The Grey Chronicles

2009.April.16

Business Policy: A Reflection, Part II



This is a continuation of yesterday’s post. When I took the course in Business Policy in 2006, the lecturer required us for a case analysis plus a course synthesis, instead of a final examinations. The synthesis included a critique of the course content, an exposition on the personal impact of the course, a critique of the individually-assigned topic presentation and the various case analyses presented. Here’s an excerpt of the latter paper:


Personal Impact

Armed with the actual construction of the various matrices for IBM, these skills and intimate knowledge will prove invaluable to my future research pursuits as well as to help me answer the third problem of my thesis: “Flat Carbon Steel Production of National Steel Corporation from its Privatization in 1995 to its Liquidation in 1999” to wit: What strategic plans could be made to sustain flat carbon steel manufacturing at the former NSC plant? Furthermore, this strategic management course would equip me to fully grasp the implications of global issues and challenges affecting the business environment, in general, and GSPI, in particular, as well as becoming a corporate executive or strategist with an MBM degree in the near future.


Individual Topic Presentations

Most of the individual presentations were copied literally from the whole textbook. Whole sentences, and even whole paragraphs, were obviously verbatim copies of the contents of the course textbook instead of producing a comprehensive outline of the assigned chapter. One has to read the textbook page by page to know that most of the oral presentation was a literal transcription of the printed textbook to a semi-presentable PowerPoint presentation. Some resorted to reading word for word what was written in the presentation. The PowerPoint slide became an oral reading device instead of serving only as a guide to the oral presentation. Alternatively, the PowerPoint slides included even the individual notes which should have been for personal use only but unfortunately orally read from the presentation slides as well.

Some colleagues did not even have the courtesy of looking at the audience once in a while, while orally reading the contents of the presentation slides. Some even did not bother with grammatical errors in their slides irrespective with all the grammar checker and speller purposely included in Microsoft Office. The purported summary of the whole text was but a conspicuous carbon copy of the printed colleagues’ notes or executive summaries of the previously presented chapters.

Instead of presenting a summary of the whole text, the last topic presentation was a complete boring re-run, also orally read word-for-word, of the previous presentations. At some later instance, I felt exasperated by this practice that I pointed out this fact: “PowerPoint is not a tool for oral reading” to the class, which irked some colleagues, but unfortunately most chose the same practice and methodology during the Case Analyses presentation.

I learned more by personally reading the textbook rather than relying on most of the oral presentation of the topics. Furthermore, individual experiences of the presented concepts respectively were sometimes shared, but regrettably these instances were rare and more often than not, quite insignificant if not outright off-topic.


Notes:

Personal Impact: Having written the first chapter of my thesis in 2006, the third problem stated above morphed into the fifth problem of the thesis, whereby two others were added by the thesis guidance committee. I was able to defend the thesis on 26 September 2008.

Course Topic Presentation The topic presentation was given for each of us in the class of nine students. It apportioned the last quarter of the course’s outline to each of us. Topics ranged from External Factor Evaluation, Internal Factor Evaluation, Boston Council Group [BCG] Matrix, Competitive Profile/Competitive Advantage, Space Matrix, Internal-External [IE] and the SWOT. I was assigned to lecture and present on the topic: Strategy Review, Evaluation, and Control; while another colleague tackled the last one: International Strategic Management. Instead of giving an individualized review of each colleague’s presentation, I opted to give an overall evaluation of what generally transpired.

Disclaimer: The posts on this site does not necessarily represent any organization’s positions, strategies or opinions; and unless otherwise expressly stated, are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Philippines License.

Advertisements

1 Comment »

  1. Hello, it really interesting, thanks

    Comment by moNArrago — 2009.October.4 @ 10:17 | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: