Why do many organizations have data that cannot be converted to actionable information? What are the hurdles faced by firms that attempt to query transactional databases?

TRUE OR FALSE QUESTIONS

1. The evaluation of requirements for the key activities in the integration effort should consider the amount of knowledge transfer required, the degree of integration necessary, and the speed of the integration necessary
2. In developing a checklist it is critical that a clear response be possible so that a box can be Checked.
3. The checklist developed for evaluation and control should cover all potential aspects of the alliance/merger.
4. Evaluation and control is a discrete activity that occurs only after the firm has implemented its plan.
5. In the integration effort the new blended firm should worry about completing the integration and not worry about written documentation.

1. Evaluate the acquisition of Calphalon; does it make sense? (cost-benefit) What capabilities/resources of Newell would help/hinder this acquisition?

2. Evaluate the acquisition of Rubbermaid; does it make sense? (cost-benefit) What resources/capabilities of Newell would help/hinder this acquisition?

3. With the challenges that Newell faces, what should Newell's TMT consider/do regarding their corporate strategy? Or what should they be careful about the acquisition of Calphalon and/or Rubbermaid?

Alan Smith was the senior manager of a marketing and sales team at a medical devices company. Since his team was all together at a large off-site company event for three days (something rare given their travel schedules), he had pulled them together to discuss an important hire. The team needed to choose someone for a key management role with core responsibilities, such as attracting new business and promoting overall revenue growth.
After sorting through a large pool of applicants, he and several others on the team had narrowed down the field to two well-qualified internal candidates. Smith was now meeting with this team and with his own boss present to decide which of the two to hire. Even though Smith was not the most senior person there, he was clearly the one authorized to make the decision. He had decided at the outset to be in “listening” mode so as not to potentially bias the team toward his viewpoint, but rather to let them speak freely.
The first candidate was Mita Anand, who had excellent performance metrics. She was known to be a broad thinker, very outgoing, and willing to speak her mind.
The second candidate was John Merriweather. He was also a consistently strong performer, and he had a good reputation throughout the company. Culturally, he would be an easy fit with the rest of the team as well, having a similar temperament, interests, and points of view on most matters.
For the first few minutes of the discussion, various team members spoke about their experiences with, and opinions of, one or both candidates. Because both were unambiguously strong performers on the metrics used in their current roles, the discussion was so far confirming the choice of these two as the finalists, but wasn’t moving the needle clearly in the direction of either Anand or Merriweather. Until, that is, Elliott Bowers (a team manager who would be at an equivalent level with the candidate eventually chosen) spoke up.
“I’m surprised no one has mentioned what happened last night, since I know many of you noticed it,” Bowers began. “At the party last night, Mita did that wild group karaoke on stage. I heard she stayed out all night. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for a manager in our industry—let alone a mother—to behave like that.”
“Yes, it was pretty noticeable,” agreed another team member, who then asked, “But there weren’t any clients in the room, were there?”
“No, but I just don’t know if I can really trust her decision-making if that is how she behaves,” Bowers replied.A few others nodded their head in apparent agreement, but no one picked up on Bowers’s thread directly. Instead, the next comment moved back to a question about whose specific background experiences might be more valuable in the managerial role. Although Smith didn’t ask for a straw vote to see where people were at, he sensed that the group had begun to lean toward Merriweather.
After a few more minutes of discussion where nothing particularly differentiating was said, Smith sensed the conversation had reached a point of diminishing return, and thus brought the meeting to a close. He thanked everyone for their contribution, and said he would let them know his decision soon.

Question 4 :

Discuss each of the following:
1. The existence of Gender discrimination in the case.
2. The Glass Ceiling phenomena through focusing on "Why Women Stay Out of the Spotlight at Work".

In view of COVID-19 impact on businesses, organizations are planning to cut costs and one of the strategy of cutting cots is downsizing. Considering any large service organization, which strategy of downsizing in your opinion would be most appropriate? Provide justifications for your answer.

