business writing question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.
Based on this application of the action model, what is/are your most important general take-away(s) that you can use in BSG Game 2? Be sure to answer this part in 150-200 words. Please try to make your answer to this part as “self-sufficient” as possible.
Requirements: 150-200 words
Page 1 of 2 GUIDELINES FOR WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT 1 Due date: November 5. Upload your MICROSOFT WORD (not PDF) file using the SafeAssign link in your module by 11:59 pm. Only one person in the group needs to upload on the group’s behalf. The unique contribution of your textbook is the “pairwise” analysis that captures the “fine-grained complexity of competition.” In chapter 10, the authors applied their action model to Cendant and Starbucks as the focal firms and Intercontinental Group and Second Cup as the key competitors, respectively. As part of this written assignment, your job is to do something similar using Game 1 BSG data for Industry 220 from Y11-Y16. A) Select a pair of companies in Industry 220: a focal firm and its key competitor. By definition, the pair should have a high degree of overlap from Y11-Y14. You may start with your own company as the focal firm and select your key competitor (the one with the greatest overlap). But if you feel your company did not have a high degree of overlap with any other company, you may select two other companies in Industry 220 with a high degree of overlap as a pair. In BSG, you have three segments (internet, wholesale, and private-label) and four geographical regions (North America, Europe-Africa, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America). If you recall, the intersection of a segment and a region was called as a market in our optional Zoom sessions. As shown on the right, there are 12 distinct markets. While deciding about the overlap, you may consider 1) the entire global shoe industry, 2) just one segment (across all four regions), 3) just one region (across all three segments), or 4) just one market (segment x region). The choice is yours. Be sure to identify your choice clearly. You may show your analysis by using the CSI framework (textbook pages 62-63) and/or by drawing on the rich data available to you as part of your BSG reports. If you recall, CSI stands for Competing under Strategic Interdependence. This concept appeared in the Module 2 “Global Gamesmanship” article. B) Compare the relative internal resource positions of the focal firm and the key competitor at the end of Y14 by collecting the most relevant information. Understand what kind of information the authors tried to use for this purpose. Depending on your context, you may use a figure similar to 10.2, 10.4, 4.1-4.4 and/or a table similar to 4.1. If your information comes from multiple sources, it might make your analysis more robust and insightful. C) Compare the relative external market positions of the focal firm and the key competitor at the end of Y14. D) Plot the internal and external resource positions [see figure 10.3] at the end of Y14. Note in B, C, and D above you are analyzing the relative positions at the end of Y14. Essentially, you are treating Y11-Y14 as historical data. You will use this historical data to predict the behavior of your key competitor for Y15-Y16 as described below.
Page 2 of 2 E) Predict the future competitive behavior of the key competitor for Y15-Y16 using the competitor analysis framework (figure 10.5) proposed by the authors: beliefs (industry, competitors, and self), competitive intent and goals (corporate, business, and functional), and past competitive actions. F) Compare and contrast your predictions of the key competitor’s behavior for Y15-Y16 in item E above with what the key competitor actually did in Y15-Y16. G) Based on this application of the action model, what is/are your most important general take-away(s) that you can use in BSG Game 2? Be sure to answer this part in 150-200 words. Please try to make your answer to this part as “self-sufficient” as possible. I will share your answer to this item with your peers and ask everyone to identify the group with the best general take-away. External research: There is zero need to do any outside research. Data is fully coming from Industry 220 Y11-Y16. Conceptual material is fully coming from your textbook. Page length/formatting: 2-3 typed, single-spaced pages, Times New Roman, 11-point font, and 1-inch margins and unlimited exhibits (tables, charts, figures, and diagrams that will enhance your written report). While there is no upper limit on the number of exhibits, I would like to see at least five insightful exhibits. Exhibits are in addition to the written-text pages. Do not insert exhibits into the written-text pages. There is no need of a title page. Please identify your work concisely in one line at the top by simply listing the names of your teammates in alphabetical order by last name. For example: Jane Doe, John Doe, Kwon Lee, and Javier Rodrigues. Save your MICROSOFT WORD file using the same name: Jane Doe, John Doe, Kwon Lee, and Javier Rodrigues. Title Page (not required), Written Report Pages (Numbered 1-2 for a two-page report or 1-3 for a three-page report), Exhibit Pages (Numbering starts at 3 or 4 depending on the length of your report), References (none because there is no need to do external research). If you are running out of space, you may lower the margins up to 0.5 inch, but do not exceed the page limit, 2-3 typed pages. Use appropriate titles in bold but do not overdo the titles. Reminder: Do not upload a PDF file; I need a Word file. Your report, A-F, will be graded holistically using the following criteria. 91-100: The report fully, logically, and creatively addresses the question and demonstrates superior understanding of the course concepts and relevant data. The report is comprehensive, demonstrates critical thinking, and provides appropriate quantitative and qualitative evidence. Overall, there is a high value addition. 81-90: The report addresses the question with minor gaps. Course concepts and relevant data were incorporated into the report but did not demonstrate proficiency. Some evidence of critical thinking. May have some interesting insights. 71-80: The report did not contain substantive content or failed to fully address the question. The report has limited connection to course concepts and inadequate use of relevant data. Does not provide adequate evidence and does not demonstrate critical thinking. Limited value addition. There is substantial scope for improvement. 0-60: Exceptionally poor work can result in a score in this range. A-F, will be 90% of your Group Assignment 1 grade. The remaining 10% will be based on how your peers rank your answer to part G. A separate mechanism will be set up to gather this peer input.