MBA 739N (3 CREDIT HOURS)
HEALTHCARE STRATEGY
SPRING SEMESTER ~ 2017
Professor:
Classroom:
Office Hours:
E-mail:
Telephone:
Thomas F. Turner, MBA, CFRM
136 Barrett Business/Com Center- 6:01pm – 10 pm
30 minutes before or after class or another time by appointment.
[email protected] OR [email protected]
(330) 316-0388 (cell phone/text) OR Direct (daytime) (330) 489-1421
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The focus of this course is healthcare strategy and its application to various business conditions within the
framework of healthcare (e.g., management finance, marketing, human resources, organizational effectiveness, etc.). Specifically, the course explores the integrative and cross-functional nature of strategy and
decision-making in the healthcare sector.
Through active learning and real-world case discussions, learning will be applied to provide a context for
future decision-making and proficiency in the field of healthcare strategy. Emerging areas will be introduced
and discussed within the context of strategy and an organization’s potential strategic response.
MBA PROGRAM STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
 Graduates think critically & solve problems within organizations, supporting decisions with appropriate
analytical and quantitative techniques.
 Graduates demonstrate sustainable ethical organizational leadership capabilities.
 Graduates demonstrate integrative professional & personal knowledge within a dynamic global business
environment.
 Graduates demonstrate advanced communication competencies within a business context.
 Graduates demonstrate advanced knowledge in the core areas of business.
 Graduates demonstrate advanced knowledge in a specialized area of business.
COURSE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES





Critique different healthcare organizations’ strategic choices and market responses.
Formulate environmental and market assessments to determine performance and needs.
Organize and prioritize corporate strategy within the context of various healthcare organizations.
Defend a strategic vision, direction, and tactics based upon a thorough understanding of the market.
Compose and justify strategic planning materials with appropriate performance metrics.
Along with the above outcomes, students will identify the linkages of healthcare strategy to other areas within
healthcare (e.g., finance, management, policy, clinical outcomes, etc.), building across the intellectual continuum.
1
COURSE ORGANIZATION
This course is organized in alignment with Walsh University’s online course template. Each module contains
the following pages: module overview and outcomes, key concepts, lectures (recorded), learning activities,
learning assessment, and summary/supplementary readings.
STUDENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Academic Integrity. The School of Business subscribes to the Academic Integrity Policy as published in the
Walsh University Catalog (“Academic Integrity Policies & Procedures” section). If a student engages in
academic dishonesty – as defined by the policy – the penalties may include an “F” for the assignment, an “F”
for the course, as well as submission of the student’s (or group’s) name to the university for further action.
The professor will follow procedures set forth in handling issues of alleged violations. The student should
become familiar with these policies, procedures, etc. Additionally, it is the student’s responsibility to fully
understand the university’s definitions of academic integrity, including those of plagiarism.
Student Conduct. Appropriate source documentation must be supplied for all quoted and/or referenced
materials. If any student has specific questions about proper citations, quotations, etc., please contact the
instructor. Each student is expected to read the assignments for each module. The course is designed to
encourage active learning by and between class members. The modules include recorded lectures, class
discussions, assigned readings, videos, and other activities.
Student Preparation & Behavior. Students should be prepared for online activities and expected to
complete reading and other assignments on-time. Students are expected demonstrate professional conduct
in the virtual classroom. Students and faculty are expected to display ethical and personal behaviors. The
class must be sensitive to both individual needs as well as those of the class as a whole. Faculty and students
are encouraged to work collaboratively and be allowed the opportunity to enjoy their learning activities.
Make-Up Policy. Make-up assignments will only be permissible under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances. It is the
student’s responsibility to notify the professor in-advance of the assignment. The professor will evaluate
each situation on a case-by-case basis. A request is not synonymous with approval. In some cases, the
assignment will be due or examination taken prior to the original due-date.
Accessibility Services for Students with Disabilities. Walsh University is committed to fostering an
institutional climate in which qualified students with disabilities have full access to the academic
environment. However, please be advised that it is your responsibility to arrange accommodations and
failure to do so in a timely manner may have a negative impact on your academic success. If you feel that you
may need an accommodation based on the impact of a disability, please contact Meredith Soduk, Director of
Accessibility Services, at 330-490-7529 or [email protected] to begin delivery of services as soon as
possible. Once your eligibility for services is determined, your instructors will be provided a letter which will
outline your accommodations. If you believe you may have a disability and would like to learn more about
disability-related services, please contact the Office of Accessibility Services, located in Farrell Hall 209,
immediately.
