutsch, Y. 2019. Why the time has come to retire instrumental stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 44: 694-698. Porter, M.E. & Kramer, M.R., 2011. Creating Shared Value. How to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 89(1-2):62-77. Video: Shared Value as Corporate Strategy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaEv4frj88&t=0s&list=PL4pqY0N7PHPaF5VWDZ_NUBEqfN702cfOM&index=4 W3: Sustainable Management Scoblic, J.P. 2020. Learning from the Future. Harvard Business Review. 98(4): p38-47. Aldy, J.E. & Gianfrate, G. 2019. Future-Proof Your Climate Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 97(3):86-97. Kiron, D. & Unruh, G. 2018. Business Needs a Safety Net. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(3):1-6. Video: The Business Logic of Sustainability - Ray Anderson https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A35hen_d6eA W4: Managerial Leadership Lingo, E.L. & McGinn, K.L. 2020. A New Prescription for Power. Harvard Business Review, 98(4):66-75. Frei, F. & Morriss, A. 2020. Begin With Trust. Harvard Business Review, 98(3):112-121. Gulati, R. 2018. Structure that’s Not Stifling. Harvard Business Review, 96(3):68-79. Video: Social Intelligence and Leadership https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qv0o1oh9f4 Organizational Design Simulation: Evolving Structures Module 2: From Planning to Execution W5: Managerial Strategy Formulation Porter, M.E. 1996. What Is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6):61-78. Porter, M. E. 2008. The Five Competitive Forces that Shape Strategy. Harvard Business Review, 86(1):78-93. Video: The Five Competitive Forces That Shape Strategy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYF2_FBCvXw&t=184s First full-length written case due: Huawei: A Global Tech Giant in the Crossfire of a Digital Cold War W6: Management Communication and Negotiation Hughes, J. & Ertel, D. 2020. What’s Your Negotiation Strategy? Harvard Business Review, 98(4):76-85. Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Chapter 4: Change the Way You Listen. ECW Press. Sull, D., Turconi, S. & Sull, C. 2018. Six Steps to Communicating Strategic Priorities Effectively. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(3):1-4. Video: Think Fast, Talk Smart - Communication Techniques https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAnw168huqA Organizational Behavior Simulation: Judgment in a Crisis W7: Managing Curiosity Thomke, S. 2020. Building a Culture of Experimentation. Harvard Business Review, 98(2):4048. Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Chapter 9: Be Curious. ECW Press. Francesca, G. 2018. The Business Case for Curiosity. Harvard Business Review, 96(5):48-57. Mid-term assignment due W8: Managerial Strategy Execution Sull, D., Homkes, R. & Sull, C. 2015. Why Strategy Execution Unravels and What to Do About It. Harvard Business Review, 93(3):57-66. Sull, D., Turconi, S., Sull, C. & Yoder, J. 2018. Turning Strategy into Results. MIT Sloan Management Review, 59(3):1-12. Video: Why Strategy Execution Unravels and What to Do About It https://hbr.org/video/5143339694001/why-strategy-execution-unravelsand-what-to-do-about-it Case: Tesla, Inc. Module 3: The Challenge of Change W9: Managing AI Babic, B., Chen, D.L, Evgeniou, T. & Fayard, A.L. 2020. A Better Way to Onboard AI. Harvard Business Review, 98(4):56-65. Iansiti, M. & Lakhani, K.R. 2020. Competing in the Age of AI. Harvard Business Review, 98(1), 60-67. Fountaine, T., McCarthy, B. & Saleh, T. 2019. Building the AI-Powered Organization. Harvard Business Review, 97(4): 62-73. Case: Toys "R" Us Canada: Is Playtime Over? W10: Managing Change Corritore, M., Goldberg, A. & Srivastava, S.B. 2020. The New Analytics of Culture. Harvard Business Review, 98(1):76-83. Groysberg, B., Lee, J., Price, J. & Cheng, J.Y. 2018. The Leader’s Guide to Corporate Culture. Harvard Business Review, 96(1):44-52. Leetaru, L. 2019. The Wrong Ways to Strengthen Culture. Harvard Business Review, 97(4):2124. Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Chapter 14: Re-create Yourself. ECW Press. Case: The Video-Streaming Wars in 2019: Can Disney Catch Netflix? Video: The 8 Types of Company Culture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtadBlEgHQ4 W11: Managing Innovation Pisano, G.P. 2019. The Hard Truth about Innovative Cultures. Harvard Business Review, 97(1):62-71. Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Chapter 11: Play the Spaces. ECW Press. Christensen, C.M., Raynor, M. & McDonald, R. 2015. What Is Disruptive Innovation? Harvard Business Review, 93(12):44-53. Video: The Explainer: Disruptive Innovation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbPiAzzGap0 Second full-length written case due: Loblaw in Canada's Stagnant Grocery Market W12: Managing Globalization and Political Risk Martin, R.L. 2019. The High Price of Efficiency. Harvard Business Review, 97(1):42-55. Rice, C. & Zegart, A. 2018. Managing 21st-Century Political Risk. Harvard Business Review, 96 (3):130-138. Weitzner, D. 2019. Fifteen Paths. Introduction. ECW Press. Video: Condoleezza Rice - Political Risk & the Future of American Diplomacy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9msb8tTZ7c Case: Chick-fil-A: International Expansion Challenges Academic Honesty: The Faculty of Liberal Arts and Professional Studies considers breaches of the Senate Policy on Academic Honesty to be serious matters. The Senate Policy on Academic Honesty is an affirmation and clarification for members of the University of the general obligation to maintain the highest standards of academic honesty. As a clear sense of academic honesty and responsibility is fundamental to good scholarship, the policy recognizes the general responsibility of all faculty members to foster acceptable standards of academic conduct and of the student to be mindful of and abide by such standards. Suspected breaches of academic honesty will be investigated and charges shall be laid if reasonable and probable grounds exist. Students should review the York Academic Honesty policy for themselves at: http://www.yorku.ca/secretariat/policies/document.php?document=69 Students might also wish to review the interactive on-line Tutorial for students on academic integrity, at: https://spark.library.yorku.ca/academic-integrity-what-is-academic-integrity/ Grading Scheme and Feedback Policy: The grading scheme (i.e. kinds and weights of assignments, essays, exams, etc.) shall be announced, and be available in writing, within the first two weeks of class, and, under normal circumstances, graded feedback worth at least 15% of the final grade for Fall, Winter or Summer Term, and 30% for ‘full year’ courses offered in the Fall/Winter Term be received by students in all courses prior to the final withdrawal date from a course without receiving a grade, with the following