Oral Presentation: Case Study Report Assessment

Assessment Format

In this assessment item, you are required to create and deliver an oral presentation around the case study provided for the Case Study Report Assessment. In the presentation, you are required to demonstrate an understanding of the case study with critical context and most importantly demonstrate your presentation skills. 

Assessment Format

The presentation will be delivered as a group consisting of the same members that would have been decided for the Case Study Report Assessment.  The presentation will be of 20 minutes duration, including time for facilitating discussion and answering audience questions towards the end.  There is no limit to the number of slides however you are required to stick to the 20 minute timeframe. A suggested structure for the presentation is outlined below:

• Title slide
• Presentation outline slide
• Introduction slide
• Organisational background slide
• Problems faced and Purpose slide
• Part 1 slide/s
• Part 2 slide/s
• Part 3 slide/s
• Part 4 slide/s
• Conclusion slide
• Recommendations slide
• References slide
• Discussion Questions’ slide

Part 1, 2, 3 & 4 relate to the topics specified in the Case Study Report Assessment. It is important that you read and understand the case study before designing the presentation slides.)

On-campus students will present the presentations during the tutorial class and the presentations will be marked in the class. Some informal feedback will be provided by the marker on the day of the presentation. However, marks will not be released immediately as they will need to be moderated by the Unit Coordinator first.

Marking Criteria

Students should familiarise themselves with the marking guide to ensure they have addressed the criteria when preparing and presenting their presentation. The presentation will be assessed according to the degree to which you demonstrate your capability in the following areas:

1. Visual Appeal
2. Comprehension/Facilitating Discussion and Answering Questions/ Preparedness/Participation/Group Dynamics
3. Presentation Skills
4. Content
5. Presentation Structure/Organisation

The marks awarded for Criteria 1, 4 and 5 will be the same for all .However, marks may vary for Criteria 2 and 3, based on how a presenter presents. If someone fails to participate in the presentation, 0 marks will be awarded. A medical certificate or similar evidence is required, if there are unavoidable circumstances due to which the presentation is not delivered as scheduled.

Your presentation must include in-text referencing and a correctly cited list of references ordered alphabetically by surname of first author, in accordance with the Harvard style of referencing as referred to in the 

All assignments will be checked for plagiarism (material copied from other students and/or material copied from other sources) using Turn-It-In. If you are found to have plagiarised material or if you have used someone else’s words without appropriate referencing, you will be penalised for plagiarism which could result in zero marks for the whole presentation. In some circumstances a more severe penalty may be imposed as per University policy.

Penalties will be shared amongst the group. Hence, it is important that all members present on the allocated day/time and ensure that the presentation is free from any plagiarism. All students in the group need to upload a copy of their presentation into Moodle by 5:00pm on the day of their presentation. Failure to do so may result in a mark of 0/20 for every member of the group.

Useful information about referencing and avoiding plagiarism can be found 

Presentation Marking Guide

Student Name(s) & ID(s): ______________________________________________________________________

Presentation Date: _______________________________________

Start time: _________________ End time: __________________Marker’s Name: ­­­­­­­­­­_________________________