Writing Policy. A minimum of twenty-five (25%) percent of the grade on ALL written assignments is based
on the writing skills evidenced. Writing skills will be evaluated using the DSoB Writing Rubric, included later
in this course syllabus. Prior to grading for content, each submitted writing assignment will first be assessed
against the writing rubric. A student scoring lower than 16.5/24 on the DSoB Writing Rubric on any written
assignment will not have their work graded for content, and the student will be required to remediate his/her
2
work by obtaining writing tutoring, as provided by the Academic Support Center at Walsh University. This
support is available in person or by electronic means.
An individualized plan of action may be determined by the course instructor in consultation with the
Academic Support Center. This plan of action may include, but is not limited to: requiring a student to attend
writing tutoring sessions prior to each subsequent assignment in the course; requiring students to submit
multiple drafts of a paper; and/or requiring a student to attend multiple writing tutoring sessions.
Any assignment that is remediated will be graded for content quality upon resubmission. However, in
fairness to those who submit acceptable work when it is due, the written quality grade will remain as it was
assessed and graded upon the paper’s initial submission.
Format for Written Assignments. All written assignments submitted for this course will conform to APA
writing guidelines. The format is published in the Manual of the American Psychological Association (Sixth
Edition) and it also available at the following cite: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/.
All citations and sources used for term papers and projects submitted for DeVille School of Business courses
will be properly cited and conform to APA writing guidelines. It is the student’s responsibility to become
familiar with and include these into all appropriate submitted class work.
3
MBA739 — TEACHING-LEARNING ACTIVITIES/EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE
Program
Learning
Outcomes
Graduates
demonstrate
advanced
knowledge in
a specialized
area of
business.
Course Learning Outcomes
Modules
Learning Activities
 Critique different healthcare
organizations’ strategic choices
and market responses.
1




Assigned textbook and articles
Recorded module presentations & videos
Discussion forums
Strategic Case Analysis




Article Discussions
Learning Exercises
Discussion Forums
Integrative Leadership Analysis
 Formulate environmental and
market assessments to determine performance and needs.
2&3




Assigned textbook and articles
Recorded module presentations & videos
Discussion forums
Strategic Case Analysis




Discussion Forums
Discussion Facilitator
Learning Exercises
Strategic Case Analysis
 Organize
and
prioritize
corporate strategy within the
context of various healthcare
organizations.
2 to 6





Assigned textbook and articles
Recorded module presentations & videos
Discussion forums
Comprehensive Strategic Report
Strategic Report Presentation
 Discussion Forums
 Comprehensive Strategic
Assessment
 Comprehensive Strategic
Presentation
 Defend a strategic vision,
direction, and tactics based
upon a thorough understanding
of the market.
7




Assigned textbook and articles
Recorded module presentations & videos
Discussion forums
Comprehensive Strategic Report
 Discussion Forums
 Learning Exercises
 Comprehensive Strategic
Assessment
 Compose and justify strategic
planning materials with appropriate performance metrics.
7&8




Assigned textbook and articles
Recorded module presentations & videos
Discussion forums
Comprehensive Strategic Report
 Discussion Forums
 Comprehensive Strategic
Assessment
4
Assessment Methods
COURSE MATERIALS
Primary Texts:
Managing Health Care Business Strategy, by George B. Moseley III (Jones & Bartlett
Publishers: Sudbury, Massachusetts, 2009).
Harvard Business Case: Cleveland Clinic Growth Strategy (purchase through the
Harvard Business Cases website) by Michael E. Porter, Elizabeth Olmsted Teisberg. Source:
Harvard Business School .
On-Line Materials: ECN includes journal articles for most class sessions. In addition, ECN also includes
presentation handouts for each session. You may find that printing them out facilitates improved note-taking
and studying.
Additional Readings & Handouts: Additional assigned readings may be distributed in the throughout the
course of the session. Appropriate announcements will be made. Students are responsible for these
additional readings.
TEACHING STRATEGIES
1.
2.
3.
4.
Readings – Include readings from the book, assigned articles, and other students’ postings on the
discussion forums.
Recorded Presentations – Each of the presentations include an accompanying recording to explain
various topics, provide examples, and offer deeper insights.
