1 How to Analyze A Case STEP 1 – READ THE CASE STEP 2 – READ THE CASE AGAIN Having said that, case analysis is not about merely reading the case, but about thinking about the case. Of course, if you haven’t read it your going to have a difficult time thinking about it. “Reading is never the primary resource of the case analysis. Reading is merely an instrument directed by the thought process that makes meaning from the text” (The Case Study Handbook, Ellet 2007, p.20).

2 How to Analyze A Case STEP 3 – EMPLOY A FRAMEWORK TO HELP YOU ANALYZE THE CASE I suggested one example for a framework. Outline the… FACTS ISSUES Then write your analysis in a paragraph format YOUR ANALYSIS

3 How to Analyze A Case STEP 3 – EMPLOY A FRAMEWORK TO HELP YOU ANALYZE THE CASE Another ‘Framework’ for helping you to understand a case might be to look at types of situations which are likely to occur in cases. Problems A problem is a situation in which something important has happened, but we don’t know why it did. Cases usually provide many examples of problems. Decisions Many cases are organized around an explicit decision. For example “We Googled You”. Evaluations Cases may ask for your evaluation of a set of circumstances. For example: A new CEO evaluating the performance of her company. Rules Rules often occur in Qunatitative cases.. We probably will not encounter a case with rules (an example would be a takeover or acquisition evaluation).

4 IME 375 How to Analyze A Case STEP 4 – CONSIDER THE CASE ANALYSIS AS A PROCESS How do you know when to conclude study of the case? When you understand it? When you are familiar with the information in the case AND when you have come to a conclusion about the main issue AND you have evidence showing why your conclusion is reasonable AND you have thought about other possible conclusions and you can document why yours is preferable.

5 IME 375 How to Analyze A Case Think about the case as a staff meeting You will argue for one set of actions Your nearest competitor for the next promotion will argue for the opposite set of actions and will try to discredit your arguments. The next screen shows the winning case study from a national competition. The Case was “We Googled You”. If you would like to read the case itself (before you read the winning entry in the Harvard Business Review comptition), here is the link. gledYou.pdf

6 IME 375 How to Analyze A Case The winner of the June 2007 Interactive Case Study is Ananda Ganguly, a software development manager in Redmond, Washington. Ananda's winning response: What ought to be and what is do not always match. A professional manager must balance his personal convictions (which in this case may be sympathetic to Mimi) with the ground realities. The facts are: (a) information on the Internet remains forever and can be searched easily, (b) 'Googling' people is a very common practice, and (c) Chinese government, which plays a dominant role in the business practices in China, is unfriendly towards protesters like Mimi. If she is hired, Hathaway Jones will have a hostile and powerful government to deal with in China, and this will seriously jeopardize the company's plans. A good business decision is to not hire her for the Shanghai job. The next consideration would be to hire her to work behind the scenes as a consultant on the China project. However, this will not work because of; (a) the nature of the job requires involvement on the ground in China, and (b) this can result in a strained relationship with the new head of Shanghai store, and (c) the assignment will not suit Mimi's career aspirations. Good employees can make a difference, however, and Hathaway has a flagging US business that needs reinvigorating. That Mimi's political views are at odds with those of the Chinese government is only a problem if we consider her for the one job of as head of a Shanghai store. Hathaway should look at Mimi in a broader context, and can use her strong core business skills and US retailing experience for improving the US business.

7 IME 375 How to Analyze A Case According to Julia Kirby, senior editor at Harvard Business Review—who manages the case study section and judged of this contest—Ganguly was chosen because "I appreciated that he did three things in such short space. First, he took a stand on whether or why it's legitimate to use information found by Googling as input to a hiring decision. Second, he underscored the cultural dimension of the case, noting the particular challenge of its being a China-based position. And lastly, he offered a pragmatic solution that lets the CEO have it both ways." Congratulations Ananda, and thanks to all those who participated in this event.