solved analysis, your interpretation/explanation of what has happened in the case.

analysis, your interpretation/explanation of what has happened in the case. You should explain what has happened in terms of issues raised in the text and in class. The analysis should be about four to four and one-half pages in length.The case submission should also include a recommendation and implementation. This section should be one-half page to one full page in length.
The case should have a title page (not counted as one of the five pages above) which should include standard information such as team members’ names, the date of submission, the course name and number, and the instructor’s name.
Your case submission should contain three key elements described below – Introduction, Analysis, and Recommendation/Implementation.I recommend that you review the sample analysis of the case, “Patrick the porter” made available through the site for this course.
Introduction – value 15 points – 5 points for the introduction and 10 points for a clear and succinct problem identification and statement (the problem will flow from your analysis).
This section should only be about four or five sentences long and would normally be developed after your analysis and recommendation have been completed.For example, one might write something such as:
The following case submission/report (just samples, you might have a preferred name for this) examines events that have unfolded in the case, identifies the main problem(s) facing the people/organization, analyzes key issues and people, and concludes with a recommendation and implementation.We believe that the main problem that the firm faces is __________ and our main recommendation, which is fully detailed at the end of the submission/report, is __________.The problem and recommendation are based on the following detailed analysis.
You can include your recommendation in the introduction if you wish, but at least please state the problem.
Analysis – value 65 points – 50 points for incorporation of concepts from the text and course to explain the case issues and 15 points for how well your material is integrated.
Teams who include more key issues (e.g., individuality, perception, communication, etc.), fully consider those issues, and show how the issues contribute to the outcomes of the case will receive more marks than those teams who include fewer issues, and/or don’t explain the issues, and/or don’t show how the issues are related.
For example, in some analyses where perception is an issue that should be considered some teams simply use the word perception, but never describe the perceptual issues, nor do they show how they fit in with other issues discussed (i.e., integration).Other people have used the word perception and described the perception issues briefly, but have not shown how perception is a factor in the case.My suggestion is that if you deal with the issue of perception, describe the relevant perceptual issues, and show how perception is related to issues/problems in the case (this last connection is the integration issue).
Please bear in mind that there is no magic number of issues, but there are some key issues that teams should deal with.
Please use subheadings freely, but please remember to wrap up each section and indicate how the section is relevant to the problem and/or other elements.Please use transitions as you move on to the next sections.
Your analysis should conclude with a summary of the analysis, a brief restatement of the problem, and a closing that suggests you are now presenting your recommendation.
Recommendation/Implementation – value – 20 points – 10 points for a clear and direct recommendation to management, in your term case that is Dr. Aucoin, and 10 points for a brief description of your implementation.
Spelling and Grammar – I can live with a couple of typos or one or two awkward constructions, but after that I will dock the team points (to a maximum of 15 points) for poor spelling and grammar.
Other issues
Please do not use terms such as “would have”, “could have”, “should have”, “might have, or “if …”, which really just lead to speculation and take your focus away from what actually happened in the case.Please deal with the evidence before you in the case itself, not what might have been.
Assume that you have been hired by the university as a consultant and your job is to explain to Dr. Aucoin what has happened here (i.e., provide an analysis) and to provide Dr. Aucoin with a recommendation about what should be done now.