Discussion Forums – In every week, students will post onto the discussion forums to offer their insights
and react to others’ postings.
Learning Activities – Specific assignments and learning activities have been developed, linked to the
student learning outcomes.
STUDENT REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS
Active participation is critical for both individual success as well as the success of your cohorts. Many of the
course activities are built upon collaborative learning and rely on the input and feedback of others. For this
reason, it is an expectation in this course that all students complete the readings and other assignments, and
actively contribute to all discussion topics.
Assignments. Modules will run Sunday-Saturday of each course week. Modules will open on the Friday prior
to the start of a module. All assignments, blog postings, discussion postings, readings, etc., should be
completed and submitted by the time listed as identified under each module. Please consult with each
module for actual due-dates and times.
Preparation. Assignments, readings, and exercises are to be completed before the module ending dates. In
addition, uses of individually-selected research articles are required to enhance understanding of course
content.
Evaluations for Courses/Faculty. Students will be given the opportunity to evaluate the course and faculty
at the end of the semester. Students have a professional responsibility and obligation to complete these
evaluations.
5
How to Communicate with Your Professor. You may email me your questions/concerns during the course.
The professor will respond to all questions delivered there within 48 hours, except on weekends. Please
contact the professor via email, text or telephone call (see Page 1) with any personal and/or private issues
anytime.
Submission of Assignments. All course written requirements should be submitted via the “Assignments”
Drop Box tab on ECN.
GRADING METHODOLOGY & POLICIES
Course assignments will be weighted as follows:
Component
Integrative Leadership Analysis
Strategic Case Analysis
Comprehensive Strategic Assessment Report
Comprehensive Strategic Assessment Presentation
MFT Test
Class Participation
TOTAL
Percent
10%
20%
30%
10%
10%
20%
100%
A grade will be assigned based upon achievement of points within one of the following ranges:
Grade
A (93% to 100%)
A- (90% to 92%)
B+ (87% to 89%)
B (83% to 86%)
B- (80% to 82%)
C+ (77% to 79%)
C (73% to 76%)
C- (70% to 72%)
D+ (67% to 69%)
D (63% to 66%)
D- (60% to 62%)
F (Below 60%)
Total Points
930 to 1,000
900 to 929
870 to 899
830 to 869
800 to 829
770 to 799
730 to 769
700 to 729
670 to 699
630 to 669
600 to 629
Less than 600
Please note that a grade of B- or higher (if governed by the 2009-2010 or later Graduate Catalogs) or a B or
higher (if governed by a previous Graduate Catalog) is required for the course to satisfy MBA requirements.
Timely Submission of Assignments. Late papers will be assessed a penalty in grade calculation.
Assignments will be dropped one letter grade for each day the assignment is late. All course assignments
must be completed before a course grade will be issued. If not completed, an incomplete grade may be
negotiated. Refer to Walsh University Catalog for incomplete grade protocol and policies.
Final Course Grade. Final course grade will be based on the above listed graded activities, interactive
participation at the graduate level in online and campus classrooms, labs, small group and community
activities, along with demonstration of ethical and professional clinical conduct in all learning activities.
Grade Appeal. Refer to the Walsh University Graduate Catalog for the specific policy.
6
Withdrawal Policy. Students are to refer to the current Walsh University Calendar to obtain the last date for
withdrawal (W) from a course. Students may be administratively withdrawn from a course for lack of
attendance. Refer to the Walsh University Graduate Catalog for the specific policy regarding administrative
withdrawal by faculty.
INTEGRATIVE LEADERSHIP ANALYSIS
The Integrative Leadership Analysis and Career Plan is worth 100 points and comprises 10% of your
grade. Looking ahead and back simultaneously is an art that all healthcare executives must develop and
maintain. It’s important—as Wayne Gretzky once said—to skate to where the puck is going to be. All the
while, one must understand the unique strengths and challenges that each individual possesses.
The goal of the integrative leadership analysis and career plan is to provide a time for each student to reflect
on his or her future in healthcare leadership. In the paper, the student will critically analyze his/her
strengths and weaknesses. Only by confronting these in an honest fashion will a healthcare executive, taking
steps to address/limit blind spots, be effective and successful.
The analysis should be between eight (8) to ten (10) pages (using 12-font, double-spaced, and one-inch
margins on all sides), exclusive of a table of contents, bibliography, and exhibits. Each student will upload
leadership analysis to the “Assignment” tab on ECN by the due-date (identified later in the course syllabus).