	Presentation Marking Guide
	4 - Excellent	3 - Good	2 - Fair	1 - Needs Improvement	Mark
1. Visual Appeal	-There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. -Information is clear and concise on each slide. -Visually appealing/engaging.	-There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. -Too much information on two or more slides. -Significant visual appeal.	-There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. -Too much information was contained on many slides. -Minimal effort made to make slides appealing or too much going on.	-There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. -The slides were difficult to read and too much information had been copied onto them. -No visual appeal of the slides.
2. Comprehension/Facilitating Discussion and Answering Questions/ Preparedness/ Participation/ Group Dynamics	-Presenter showed complete understanding of case study/topic. -Accurately answered all questions posed. -Presenter knew the information, participated equally, and helped each other as needed. -Extremely prepared and rehearsed.	-Presenter showed a good understanding of case study/topic. -Presenter able to answer most of audience questions. -Slight domination of one presenter. Members helped each other.  -Very well prepared.	-Presenter showed good understanding of some parts of case study/topic. -Presenter accurately answered some questions. -Significant controlling by some members with one minimally contributing. -Primarily prepared but with some dependence on just reading off slides.	-Presenter did not understand case study/topic. -Majority of questions not answered or majority of information incorrect. -Unbalanced presentation or tension resulting from over-helping. -Presenter and/or multiple group members not participating. Evident lack of preparation/rehearsal. Too much dependence on slides.
3. Presentation Skills	-Regular/constant eye contact. -The audience was engaged, and presenter held the audience’s attention. -Appropriate speaking volume, fluctuation in tone and appropriate body language. -Confident	-Presenter spoke to majority of audience; steady eye contact. -The audience was engaged by the presentation. -Presenter spoke at a suitable volume and fluctuation. -Some fidgeting by presenter.	-Presenter focused on only part of audience. Infrequent eye contact. -The audience was distracted. -Speakers could be heard by only part of the audience. -Body language was distracting.	-Minimal eye contact by presenter focusing on small part of audience. -The audience was not engaged. -Presenter spoke too quickly or quietly making it difficult to understand. Low volume and/or monotonous tone. -Inappropriate/disinterested body language. Very nervous.
4. Content	-The presentation was a concise summary of the case study and demonstrated understanding. -Comprehensive and complete coverage of information. -Critically analysed the case study and not just a regurgitation.	-The presentation was a good summary of the case study. -Most important information covered; little irrelevant info. -Some critical analysis.	-The presentation was informative but several elements went unanswered. -Much of the information irrelevant; coverage of some of major points. -Inadequate critical analysis	-The presentation was a brief look at the topic but many issues were left unanswered. -Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out. -No critical analysis
5. Presentation Structure/Organisation	-Information was presented in a logical sequence with appropriate slides (title, outline, introduction, main body, conclusion, recommendations, references and discussion questions) -Provides clear purpose, relevant examples, figures and supports ideas with supporting evidence/references. -Correct referencing style with no mistakes. -Organises time well, presentation is not too short or too long.	-Information was presented in a logical sequence but some key slides missing. -Somewhat clear purpose, some examples and some support of ideas with evidence. -Some mistakes in referencing. -Generally timed well but spent too much or too less on a topic.	-Information was inconsistently organized with many key slides missing. -Attempted to identify purpose, provides weak examples that do not support the case study and very thin evidence. -Many mistakes in referencing; Misleading and/or irrelevant references. -Spent too much or too less on many topics.	-No sequence of information. Does not clearly define purpose. No figures used. -No supporting references were used. -Incorrect referencing style with many mistakes. -Used time poorly; the whole presentation is too long or too short.
				Total	/20

 

Presentation Outline

?This presentation is based on the analysis of the case study of IBM.

?The presentation starts with the overview of the company, its operations and functions in the IT industry.

?The later part of the presentation deals with the analysis of the problems faced by the company and possible solutions for the same.

Introduction

?Continuous improvement is important for any organization to survive in the market.

?In addition to improvement, innovation is also a necessary attribute for IT companies (Taran et al. 2016).

?IBM is an IT company that grows with continuous improvement and innovation. Organizational Background

?International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) is an internationally acclaimed information technology company that deals with the manufacture and sale of various IT products like computers, computer software, microelectronics and digital storage systems (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?IBM has established itself as one of largest IT companies in the world in terms of revenue and annual profit.   

?IBM is based in Armonk, New York, USA.

?In 2004, IBM generated a revenue of $96.3 billion with the profit margin settling around $8.4 billion (Etzkowitz and Ranga 2015).

?The total number of employees and stakeholders of the company have surpassed the 1 million mark in 2005 itself.

Leadership Team

 Problem Faced and Purpose

?In spite of having extensive business planning and investment in the research department of the company, there are a number of problems and challenges faced by the company (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?However, the company’s innovation and business policy means it is always ready to face challenges and make suitable innovations and change management policies to address these challenges.

 

?The purpose of the company is to learn from mistakes and make better business decisions in the future.

?The first purpose of the company is to identify the mistakes that resulted in disasters or failure of the projects (Zhang, Kandampully and Bilgihan 2015).

?Next, the company wants to prepare a suitable plan for the development of new business and innovation framework that will not repeat previous mistakes.

Innovation Barriers

?The main issues the company has faced are related to innovation barriers.

?The company invests a huge amount of their annual revenue in the innovation sector.

?In 2004, it was found that the company invested around $6 billion in the innovation department (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?The company strictly follows the policy of continuous innovation in order to always stay ahead of the competitors in the market.

Marking Criteria

 

?Some of the main innovation barriers the company faces are explained in the following slides.

?The business management system of the company mostly emphasized on short term business plans rather than planning on designing long term sustainable business strategy (Taran et al. 2016).

?IBM stated that one main problem was that they were mostly occupied on current markets and offerings rather than focusing on entering new markets.

?The business model of IBM was based on establishing sustained profit and revenue rather than growing on the existing revenue and increase the profit margin every year.

?The company also lacked sufficient insight of the market, especially the embryonic markets that were only growing (Zhang, Kandampully and Bilgihan 2015). Lessons Learnt from the Barriers

?Since the challenges faced in the innovation and business model, the company has learnt some major lessons and has taken suitable steps to avoid such barriers in the future.

?The company realized that simply making investment in innovation department does not ensure success (Taran et al. 2016).

?Many of IBM’s ventures and projects failed due to lack of proper execution plan and business model.Policies Developed for Addressing Issues

?As a corrective measure for avoiding the discussed challenges and barriers, the company created some new policies that will be beneficial for the company in the long run.

