What did the HP Kittyhawk do right? What did it do wrong? What should HP do going forward at the time of the case?
1. The best papers quickly and concisely describe the firm’s dilemma. Usually this dilemma involves some sort of a mismatch between the opportunities/threats presented
by the environment and the strengths/weaknesses of the firm (SWOT). Throughout the quarter, I will give you models for conducting more comprehensive, nuanced SWOT
analyses. Laundry lists of firm characteristics and business environment characteristics are usually a sign that the student does not have a strong understanding of
the key issue, especially when the student does not relate recommendations back k to those characteristics.
2. The best papers concisely identify multiple strategic options and logically evaluate the relative merits of those options using data to back up arguments. That said
many good arguments are not always supported by easily accessible data, and overreliance on measurable evidence can sometimes lead to erroneous conclusions.
3. The best papers concisely describe strategy implementation in a way that considers the future. Suggested implementations step help minimize the disadvantages and
maximize the advantages of strategic options. Not only do the best papers identify short-term and long-term implementation steps. They also consider how the
environment will evolve in the future. How will competitors react? Will the bases of competitive advantage change for other reasons (e.g. changing consumer tastes,
technologies or supply base)?