Late papers will not be accepted.
The well-written paper will be one that is thoughtful, honest, and well-written. As an appendix, each paper
must also include the student’s current resume and copies of testing artifacts used in the self-assessment.
The grading rubric used to assess student performance for this assignment is included under the “Grading
Rubrics” section of the course syllabus.
Part I will be an honest self-analysis of the student’s strengths and weaknesses. While all papers will be
confidential, if there are matters that a student is not comfortable in sharing, he/she should avoid including in
the paper. The student should utilize and integrate a leadership and/or personality test. Each student is free
to select the one that fits best. As such, the student should research and decide on which one(s) to use (e.g.,
Myers-Briggs, 360-degree evaluation, etc.). Part I should also include a developmental plan – specifically
identifying how the student’s will improve current strengths while addressing current areas of weakness.
Part II of the paper should address the student’s short-term (next three years) and long-term (next seven
years) career plans, within the constraints of Part I, as well as any other mitigating factors (i.e., inability to
move, need for further education, additional licensure requirements, etc.). Especially for the short-term
career plan, detailed information should be included relative to the exact position sought, the linkage
between the student’s skill set and the requisite skills needed for the job, the type of healthcare provider, etc.
STRATEGIC CASE ANALYSIS – HARVARD BUSINESS CASE: CLEVELAND CLINIC GROWTH STRATEGY
The Strategic Case Analysis is worth 200 points, comprising 20% of your final grade. Key attributes of
healthcare leaders include the ability to integrate various business concepts (e.g., marketing, management,
finance, human resources, clinical care, physician issues, quality, market forces, etc.). The strategic case
analysis assignment is a real-life case, preparing students for what they may face in healthcare management.
For this strategic case assignment, each student will apply his/her healthcare knowledge to the assigned case.
The student is expected to comprehensively and totally analyze the case from a number of perspectives,
addressing the issues either real or perceived. The case analysis write-up will be eight (8) to ten (10) pages
(using 12-font, double-spaced, and one-inch margins on all sides), exclusive of a table of contents,
7
bibliography, and exhibits. The student will upload the case analysis to the “Assignment” tab on ECN by the
due-date identified later in the course syllabus. Late case write-ups will not be accepted.
The well-written case analysis will be organized, comprehensive, accurate, and integrative. The grading
rubric used to assess student performance for this assignment is included under the “Grading Rubrics”
section of the course syllabus.
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT REPORT
The Comprehensive Strategic Assessment is worth 300 points, comprising 30% of your total final
grade. The student will select a healthcare organization (e.g., health system, hospital, or continuing care
retirement community) and complete a comprehensive strategic audit on that organization. If a student
works for one healthcare organization, it is recommended that he/she select the organization’s main
competitor for this assignment. The student will is required to submit for review and approval the proposed
healthcare organization to the professor by the date listed on the detailed course schedule.
This assignment is divided into three (3) separate submissions, each worth 100 points individually.
Following is a detailed description of each:
Part I – Healthcare Organization Overview & Internal Analysis. Comprehensively analyze the healthcare
organization, including its internal operations, financial operations (Form 990 via the GuideStar website) and
financial ratio analysis, quality review (Hospital Compare and The Joint Commission’s Quality Check
websites), service line offerings, and any other perspectives that illustrate the current situation of the healthcare organization. A thorough and accurate SWOT analysis should also be included.
Part II – Industry Overview and External Competitive Analysis. Comprehensively analyze the industry,
including any current market forces or trends that are reshaping the landscape and requiring strategic
responses. Part II should also include a complete analysis of the healthcare market and the selected
healthcare organization’s primary competitor, including an analysis its internal operations, financial
operations (accessing Form 990 via the GuideStar website), quality (accessing via the Hospital Compare and
The Joint Commission’s Quality Check websites) service line offerings, and any other perspectives that
illustrate the current situation of the healthcare organization. A thorough and accurate Porter Five Forces
analysis should also be included. Finally, based upon Parts I and II, the analysis should identify two (2)
strategic issues faced by the selected healthcare organization – directly linked to address issues and
opportunities presented in Part I and Part II.
Part III – External Strategic Analysis. The submission will include a vision statement (for the next three to five
years). Based upon the two (2) strategic initiatives identified in Part II, the student will offer at least three (3)
tactical strategies that will address each identified strategic initiative. Each tactical strategy should be
focused and objective (so that it’s easily distinguishable when it has been completed or attained). After a
brief discussion of each tactical strategy, an implementation time will be included to show the order and time
needed to complete each tactical strategy. Finally, a balanced scorecard (using the examples outlined in this
course or other healthcare specialty courses) will also be included.
