MGMT 401 – Strategic Management Capstone
Final Case Study Analysis and Strategic Recommendation Report
Institutional Model: American University of Dubai (School of Business Administration)
Course Level: Senior (Year 4 Undergraduate)
Assessment Type: Individual Written Case Study Report (Capstone)
Weight: 30% of Final Course Grade
Length: 2,500–3,000 words (approximately 8–10 pages, excluding references and appendices)
Citation Style: APA 7th Edition
Submission: LMS upload (Turnitin enabled)
Assessment Overview
This capstone case analysis reflects a long-standing assessment pattern in Strategic Management courses across American-style universities in the Middle East and the United States. Faculty frequently assign a comprehensive Harvard-style case report in the final third of the semester. The structure rarely changes because it aligns closely with AACSB learning goals related to strategic analysis, ethical reasoning, and integrative decision-making.
Students are expected to demonstrate that they can move beyond summarizing a case. The task requires diagnosis, evaluation of alternatives, and the development of defensible recommendations grounded in theory and evidence. In my experience teaching this course, what separates strong submissions from average ones is not length but clarity of strategic reasoning.
Case Selection
Select one contemporary organization operating in the Middle East. The firm must have sufficient publicly available information (annual reports, investor briefings, credible news coverage). Examples may include regional airlines, retail conglomerates, logistics firms, hospitality groups, or technology companies.
Privately owned firms may be used if reliable secondary data is available. Avoid purely descriptive profiles.
Assignment Task
Prepare a structured Strategic Management Report addressing the following components:
I. Executive Summary (250–300 words)
- Concise statement of the firm’s strategic position
- Primary strategic challenge
- Headline recommendation
II. External Environment Analysis
- PESTEL analysis (focused and selective)
- Industry structure using Porter’s Five Forces
- Key opportunities and threats
III. Internal Analysis
- Resource-based view assessment
- VRIO or VRIN evaluation
- Core competencies and capability gaps
IV. Strategic Issue Identification
Clearly articulate the central strategic problem. Avoid listing multiple unrelated issues. The problem statement should be precise and supported by evidence.
V. Evaluation of Strategic Alternatives
- Present at least two feasible strategic options
- Evaluate each using relevant strategy frameworks
- Consider financial, operational, and reputational implications
VI. Final Recommendation and Implementation Plan
- Justify one preferred strategy
- Outline implementation steps over 12–24 months
- Identify risks and mitigation measures
VII. Conclusion
Reflect briefly on long-term sustainability and competitive positioning.
Formatting Requirements
- 2,500–3,000 words
- APA 7th edition
- Minimum 8 scholarly sources (2018–2026)
- Use clear section headings
- Appendices permitted for tables and financial summaries
Excessively descriptive papers will lose analytical marks. Strategic tools must inform reasoning rather than appear as isolated diagrams.
Marking Rubric (30%)
| Criteria | Excellent (A) | Good (B) | Competent (C) | Limited | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strategic Analysis Depth | Frameworks applied critically and accurately | Mostly accurate application | Basic application | Superficial description | 8% |
| Problem Identification | Clear, focused, evidence-based | Mostly clear | Broad or partially supported | Unclear or inconsistent | 5% |
| Evaluation of Alternatives | Comparative, analytical, justified | Some comparison present | Limited depth | No meaningful evaluation | 7% |
| Recommendation & Implementation | Realistic, phased, risk-aware | Adequate but general | Basic implementation outline | Weak or unsupported | 6% |
| Academic Writing & APA | Clear, professional, properly cited | Minor formatting errors | Noticeable issues | Significant errors | 4% |
Weekly Discussion Companion (Week 9 – 400 Words)
Post a 400-word summary of your proposed strategic recommendation. Respond to two peers with constructive critique focused on feasibility and competitive sustainability.
Sample Analytical Study Bay (Model Direction Only)
The airline’s competitive position appears constrained by rising fuel costs and intensified regional rivalry. Industry data suggests that carriers with differentiated service models sustain stronger margins compared to price-based competitors. Porter’s framework indicates high buyer power and moderate threat of substitution, particularly from low-cost carriers. A strategic shift toward premium service segmentation could strengthen brand equity if supported by operational efficiency improvements. Evidence from industry studies indicates that firms aligning resources with distinctive capabilities achieve superior long-term performance (Islami, Mustafa & Latkovikj, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v15n1p99). Financial restructuring alone may not resolve competitive pressures without strategic repositioning.
Scholarly References (APA 7th Edition)
Islami, X., Mustafa, N., & Latkovikj, M. T. (2020). Linking Porter’s generic strategies to firm performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 15(1), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v15n1p99
Barney, J. B., & Mackey, A. (2021). Text and metatext in the resource-based view. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12330
Grant, R. M. (2019). The resource-based theory of competitive advantage. California Management Review, 61(3), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619842472
Verbeke, A., & Hutzschenreuter, T. (2021). The future of international business strategy research. Journal of International Business Studies, 52, 595–602. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00424-8