Describe in detail an organizational structure that would be suitable for an organization to have success in the fast food restaurant industry. Do you think the ideal structure would be different for a small expensive restaurant with a celebrity chef? Give reasons for your structure decisions

Alan Smith was the senior manager of a marketing and sales team at a medical devices company. Since his team was all together at a large off-site company event for three days (something rare given their travel schedules), he had pulled them together to discuss an important hire. The team needed to choose someone for a key management role with core responsibilities, such as attracting new business and promoting overall revenue growth.
After sorting through a large pool of applicants, he and several others on the team had narrowed down the field to two well-qualified internal candidates. Smith was now meeting with this team and with his own boss present to decide which of the two to hire. Even though Smith was not the most senior person there, he was clearly the one authorized to make the decision. He had decided at the outset to be in “listening” mode so as not to potentially bias the team toward his viewpoint, but rather to let them speak freely.
The first candidate was Mita Anand, who had excellent performance metrics. She was known to be a broad thinker, very outgoing, and willing to speak her mind.
The second candidate was John Merriweather. He was also a consistently strong performer, and he had a good reputation throughout the company. Culturally, he would be an easy fit with the rest of the team as well, having a similar temperament, interests, and points of view on most matters.
For the first few minutes of the discussion, various team members spoke about their experiences with, and opinions of, one or both candidates. Because both were unambiguously strong performers on the metrics used in their current roles, the discussion was so far confirming the choice of these two as the finalists, but wasn’t moving the needle clearly in the direction of either Anand or Merriweather. Until, that is, Elliott Bowers (a team manager who would be at an equivalent level with the candidate eventually chosen) spoke up.
“I’m surprised no one has mentioned what happened last night, since I know many of you noticed it,” Bowers began. “At the party last night, Mita did that wild group karaoke on stage. I heard she stayed out all night. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for a manager in our industry—let alone a mother—to behave like that.”
“Yes, it was pretty noticeable,” agreed another team member, who then asked, “But there weren’t any clients in the room, were there?”
“No, but I just don’t know if I can really trust her decision-making if that is how she behaves,” Bowers replied.A few others nodded their head in apparent agreement, but no one picked up on Bowers’s thread directly. Instead, the next comment moved back to a question about whose specific background experiences might be more valuable in the managerial role. Although Smith didn’t ask for a straw vote to see where people were at, he sensed that the group had begun to lean toward Merriweather.
After a few more minutes of discussion where nothing particularly differentiating was said, Smith sensed the conversation had reached a point of diminishing return, and thus brought the meeting to a close. He thanked everyone for their contribution, and said he would let them know his decision soon.

Question 3 :
As a leader, provide recommendations on how to apply gender Equality in your Organization ?

Question 3

Compose a literature review surrounding the debates on “The impact of a good marketing strategy on an organisation’s performance”. This submission will serve as part of your motivation or presentation to your Manager, pending on how well you gather and present the information pertaining to the above. (25)

Rules of Evidence

1. Under the rules of evidence, a judge may exclude relevant evidence for a variety of reasons. Which of the following is a situation where a judge can refuse to admit relevant evidence?
   1. The evidence is unduly prejudicial
   2. The evidence is hypothetical
   3. The evidence might be offensive
   4. The evidence is narrative
2. ________________ is defined as anything perceptible by the fives senses and any proof legally presented at trial to prove a contested issue and induce a belief in the mind of the jury.
   1. Testimony
   2. Point of law
   3. Evidence
   4. Hearsay
3. Evidence that proves or disproves facts in issue indirectly, by inference, is called:
   1. Circumstantial evidence
   2. Direct evidence
   3. Relevant evidence
   4. Demonstrative evidence
4. An attorney may impeach an opposing party’s witness by showing/proving that the witness:
   1. Has been convicted of a misdemeanor
   2. Made prior consistence statements
   3. Has a reputation for truthfulness
   4. Is influenced by bias or self-interest
5. ________________ refers to a document or process that memorializes who has had possession of an object and what they have done with it.
   1. Authenticity
   2. Chain of custody
   3. Forensic examination form
   4. Litigation hold
6. Harris is retained by legal counsel to provide an opinion involving specialized knowledge in the accounting field for a jury trial. Which of the following best describes his role.
   1. A fact witness
   2. A counseling expert
   3. A non-adversarial witness
   4. An expert witness
7. Evidence that tends to make some fact in issue more or less likely than it would be without the evidence is called:
   1. Relevant evidence
   2. Authenticated evidence
   3. Direct evidence
   4. Real evidence
8. The exclusionary rule:
   1. Prohibits a party from testifying about the contents of a document without producing the document itself
   2. Refers to the warnings advising suspects that they have the right not to answer questions and the right to legal counsel during interrogations
   3. Provides that, if the government violates an individual’s constitutional rights during a criminal investigation, it cannot prosecute the person whose rights were violated.
   4. Provides that, if the evidence is unconstitutionally seized, that evidence cannot be used in a criminal prosecution against the person whose rights were violate

Evaluating Deception

1. Black, a Certified Fraud Examiner, is interviewing a person whose honesty and truthfulness is unknown. Which of the following responses to a question by Black does NOT indicate a deceptive answer?
   1. “Please repeat the question.”
   2. “Let me see, now.”
   3. Why would I do that?”
   4. “I didn’t do it.”
2. Which of the following is likely to produce the most reliable behavioral symptoms?
   1. Mentally unstable subjects
   2. Juvenile subjects
   3. Highly intelligent subjects
   4. Subjects under the influence of drugs
3. Which is the most likely to be the answer of an honest person when accused of a wrongdoing?
   1. “I’m sorry, sir, but I didn’t do it.”
   2. “No!”
   3. “I didn’t take the $400,000 on March 15
   4. “But I couldn’t have don’t it. I don’t have necessary access.”