Each of the above submissions should each be a minimum of six (6) to eight (8) pages (12-font, double-spaced, and
one-inch margins on all sides), exclusive of a bibliography and/or exhibits. Each student will upload each portion
of the strategic assessment to the “Assignment” tab on ECN by the due-date (identified later in the course
syllabus). Late papers will not be accepted.
The well-written case analysis will be organized, comprehensive, accurate, and integrative. The grading
rubric used to assess student performance for this assignment is included under the “Grading Rubrics”
section of the course syllabus.
8
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT PRESENTATION
The Comprehensive Strategic Assessment presentation is worth 100 points, comprising 10% of your
final grade. Each student will be required to present an eight (8) to ten (10) minute presentation. Early in
the course, the professor will identify options to conduct a real-time class session (during the week of Module
#8). Each student will participate via ECN during that block of time – both as a presenter and as an active
listener.
The student must adhere to the time limit. Presentations extending beyond the allotted time, time will be
terminated and the presentation grade adjusted accordingly. It is highly recommended that each student
practice his/her presentation prior to presenting. Each student will be required to upload a copy of the
presentation (PDF file – three slides per page). Further information is provided later in the course syllabus.
The professor will grade on the content of each student’s presentation (exclusive of handouts, etc.). A grading
rubric for the presentation is included in this course syllabus. The grading rubric used to assess student
performance for this assignment is included under the “Grading Rubrics” section of the course syllabus.
MFT TEST
The MFT Test is worth 100 points, comprising 10% of your final grade. It is important to assess overall
knowledge acquisition at various time intervals within the MBA Program. Overall, the program assesses
students’ knowledge at two distinct time periods: (1) Entry in the MBA Program (tested during in the
Sustainable Ethical Leadership course); and (2) At the end of the MBA Program (tested in the student’s
capstone course).
At both time periods, the DeVille School of Business utilizes the MFT Test, a standardized test, to measure
“before” and “after” in aggregate as well as in specialized areas of business (e.g., finance, marketing, strategic
integration, etc.). For the purposes of assessment, all student scores are confidential and aggregated. No
individual student test scores are ever released, analyzed, or reported when assessing the overall success of
the MBA Program in advancing knowledge.
Each student in this capstone course will be required to complete the MFT Test. In order to achieve the 100
points available for this assignment, the student must score 60% or higher on the test. A student scoring less
than 60% will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The possibility exists that a student scoring less than
60% may receive a zero (0) for the test. Any student failing to take the test will receive a zero (0) for the test.
Early in the course, the instructor will communicate the details about the test. A common and predetermined block of time will be required when all students take the test. If a student cannot be present
during that time, it is the student’s responsibility to communicate with the instructor in order to find an
alternative time.
CLASS PARTICIPATION
Class participation is worth 200 points, comprising 20% of your final grade. Students learn from
sharing thoughts, ideas, and backgrounds, along with listening to the input from other students. Your class
participation score will be based on the quality of your input, followed by the quantity of your interaction. As
such, it is important that you come prepared, having already read the assigned readings. Your participation
isn’t optional—although you will make a decision regarding your depth of participation. The quality of the
student’s input will be assessed in the evaluation of the overall participation score.
9
Toward the end of the semester, you will be asked to complete a self-evaluation of your participation and
assign a score based upon the descriptions below. The form will include an opportunity for you to comment
on your score, justifying your class participation grade. After a review of these evaluations, the instructor
reserves the right to adjust the final class participation grade for each student. Following is a guideline that
the instructor will use, along with the student’s own self-evaluation, for assessing a Class Participation score:
Grade
A
(95 Points)
A(91 Points)
B+
(88 Points)
B
(85 Points)
B(81 Points)
C
(75 Points)
F
(0 Points)
Description
Leader and initiator in class discussion; always prepared and has worked out an analysis of the assigned
readings; excels in interacting with classmates in a professional manner; comments always focused,
integrative, demonstrating preparation/active listening; offers insightful comments that others use as a basis
for their own comments.
Quality participation based on sound preparation; regularly responds to instructor’s comments and
questions; also responds to comments of classmates; occasionally takes lead in class discussions; often
volunteers illustrations about the subjects discussed; provides a genuine attempt to offer consistent original
insightful comments.