?The company created a policy in which “smart” people will be recruited rather than only efficient people (Nylén and Holmström 2015).?In this policy, the company wants the employees to take part in various operational aspects of the company and suggest new ideas and measures on a regular basis (Taran et al. 2016).

?The company introduced the concept of diversity of thoughts in the organization structure.Awards and Recognition

?In addition to the new policies, the company also announced several awards and recognition for employees who have exceptionally contributed towards the success of the company (Taran et al. 2016).

?These awards are selected based on year long performances and important contributions towards the growth of business of the company.Evaluation of Investments

?The investments of the company can be evaluated using balanced scorecard method.

?It has already been stated that the company makes a significant amount of investment in the innovation sector.

?However, the innovations are made for short term strategies only.

?More long term strategies for innovation model and investment are required.

 New Learning Ideologies

?In spite of application of the new policies and the reward system for the employees, IBM realized that another important requirement is missing.

Presentation Structure/Organisation

?IBM understood that unless there is not a learning framework available, there will not be sufficient professional development among the employees (Zhang, Kandampully and Bilgihan 2015).

?For the learning framework, the company introduced three new learning ideologies for the employees.

 Work Apart Learning

?This framework allows the employees to learn in a different environment other than work only.

?The benefit of this framework is that the employee does not need to remain under the work place pressure and has the freedom of learning (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?The employee has the chance to evaluate and practice his skills without having to make errors and mistakes at office work.

?Work apart learning provides the employees with a school like environment where they can learn with interactive learning methods (Taran et al. 2016).

?With these learning sessions, the employees can learn personally without others’ disturbances or professional pressure.

 Work Embedded Learning

?This is a special type of learning framework that has been implemented by IBM for instant learning without disturbing the flow of work.

?An example of application of this framework in the IBM GPS (Global Positioning System) that informs a driver regarding his current location and the direction he has to go without needing him to query for his location information (Taran et al. 2016).

?In this method, the employees do not have to take part in additional learning classes or courses (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?This learning is only suitable for the employees who can learn easily along with the flow of work.

 

Work Enabled Learning

?This approach framework is specifically for the employees who are interested in making the workplace a room for learning and professional development (Zhang, Kandampully and Bilgihan 2015).

?The learning sessions are conducted within the workplace aiding the professional development of the employees.

?Personal reflection and development are also parts of this learning framework.

?The disadvantage of this method is that it slows down the progress of work of the employees.

?However, it also presents a platform for learning from own mistakes (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?The innovative power of employees increases based on this reflective learning.

 Role of Learning in Employee Development

?The different types of learning methods help the employees gather sufficient knowledge and skills needed for professional development (Nylén and Holmström 2015).

?Different learning frameworks have been applied for benefitting different types of employees.

 

Integrated Product Development Model and Benefits

 

 Critical Success Factors

?From the analysis of the case study, the critical success factors can be determined.

?Some of the critical success factors for the innovation model for IBM are as follows.

ØSustainable innovation framework

ØSuitable investment as per requirements

ØGrowth of the company in market rather than constant market sustainability

Conclusion

?Finally, it can be concluded that there are a lot of reasons behind the success of IBM in the IT industry.

?The main and the most important attribute of the company is that it takes failures as major steps of learning and use them for future success.

The company also invests heavily on innovation in spite of one or two failures

Recommendations

?Some recommendations for the company to avoid innovation barriers are as follows.

ØThe company must emphasize on building an innovation framework before investing in innovation. Planned innovation is more important than random innovation.

ØThe company should assess the feasibility of the innovation in terms of the current market.

ØThe company should encourage the employees to take part in learning courses for their professional development.

ØThere should be free idea exchange environment within the offices so that different employees can interact with each other and share ideas that will be beneficial for the company.Lessons Learnt and Path for Future

ØFrom the analysis of the case study, it has been learnt that if long term plans are not developed, the innovation process may face significant barriers.

ØIt has been learnt that the company needs to follow a suitable innovation framework in order to maintain a sustainable innovation process.

ØThe investments should be made based on long term plans and market sustainability.

References

Etzkowitz, H. and Ranga, M., 2015. Triple Helix systems: an analytical framework for innovation policy and practice in the Knowledge Society. In Entrepreneurship and Knowledge Exchange (pp. 117-158). Routledge.

Nylén, D. and Holmström, J., 2015. Digital innovation strategy: A framework for diagnosing and improving digital product and service innovation. Business Horizons, 58(1), pp.57-67.

Taran, Y., Nielsen, C., Montemari, M., Thomsen, P. and Paolone, F., 2016. Business model configurations: a five-V framework to map out potential innovation routes. European Journal of Innovation Management, 19(4), pp.492-527.

Zhang, T., Kandampully, J. and Bilgihan, A., 2015. Motivations for customer engagement in online co-innovation communities (OCCs) A conceptual framework. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 6(3), pp.311-328.