Description of this paper

UMUC BMGT464 group assignment




Case Study 2, BMGT 464



Going Global: What Does it Take to Make Cross-cultural Teams Successful?



PetGourmand, a second generation, family-owned Memphis-based company with about 200 employees, develops, manufactures, and sells nutritious, gourmet food products for pets. PetGourmand is a low-tech, hands-on, bricks and mortar company with solid brand recognition, an impeccable reputation for high quality and ethical standards and processes, older work force (average employee age is late 40s), low staff turnover, impressive record of speedy state and federal new-product approvals, and solid working relationships with their veterinary and pet-owner customers. For the most part the company plays up the PetGourmand as a close \"family,\" although the organization\'s structure is hierarchical with fairly rigid management divisions and reporting policies. Research, manufacturing, and sales and marketing operate in traditional fashion, with employees reporting to supervisors or mid-level managers. By the 1990s, sales and distribution grew from Tennessee into a regional market, establishing a competitive advantage throughout the US South. Then came the Great Recession. As customers lost jobs, and small business profits, such as veterinary practices dipped, the demand of \"fancy cat food,\" as one PetGourmand lab technician said, seemed to disappear overnight. By the time Bon Vivant Specialities contacted PetGourmand\'s CEO about acquiring PetGourmand, the writing was on the wall.



Bon Vivant Specialities (BVS) is a large Chinese-owned manufacturer and distributor of gourmet food and beverages, headquartered in Hong Kong. Manufacturing plants operate in main land China, and the company has additional offices in Europe and Australia. By acquiring the smaller, well-respected PetGourmand, BVS aims to diversify and expand its consumer base by including products tailor-made to meet market projections of a customer upsurge in healthy, gourmet pet foods and treats. Given the availability of telecommunications technology (software and hardware), and BVS\'s current expertise and use of such technology, geography and location should not be an insurmountable issue. PetGourmand employees, on the other hand, are dispirited about the acquisition, and anxious about \"working for foreigners,\" downsizing, less face-to-face interaction, language differences, and more electronic systems put into place. To make matters worse, recent news media have printed stories about tainted pet food made by other companies in China. Employees fear loss of product quality and damage to PetGourmand\'s reputation.



BVS has told PetGourmand workers that—for now—most employees will be retained. However, all employees will be evaluated, and reassigned and integrated into BVS\'s existing, and to-be-formed-as-needed, work teams, a key component of BVS\'s flat, smoothly efficient organizational structure. BVS\'s management staff, scientists, and sales professionals tend to be tech-savvy, culturally diverse, young-to-middle age (ages 25 to mid-forties), bi-lingual, ambitious, self-directed, accustomed to working remotely, and clearly focused on the company’s commercial success. BVS’s Harvard-educated CEO, Daniel Chinn, supports increasing the company\'s competitive edge by \"discovering and developing individual potential through group collaboration and team synergy,\" and is known to be an enthusiastic supporter of job training and career growth beginning from his days as a brilliant, hard-driving MBA student. He\'s eager to move forward on the integration of \"PetGourmand\'s greatest asset—it\'s knowledge rich, experienced workers.\"



Group Research Project: Case Study 2–Group Level of Analysis



This assignment is a group project. It will assess your and your study group\'s knowledge of the effect of group behavior on organizational performance and effectiveness. It also will examine your critical thinking and writing skills within a collaborative team environment. Your team will be created under Study Groups, and where all collaboration will take place. You must read the case titled \"Going Global: What Does it Take to Make Cross-cultural Teams Successful?\"; identify and analyze key problems, challenges, and opportunities in the case; and make recommendations for solving the problems and challenges. Recommendations and analysis should address OB issues focusing on the group level of analysis, and should be based on information from Chapters 8-11 and portions of Chapters 12 (as designated in the Course Schedule), and two outside references.






Read assigned material for Weeks 4, and 5. Research relevant, credible, well founded outside materials to support analysis.


Document and evaluate strategies or interventions that the organization could use to solve problems and enhance team performance and effectiveness.


Propose and evaluate recommendations for ongoing improvements to organizational performance and success.


Evaluate each of your fellow team members\' contribution and performance using a structure performance measure (use the attached peer evaluation form/rubric).


Your group project case analysis report should use the following format:



Summary of the case background


Identification, analysis, and discussion of problems, challenges, and opportunities


Proposed recommendations and solutions


Make sure you thoroughly identify, explain, and analyze the key concepts, theories, issues, and problems in the case. Your analysis and recommendations should show mastery of the course subject and good critical thinking skills.






Your paper should be four typed, doubled-spaced pages in length.


You should use appropriate APA-style citations and proper report writing style, including headings and subheadings.


You are expected to paraphrase and not use quotes. Deductions will be taken when quotes are used and found to be unnecessary.


Due Date



Nov 23, 2014 11:59 PM Rubrics



Note: The activities evaluation will be applied to all members of this group.



Rubric Name: Written Assignment (20%)





























Below Standards



Identified concept and/or theory



4 points



Identified, analyzed, constructed, and interpreted at least three concepts and at least one theory



3.2 points



Illustrated and analyzed three concepts and/or theory



2.4 points



Described and illustrated three concepts



1.6 points



Identified and described two concepts



0.8 points



Identified one concept with no description



0 points



Did not identify concept or theory



Explained critical incident in the case study that maximized employee contribution (Incidents must be related to individual characteristics and behaviors in which the organization\'s performance is impacted )



4 points



Interpreted, analyzed, and evaluated three incidents



3.2 points



Analyzed and synthesized three incidents



2.4 points



Interpreted and analyzed at least three incidents



1.6 points



Described and interpreted at least two incidents



0.8 points



Described at least one incident



0 points



Did not describe any critical incidents



Analyzed the pros and cons of one critical incident relating to individual-level productivity



4 points



Debated, formulated, and interpreted pros/cons by writing examples of individual-level productivity translated from at least three incidents in the case study



3.2 points



Formulated, debated, and wrote pros/cons by translating individual-level productivity from a critical incident in the case study



2.4 points



Debated, constructed, and wrote pros/cons by expressing individual-level productivity



1.6 points



Debated and constructed the pros/cons without recognizing individual-level productivity



0.8 points



Described and analyzed pros/cons without recognizing individual-level productivity



0 points



Did not analyze pros and cons



Constructed and wrote recommendations to improve individual performance and/or organizational effectiveness



4 points



Analyzed, constructed, formulated, and justified recommendations from at least three critical incidents in the case study



3.2 points



Analyzed, constructed, and formulated recommendations from at least two critical incidents in the case study



2.4 points



Analyzed, debated, and constructed at least two recommendations



1.6 points



Illustrated, distinguished, and composed at least two recommendations



0.8 points



Constructed and illustrated at least one recommendation



0 points



Did not construct and write any recommendation


Paper#53338 | Written in 10-Dec-2015

Price : $25