Systematically contributes to class discussion based upon solid preparation; occasionally responds to the
remarks of the instructor and/or classmates, demonstrating knowledge within a given area; gives an attempt
to offer original insights and/or comments from time to time.
Occasionally contributes to class discussion based upon preparation; responds to the remarks of the
instructor and/or classmates; rarely, if ever, volunteers to begin a discussion; offers minimal original
information or comments.
Answers questions from the instructor; responds to other students, but not consistently; demonstrates
limited knowledge, but not ability to integrate material or concepts; seems only to repeat insights or
comments from others.
Answers questions from the instructor, but does not otherwise take part in the class discussion; offers the
“minimal input” within the class or outside of class to the professor.
Does not take part in any class discussion.
(Note: The above rubric is only a guide—actual class participation scores may range from 0 to 200)
Along with opportunities for student input during lectures, each student will have the opportunity serve as a
“Discussant” as the class reviews and discusses the week’s journal articles. Given the enrollment in the class,
each student will either be solely responsible for discussant duties or split them with another classmate.
CLASS COMMUNICATION (ESPECIALLY EMAIL COMMUNICATION)
We will use everyone’s Walsh email address exclusively. As such it is critical that you check your Walsh
email account throughout the week between classes. The professor may send handouts and/or articles to
review between class meeting times. It is your responsibility to check your Walsh email account, read
any attachments, and take appropriate action based upon the email message.
You may choose to forward your Walsh emails to a personal email accounts—however, it remains your
responsibility to correctly forward these emails and to review them prior to each class. If you have any
questions about the technical aspects of your Walsh email account, please contact Walsh University’s
Information Systems Department. You must resolve any email issues by the first week of class.
The professor has posted office hours and will maintain an “open door” policy during these times—please feel
free to stop by anytime during these times to discuss any matters that you deem necessary regarding this
class. If you are unable to meet during the posted office hours, please contact the professor to set up another
time to meet. The overarching goal is that you learn as much as you can and achieve your highest grade
possible based upon your performance.
10
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE (AS OF JANUARY 30, 2016)
Session
Date
Topic
Assignments & Activities
1
March 7
Course Overview
Healthcare Leadership Competencies
Strategic Career Planning
Readings — Session #1
2
March 14
Basic Strategic Concepts
Internal Audit of Strategic Assets
Chapter #1
Chapter #2
Readings — Session #2
3
March 21
External Environment: Law & Economics
External Environment: Market & Customers
External Environment: Industry &
Competitors
4
March 28
Defining Future Direction of Organization
Chapter #3
Chapter #4
Chapter #5
Readings — Session #3
INTEGRATIVE LEADERSHIP
ANALYSIS DUE
Chapter #6
Readings — Session #4
5
April 4
NO CLASS SESSION – on-line week.
SUBMIT PART 1 of Comprehensive
Strategic Assessment.
Special Topic Discussion ECN: Physician
Alignment, Integration, and Other Issues
Readings — Session #6
PART I OF COMPREHENSIVE
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT DUE
WRITE A 3 – 4 PARAGRAPH ON
Chapter #7
Chapter #8
Readings — Session #7
PART II OF COMPREHENSIVE
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT DUE
Chapter #9
Chapter #10
Readings — Session #8
PART III OF COMPREHENSIVE
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT DUE
6
April 11
Formulating Corporate-Level Strategy
Formulating SBU-Level & Functional Area
Strategy
7
April 18
Implementing the Strategy
Monitoring, Fine-Tuning, & Changing the
Strategy
8
DATE (In-class
or a Saturday)
TO BE
DETERMINED
9
April 25
BEST PRACTICES FOR PHYSICIAN
ALIGNMENT VIA DISCUSSION. CITE 2
APA SCHOLARLY SOURCES
MFT Test – to be conducted in class or a
Saturday session. TBD
Special Topic: Future of Healthcare
Course Summary
11
Readings—Session #9
STRATEGIC CASE ANALYSIS DUE
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC
ASSESSMENT PRESENTATIONS
DSOB WRITING RUBRIC (TOTAL OF 24 POINTS AVAILABLE FOR EACH WRITING ASSIGNMENT)
Not Acceptable
(0 Points)
Organization and
Coherence
Unorganized and
incoherent.
Tone and voice are
Professional
Tone/Voice (Use of inappropriate
throughout.