Alan Smith was the senior manager of a marketing and sales team at a medical devices company. Since his team was all together at a large off-site company event for three days (something rare given their travel schedules), he had pulled them together to discuss an important hire. The team needed to choose someone for a key management role with core responsibilities, such as attracting new business and promoting overall revenue growth.
After sorting through a large pool of applicants, he and several others on the team had narrowed down the field to two well-qualified internal candidates. Smith was now meeting with this team and with his own boss present to decide which of the two to hire. Even though Smith was not the most senior person there, he was clearly the one authorized to make the decision. He had decided at the outset to be in “listening” mode so as not to potentially bias the team toward his viewpoint, but rather to let them speak freely.
The first candidate was Mita Anand, who had excellent performance metrics. She was known to be a broad thinker, very outgoing, and willing to speak her mind.
The second candidate was John Merriweather. He was also a consistently strong performer, and he had a good reputation throughout the company. Culturally, he would be an easy fit with the rest of the team as well, having a similar temperament, interests, and points of view on most matters.
For the first few minutes of the discussion, various team members spoke about their experiences with, and opinions of, one or both candidates. Because both were unambiguously strong performers on the metrics used in their current roles, the discussion was so far confirming the choice of these two as the finalists, but wasn’t moving the needle clearly in the direction of either Anand or Merriweather. Until, that is, Elliott Bowers (a team manager who would be at an equivalent level with the candidate eventually chosen) spoke up.
“I’m surprised no one has mentioned what happened last night, since I know many of you noticed it,” Bowers began. “At the party last night, Mita did that wild group karaoke on stage. I heard she stayed out all night. I just don’t think it’s appropriate for a manager in our industry—let alone a mother—to behave like that.”
“Yes, it was pretty noticeable,” agreed another team member, who then asked, “But there weren’t any clients in the room, were there?”
“No, but I just don’t know if I can really trust her decision-making if that is how she behaves,” Bowers replied.A few others nodded their head in apparent agreement, but no one picked up on Bowers’s thread directly. Instead, the next comment moved back to a question about whose specific background experiences might be more valuable in the managerial role. Although Smith didn’t ask for a straw vote to see where people were at, he sensed that the group had begun to lean toward Merriweather.
After a few more minutes of discussion where nothing particularly differentiating was said, Smith sensed the conversation had reached a point of diminishing return, and thus brought the meeting to a close. He thanked everyone for their contribution, and said he would let them know his decision soon.
Question 1 :
After reading the 'Whom should we promote case, answer the following.
A) Identify the main characters in this case, B) according to your understanding, what is / are the main issue (s)?
C) According to the information you have been provided, if you w e in Smith 's position, who would you choose and why?

Mexico Inc. has opened numerous restaurants near college campuses. Given below are student population in thousands (X) and annual revenue in millions at Taco Sell (Y) for various campuses.

a) Is this a time series or a causal relation case?

b) Please develop a regression equation for this case (write the equation clearly)

c) How good is the model (that is what can you say about the model given the r2 value)?

d) Now, the company is contemplating opening an outlet at IUP (current student population 10,000). Make a forecast of annual revenue at the IUP outlet of Taco Sell
.

Identify the nine functions of the Value Chain, and then explain what specific information is provided in Capstone to do this kind of organizational analysis? Are all functions accounted for within the simulation? Where would you find data in the Reports to do a Value Chain analysis? Be as specific as possible.

Critically explain how corporate growth strategies can contribute to gaining competitive advantage on a business-level in the fashion industry. Please use relevant theoretical frameworks and real-life example (s).

Critically discuss the different business-level strategies that a company can adopt and please indicate which strategy is most beneficial to follow in the smart phone industry.

Question 2

Read the extract below and answer the question that follow.

Strawbwrry international wishes to conduct a research study using their employees as key participants. The organisation maintains a global footprint and employs over 25 000 employees at several branches worldwide.

2.1 Discuss the reasons why sampling such a population is necessary (10)

2.2 Describe four types of non-probability sampling. (8)

2.3 Critically analyze the principle of sampling. (12)