exceptions: Note: Under unusual and/or unforeseeable circumstances which disrupt the academic norm, instructors are expected to provide grading schemes and academic feedback in the spirit of these regulations, as soon as possible. For more information on the Grading Scheme and Feedback Policy, please visit: http://www.yorku.ca/univsec/policies/document.php?document=86 Reappraisals: Students may, with sufficient academic grounds, request that a final grade in a course be reappraised (which may mean the review of specific pieces of tangible work). Nonacademic grounds are not relevant for grade reappraisals; in such cases, students are advised to petition to their home Faculty. Students are normally expected to first contact the course director to discuss the grade received and to request that their tangible work be reviewed. Tangible work may include written, graphic, digitized, modeled, video recording or audio recording formats, but not oral work. Students need to be aware that a request for a grade reappraisal may result in the original grade being raised, lowered or confirmed. For reappraisal procedures and information, please visit the Office of the Registrar site at: http://myacademicrecord.students.yorku.ca/gradereappraisal-policy Accommodation Procedures: LA&PS students who have experienced a misfortune or who are too ill to attend the final examination in an ADMS course should not attempt to do so; they must pursue deferred standing. Other students should contact their home Faculty for information. For further information, please visit: http://ds.info.yorku.ca/academic-support-accomodations/ Religious Accommodation: York University is committed to respecting the religious beliefs and practices of all members of the community, and making accommodations for observances of special significance to adherents. For more information on religious accommodation, please visit: https://w2prod.sis.yorku.ca/Apps/WebObjects/cdm.woa/wa/regobs Academic Accommodation for Students with Disabilities (Senate Policy) The nature and extent of accommodations shall be consistent with and supportive of the integrity of the curriculum and of the academic standards of programs or courses. Provided that students have given sufficient notice about their accommodation needs, instructors shall take reasonable steps to accommodate these needs in a manner consistent with the guidelines established hereunder. For more information, please visit the Counselling and Disability Services website at http://www.yorku.ca/dshub/ York’s disabilities offices and the Registrar’s Office work in partnership to support alternate exam and test accommodation services for students with disabilities at the Keele campus. For more information on alternate exams and tests please visit http://www.yorku.ca/altexams/ Please alert the Course Director as soon as possible should you require special accommodations. ADMS 3900 W2021 – Midterm Paper Rubric A (80-100) B (70 – 79) C (60 – 69) D (50 – 59) Introduction (20%) (1 page approximately) Introduction of the problem is thorough, but concise. Problem is recent and introduction addresses its strategic relevance and relation to the themes of the first two modules. Introduction of the problem is thorough but too lengthy, delaying the analysis. Problem is recent and introduction addresses its strategic relevance and relation to the themes of the first two modules. Introduction is brief, if present. Little more than article summary provided; no context given for strategic relevance or relations within the first two modules. Analysis (25%) (4-5 pages approximately) Analysis covered five theories from the readings, providing both a brief summary of the reading to show relevance to the problem, and an application to the problem. Analysis covered five theories from the readings, providing either a brief summary of the reading or an application to the problem. Introduction of the problem is brief, giving little more than an article summary. Limited strategic relevance provided, and limited connections made between the problem and first two modules. Analysis covered three or four theories from the readings, providing a brief summary of the reading and an application to the problem. Discussion of alternatives (30%) (3-4 pages approximately) Focus on strategic analysis was consistent. Used weekly readings with additional research and/or strategic tools complementary to analysis. Discussion gives a recommendation from the three alternatives. Recommendation is feasible and contextualized within analysis. Any appendices provided additional strategic insight. NOTE: if no appendices, then graded /95 No grammatical errors, awkward syntax, or spelling issues. Focus on strategic analysis was consistent. Used weekly readings without additional research or strategic tools. Used contradictory tools, focusing on different aspects of strategic management than weekly readings. Discussion gives a recommendation from the three alternatives. Recommendation has some contextualization within analysis, but discussion is general. Most appendices provided additional insight. Provided brief overview of discussion of solutions instead of selecting a recommendation. No conclusion provided. Some appendices provided insight in the context of discussion. Appendices provided no value to the paper. Few grammatical errors, awkward syntax, or spelling issues. Used recommended weekly readings; any outside research or strategic tools were properly cited and a bibliography was provided. Used recommended weekly readings; most outside research or strategic tools were properly cited and a bibliography was provided. Some grammatical errors, awkward syntax, or spelling issues. Did not use recommended weekly readings. No citations within the paper, but a bibliography was provided. Many grammatical errors, awkward syntax, or spelling issues. Did not use recommended weekly readings. No citations or bibliography provided. Conclusion (10%) (1 page approximately) Quality of Appendices (5%) Quality of Writing (5%) Citations (5%) Analysis covered one or two theories from the readings with both a summary and an application to the problem, or three or four readings with either a brief summary or an application to the problem. Used no strategic tools; little evidence of strategic analysis in body of report. Mid-term assignment -30% The mid-term is a written assignment due in week 7 where students will choose a company that they aspire to work for, find a recent (past 6 months) story about them in the business press that highlights a challenge faced by their management team and propose a path forward. The assignment should be a maximum of 10 typed, 12-point font, double-spaced pages. A detailed grading rubric will be posted on Moodle.
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached. Please let me know if you have any questions or need revisions.