Third Person)
Needs
Improvement
(1 Point)
Satisfactory
(2 Points)
Exemplary
(3 Points)
The paper is weak in
organization and/or
coherence. The reader
cannot identify a line of
reasoning.
The paper is generally
organized and coherent.
The reader can mostly
follow the line of
reasoning.
The paper is well
organized and coherent
throughout. The reader
can follow the line of
reasoning.
Frequent lapses in tone
and voice. The writing
does not engage the
reader.
Tone and voice are
generally appropriate
with only minor lapses.
Tone and voice are
professional and
consistently appropriate
throughout.
Minimal flow of thoughts
and ideas.
Flow of thoughts and
ideas is generally
consistent.
Flow of thoughts and
ideas is consistent
throughout.
Word choice is accurate,
clear, concise and
appropriate throughout.
Presentation
of Ideas
Lacking in flow of
thoughts and ideas.
Word Choice
Word choice is confusing, Word choice is poor
unclear and/or
and/or inappropriate.
inappropriate.
Word choice is generally
clear, concise and
appropriate.
Sentences are fragmented Several sentences are
and incomplete.
constructed incorrectly.
Most sentences are well Sentences are well
phrased, clear and varied. phrased, clear and varied
throughout.
No attention given to
grammar and spelling.
Errors are frequent and
distracting.
Minor errors are
apparent but do not
detract from or obscure
meaning.
Writing is error free
throughout.
Errors are frequent and
distracting.
Minor errors are
apparent but do not
detract from or obscure
meaning.
Writing is error free
throughout.
Inappropriate format
and/or frequent
inconsistency in
application.
Appropriate format but
with minor
inconsistencies in
application.
Appropriate format
consistently applied and
artifact within assigned
page length.
Sentence
Structure
Grammar
and Spelling
No attention given to
Punctuation
and Capitalization punctuation and
capitalization.
Format (Length,
Report, Essay,
and APA)
No apparent format.
TOTAL POINTS
/24 Points
Note: A student scoring lower than 16.5/24 on the DSoB Writing Rubric on any written assignment will not
have their work graded for content, and the student will be required to remediate his/her work by obtaining
writing tutoring, as provided by the Academic Support Center at Walsh University. This support is available
in person or by electronic means
12
INTEGRATIVE LEADERSHIP ANALYSIS (TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average
(0%)
Self-Analysis &
Developmental
Plan
(30 Points Total)
Short-Term and
Long-Term Goals
(25 Points Total)
Resume
(10 Points Total)
Integration of
Course Materials
(10 Points Total)
Overall
Writing
Assessment
(25 Points Total)
Average
(80%)
Very Good
(90%)
Excellent
(100%)
Narrative includes a selfanalysis, but does not
offer a developmental
plan and/or offer any
self-analysis, personality
test, or leadership
analysis.
[0 Points]
Narrative includes a
developmental plan, but
does not appear to be
grounded to or linked
with the personality or
leadership analysis.
[24 Points]
Narrative includes a
generally complete and
realistic developmental
plan, grounded to and
linked with a self-analysis
and one personality or
leadership analysis.
[27 Points]
Narrative includes a
comprehensive and
realistic developmental
plan, grounded to and
superbly-linked with a
self-analysis and two
different personality or
leadership analyses.
[30 Points]
Offers short-term and
long-term goals, but does
not link to the selfanalysis.
[0 Points]
Offers short-term and
long-term goals
exhibiting some critical
thinking, with some
linkage to the selfanalysis.
[20 Points]
Offers specific short-term
and long-term goals
generally exhibiting
critical thinking by
linking self-analysis with
goals.
[22 Points]
Offers specific short-term
and long-term goals
consistently exhibits
critical thinking by
superbly linking selfanalysis with goals.
[25 Points]
Resume is not current, is
not well-formatted, or is
not professionallypresented.
[0 Points]
Resume is current, but
the formatting and/or the
presentation could be
improved.
[8 Points]
Resume is current and
generally well-formatted
and professionallypresented.
[9 Points]
Resume is current,
superbly formatted, and
professionally-presented.
[0 Points]
Does not integrate
assigned readings DVD
into the analysis.
[0 Points]
Integrates course
materials sporadically,
but does not demonstrate
grasp of concepts.
[8 Points]
Generally integrates
course materials, but
could demonstrate
greater grasp of concepts.
[9 Points]
Comprehensively
integrates course
materials showing a real
grasp of the concepts.
