Case Analysis

Case Analysis

Task:

You are required to write a real-world critical appraisal of an innovation project undertaken by one of the industry or government organisations in the

commercialisation process. You will need to provide a synthesis of the different elements involved in the innovation and commercialisation process concerning the R&D

stage, business/product development, funding regimes and Intellectual property strategies. You also need critically to analyse the strategies employed and provide

strategic recommendations and alternative options that are linked to your analysis.

For example, you may choose to write a report to document the developmental elements of a new product development or an innovation project in a technology firm

(biotechnology firm or biotechnology product) and evaluate firm’s commercialisation strategies. For the new product development/innovation project you may emphasis

critical issues such as discovery and R&D, business development, financial & IP issues, manufacturing, marketing and business strategy, as the firm moves through the

new product development stages.

The following hints may provide some guidance for writing your case study.

a)    The case study may be presented in report format. Executive summary may be used for the report.
b)    In general you need to gain a good understanding of what was happening to the case company regarding the commercialisation process.
c)    Begin with an introduction to the case and develop a brief outline of the history, important developments, and growth of the company.
d)    Clearly articulate and discuss the strategic issues the company faced regarding the commercialisation/innovation processes.
e)    Identify what problem/s the company was confronting in relation to innovation projects.
f)    Analyse the company’s commercialisation strategy by referring to the different critical elements involved in the process and offer alternative strategic

recommendation.
g)    Search and include external resources if necessary.
h)    Written expression, coherence, consistency and logical development are important.

For example, you may structure your report as:
1.    Executive Summary
2.    Introduction (brief)
3.    Company Information: History, Product, Growth
4.    Innovation/Commercialisation Process
(In this section you may have several sub-sections and you should refer to a specific product/process within the case company to address/discuss critical issues that

were/are relevant to the new product development within the company, for example, discovery stage, business development, IP issues, manufacturing issues, marketing,

etc. try to link your discussion to relevant concepts and theories) – Overall this section depends on what problems/issues the company faced/facing or are/were

critical for commercialising their products/services and depending on the case some elements may need more discussion and emphasis than other elements.
5.    Strategic Recommendations
(Based on your previous analysis you need to offer a few key recommendations and action plans for the possible future product development or innovation projects within

the company)
6.    Conclusion (brief)

Please also see the marking criteria sheet, which is also based on the above points.

CRITERION    GRADE 7    GRADE 6    GRADE 5    GRADE 4    < GRADE 4
1    Understanding of the case and identification of critical issues

Weighting 10/40

/10    Excellent. Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the case (e.g. history, background, technology, etc). Critical issues/problems are relevant to the

case, and analysed in an accurate and comprehensive manner.

10 – 8.5    Very good. Demonstrates clear understanding of the case (e.g. history, background, technology, etc). Critical issues/problems are relevant to the case,

and analysed with only minor errors in accuracy and completeness.

8 – 7.5    Good. Understanding of the case (e.g. history, background, technology, etc) may be implicit and not comprehensive, with some omissions. Critical

issues/problems are relevant to the case, and described with some errors in accuracy and completeness.

7 –  6.5    Satisfactory. Lacking in clear explanation of the case (e.g. history, background, technology, etc). Not all critical issues/problems are relevant to

the case, some omission, errors in accuracy and completeness.

6 – 5    Poor. Limited understanding of the case (e.g. history, background, technology, etc) and its critical issues/problems. Many omissions, errors in accuracy or

completeness.

4.5 – 0
2    Individual reflection, interpretation and analysis of commercialisation strategies

Weighting 12/40
/12    Excellent – has demonstrated an outstanding ability to access and critically evaluate in depth the commercilisation/business strategies of the case, linking to

theory literature,  and using techniques,  models or concepts for analysis that are highly relevant and informative.

12 – 11    Very good – Has accessed and evaluated commercilisation/business strategies in depth to a high standard; well linked to theory/models; only minor problems; all

relevant to chosen case.

10.5 – 9    Good access and evaluation of commercilisation/business strategies; some problems e.g. limited analysis; link to theory, models, concepts may be

implicit; generally relevant to chosen case.

8.5 – 7.5    Satisfactory access and evaluation of commercilisation/business strategies; some limitations e.g. selection and/or omissions; may lack depth of

analysis, or lack integration of arguments to appropriate theory, models, concepts.

7 – 6    Poor – Has used too little analytical techniques; inadequate analysis and/or not linked to appropriate theory, models, concepts, and/or unsubstantiated

evidence.

5.5 – 0
3    Critical evaluation of alternative options and strategic recommendations linked to analysis

Weighting 12/40

/12    Excellent – Recommendations clearly based on the integrated argument and evidence reviewed. Explicit links to analysis and critical issues. Relevant and

innovative implementation and action solutions are devised, critiqued and analysed. Alternative strategies are thoroughly considered.

12 – 11    Very good – Recommendations clearly based on the integrated argument and evidence reviewed. Mainly explicit links to analysis and critical issues. Offers

relevant and comprehensively critiques implementation and action solution. Alternative strategies are well considered.

10.5 – 9    Good – Recommendations mainly based on the integrated argument and evidence reviewed. Links to analysis and critical issues may be implicit. Describes

in detail implementation and action solutions. Alternative strategies are basically considered.

8.5 – 7.5    Satisfactory –
Some conclusions and recommendations based on the integrated argument and evidence reviewed. Implicit links to analysis and critical issues.  Basically describes

implementation and action solutions. Alternatives not considered.

7 – 6    Poor – Conclusions not based on integrated argument of analysis and link to critical issues. Implementation and action solutions very limited. Alternatives not

considered.

5.5 – 0
4    Written expression, structure and writing style

Weighting 6/30

/6
Excellent –
Well-structured, argument flows well, Very professional writing style.

6 – 5.5    Very good –
Well-structured, minor problems with argument flow. Well-written, easy to read.

5 – 4.5    Good –
Good structure, some problems with flow
Some errors in writing style.

4 – 3.5    Satisfactory –
Disjointed structure
Adequate writing style but little difficult to read.

3 – 2.5    Poor –Unsatisfactory structure, lacks coherence. Poor writing style, with many grammatical and editing errors.

2-0

These are some useful references that can help you to do the assignment

References

•    Hine, D. & Kapeleris, J (2006) Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Biotechnology, an International Perspective: Concepts, Theories and Cases, Cheltenham, UK:

Edward Elgar.

•    Trott, Paul (2008) Innovation Management and New Product Development, 4th ed. Essex, UK: Prentice Hall.

•    Murray, R. & Wilemon, D. (2008) The Strategy of Managing Innovation and Technology, New Jersey: Pearson Education.

•    White, M. A. & Bruton, G. D. (2011) The Management of Technology and Innovation: A Strategic Approach, 2nd ed. Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