Running head: NIKE

1

Nike
Name of Student
Institution Affiliation
Date of Submission

NIKE

2
Nike
Every company is bound to good time and bad times. The good times are characterized

by big sales, corporation among workers, making profits and huge revenues among other
positive things. The bad times are characterized by business closing down, failing to strike a
deal, losses, decreased revenues among others. Among companies that were affected by the
covid19npandemic was Nike. In this paper, focus will be on the challenge that Nike faced or is
facing and the remedies that the management is putting in place.
Nike is a company that focuses on sport wear. The U.S based company was launched in
1964 with a different name as Blue-Ribbon Sports. It was started by two people, Bill Bowerman
ex-coach at Oregon university together with Phil Knight his former tuent. The two opened a
retail store in 1966 which was their first and later in 1972, they launched their first Nike brand
shoe. The name was changed later in 1978 its Nike, Inc where the company went public two
years later. The company had reached and surpassed 170 countries by the 21st century and its
logo was famously known the world all over (Britannica, 2019). Nike expanded steadily in
business and made its product line diversified through the major and many acquisitions which
included shoe companies like Cole Haan in 1988 which was later sold in 2012, and the Converse,
Inc in 2003. In addition, the company acquired the producer of sports equipment Canstar Sports,
Inc in 1994 which was later names as Bauer and was sold in 2008. Also, the athletic equipment
company Umbro acquired in 2008 and later in 2012. These strategies made the company to raise
steadily since the 1980s. The company later created Nike ACG – all conditions gear – which is a
branch that markets for products made for the extreme sports like snowboarding and biking. The
company started selling sports tech accessories among them high altitude compasses worn on the

NIKE

3

wrist and heart rate monitors. Nike owes part of its success to endorsemen...


Anonymous
Excellent resource! Really helped me get the gist of things.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags