Words: 431
Individual Assignment #1 In 1996, Gillette acquired Duracell batteries for $7. 3 billion in stock. The purchase was met with optimism not only by Gillette’s senior management and its highly visible director, Warren Buffett, but also by Wall Street analysts. Despite the initial enthusiasm, Duracell had become a drain on Gillette’s performance and had brought an end to Gillette’s impressive earnings growth history. It had also cost Michael Hawley, a former CEO, his job after only 18 months in the position, due to his inability to turn around the financial hemorrhaging at the Duracell division.
Suppose it is 2001 and you are a business consultant. James Kilt, the newly hired CEO of Gillette, hires you to write a 3-page and double-spaced consulting report for him. Considering what had cost his predecessor’s job, Mr. Kilt asks you to provide recommendations on the question: “How to turn around the Duracell division? ” Grading Criteria: Your response to the question will be evaluated on the basis of: Professionalism (Form & Critical Thinking) 1. Not acceptable. Paper needed copy editing for spelling and/or grammar. . Not good. Rehashed a lot of case fact. 3. Acceptable. Well written and little repetition of case facts. 4. Very good. Well written and well argued. Comprehensive. Breadth and Depth of Knowledge on the Topic 1. Not acceptable. The pros and cons the suggestions are not mentioned. 2. Not good. Only the pros or the cons of the suggestions are mentioned. 3. Acceptable. Both the pros and the cons of the suggestions are mentioned. 4. Very good. Both the pros and the cons of the suggestion are mentioned and compared (i. . , Do the pros outweigh the cons, or vice versa? ). Theoretical Foundations of the Suggestion 1. Not acceptable. Your arguments have no relationship with strategic management. For example, no theory in the textbook is applied in your report. 2. Not good. Your arguments are guided by more than two theories. 3. Acceptable. Your arguments are guided by one or two theories mentioned in the textbook. However, the theory/theories are not very relevant to the case. 4. Very good.
Your arguments are guided by one or two relevant theories and the theories are closely related to the case (Please note that you are not required to repeat the detail of the theory due to the page limit). Relevant & Credible Evidence 1. Not acceptable. No relevant evidence is provided to support the arguments. 2. Not good. Some evidence provided, but the relationship between arguments & evidence is only loosely established. 3. Acceptable. The response provided some relevant evidence to support the arguments. 4. Very good. Arguments are supported with enough & strong pieces of evidence which are closely connected to the arguments.