Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
Michael Porter’s model and its components
This assignment covers the content in Michael Porter’s Competitive Advantage. In this assignment you must pick an article from the Harvard Business Review website (https://hbr.org/) that deals with strategic management of a company. The HBR article MUST be related to the strategic
management of a company. A number of these articles are listed in your syllabus.
- Describe Michael Porter’s model and its components. Pick an industry and describe how the different components of the model relate to the industry.
- Apply all components of Porter’s model to your HBR case, as a case review. Your response here must be at least a page and will likely be more.
- NO plagiarism
- Pages 4-6
- No need to refer the text book now.
- I need it in 10 hrs please.
- I’ll include the articles below. If possible write from those, if not choose anything that related to the with strategic management of a company.
Harvard Business Review/Cases
Paul W. Beamish. Currie Road Construction Limited. Harvard Business Review. 2014.
Rosi Ji; Thorsten Knauer; Momo Schafer; Friedrich Sommer; Jil Wehlmann. EADS/Airbus: Vision 2020 . Harvard Business Review. 2014.
Hounaida A El Jurdi; Nadine A Yehya. AUB Medical Center: Achieving 2020 Vision. Harvard Business Review. 2014.
Michael N. Young; Donald Liu. Hong Kong Disneyland . Harvard Business Review. 2014.
Mridula Anand; Anand Nandkumar; Charles Dhanaraj. Embrace (A): Opportunity Identification . Harvard Business Review. 2013.
Mridula Anand; Anand Nandkumar; Charles Dhanaraj. Embrace (B): Opportunity Assessment . Harvard Business Review. 2013.
Mridula Anand; Anand Nandkumar; Charles Dhanaraj. Embrace (D): Building the Business Model . Harvard Business Review. 2013.
Abdulrahman Y. Al-Aali and David J. Teece. Towards the Strategic Management of Intellectual Property: Retrospective and Prospective. Harvard Business Review. 2013.
William W. Fisher III and Felix Oberholzer-Gee. Strategic Management of Intellectual Property: An Integrated Approach. Harvard Business Review. 2013.
James G. Conley, Peter M. Ernst & Holger Ernst. Value Articulation: A Framework for Strategic Management of Intellectual Property. Harvard Business Review. 2013.
Kim Warren. Building Strategy and Performance Through Time: 5: Building and Managing the Strategic Architecture. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Alina Dulipovici and Ann-Frances Cameron. We Gave them the Tool, But Hardly Anyone’s Using it! Untangling the Knowledge Management Dilemma at TPA. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Russell Walker and Joanna Wilson. Nokia’s Supply Chain Management. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
- Chan Kim, Renee Mauborgne and Oh Young Koo. How Apple’s Corporate Strategy Drives Growth?Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Martin Lockstrom, Thomas Callarman and Shengrong Zhang. Strategic Sourcing at Whirlpool China: Finding the Ideal Supplier. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Boris Groysberg and Sarah L. Abbott. A.P. Moller-Maersk Group: Evaluating Strategic Talent Management Initiatives. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Larry Yuspeh. Linking Process and Strategic Risks for Effective Risk Management. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Gerry Johnson, George s. Yip and Manuel Hensmans. Achieving Successful Strategic Transformation. Harvard Business Review. 2012.
Mary M. Crossan. Strategic Analysis and Action. Harvard Business Review. 2011.
Juli Wulf. Corporate Strategy at Berkshire Partners. Harvard Business Review. 2010
Stanford. Highbridge Capital Management: Building A Sustainable Organization. Harvard Kennedy School of Business. 2010
Arnold Iranka. Executing Strategic Change. Harvard Business Review. 2009.
William E. Gillis. Franchiser Strategy and Firm Performance: Making the Most of Strategic Resources. Kelly School of Business. 2009.
Bo Bemhard. Ecco A/S-Global Value Chain Management. Ivey. 2008.
Robert A. Burgelman. HP’s ProCurve in 2009. Stanford Graduate School of Business. 2009
Yves Doz. The Dynamic of Strategic Agility. Hass School of Business, University of California at Berkley. 2008.
Xuelt Huang. Strategic Management at Zhujiang Iron and Steel Company. Asian Case Research Center. The University of Hong Kong. 2007.
Yu Chen. Strategic Performance Measurement of Supplier at HTC. Asian Case Research Center. The University of Hong Kong. 2008.
Wendy Garling. Instilling a Strategy Management Culture at St. Vincent Catholic Medical Center. Harvard Business Review. 2010.
David Norton. The Office of Strategy Management. The State of the Art, 2011. Harvard Busniess Review. 2011.
Atanu Adhlkart. UTV and Disney: A Strategic Alliance. Ivey. 2010.
Robert W. Keldel. WAWA: Supply Change Management. Harvard Business Review. 2011.
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.