[10 Points]
The score from the DSoB writing rubric will be applied to this grading line item. Basically, the total assessed
total writing rubric score will be converted into a percentage (with a maximum of 24 points available) and
applied to the points available for this specific assignment grading rubric line item. [Maximum of 25 Points]
TOTAL POINTS
13
/100 Points
STRATEGIC CASE ANALYSIS (TOTAL OF 200 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average
(0%)
Identification of
Issues
(25 Points Total)
Analysis of the
Situation
(75 Points Total)
Recommended
Course of Action
(30 Points Total)
Integration of
Course Materials
(20 Points Total)
Overall
Writing
Assessment
(50 Points Total)
Average
(80%)
Very Good
(90%)
Excellent
(100%)
Case analysis does not
identify issues.
[0 Points]
Case analysis identifies a
few issues, but fails to
provide any background
or context.
[20 Points]
Case analysis offers one
to three clear and
distinctive set of issues,
or some issues that are
not important to the
situation.
[22 Points]
Case analysis provides a
full and complete set of
all the relevant and
important issues of the
case.
[25 Points]
Analyzes the situation but
is neither complete in
analyzing the internal and
external perspectives nor
accurate in showing
connections between the
issues and the current
situation issues.
[0 Points]
Analyzes the situation
from an internal and
external perspective – but
is not effective in showing
connections between the
issues and the current
situation.
[60 Points]
Analyzes the situation
thoroughly from an
internal and external
perspective – showing
many of the connections
between the issues and
the current situation.
[68 Points]
Analyzes the situation
comprehensively from an
internal and external
perspective – showing all
of the connections
between the issues and
the current situation.
[75 Points]
Either only one course of
action is offered or the
courses of action offered
are not linked to issues,
current situation or
possible strategic
response.
[0 Points]
A few courses of action
are offered, with some
logic, and linkage to the
issues, current situation,
and possible response –
however, it could have
been improved.
[24 Points]
Multiple courses of action
are generally logical,
well-developed, but the
linkage to the issues,
current situation, and
possible response could
have been improved.
[27 Points]
Multiple courses of action
are very well-developed,
logical, thorough, and
linked to the issues,
current situation, and
possible response.
[30 Points]
Does not integrate
assigned readings DVD
into the analysis.
[0 Points]
Integrates course
materials sporadically,
but does not demonstrate
grasp of concepts.
[16 Points]
Generally integrates
course materials, but
could demonstrate
greater grasp of concepts.
[18 Points]
Comprehensively
integrates course
materials showing a real
grasp of the concepts.
[20 Points]
The score from the DSoB writing rubric will be applied to this grading line item. Basically, the total assessed
total writing rubric score will be converted into a percentage (with a maximum of 24 points available) and
applied to the points available for this specific assignment grading rubric line item. [Maximum of 50 Points]
TOTAL POINTS
14
/200 Points
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT REPORT – PART I (TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average
(0%)
Organizational
Analysis
(20 Points Total)
Operational
Analysis
(15 Points Total)
Average
(80%)
Very Good
(90%)
Excellent
(100%)
Lack of any meaningful
operational analysis.
[0 Points]
Some complete or accurate organizational analysis, but could have
benefitted from greater
research.
[16 Points]
Generally complete and
accurate organizational
analysis, demonstrating
an overall understanding
of issues as demonstrated
by solid research.
[18 Points]
Totally complete and
accurate organizational
analysis, demonstrating a
superb understanding of
issues as demonstrated
by superb research.
[20 Points]
Not at all thoughtful
presentation of the
affected operational
factors.
[0 Points]
Somewhat thoughtful
analysis of the operational factors, but a general
lack of integrative knowledge.
[12 Points]
Generally thoughtful and
complete analysis of the
operational factors,
including some integrative knowledge of areas.
[13.5 Points]
Thoughtful, complete,
and realistic analysis of
operational factors,
demonstrating integrative knowledge across
the various operational
areas.
[15 Points]
Some accurate payer mix
and description of financial issues (e.g., revenues,
pricing), but would have
benefitted from improved
financial analyses.
[16 Points]
Generally complete and
accurate payer mix
description and financial
issues, (e.g., revenue,
pricing), demonstrating a
general understanding of
financial issues.
[18 Points]
Totally complete and
accurate payer mix
description and financial
analysis, (e.g., revenue,
pricing), demonstrating a
superb understanding of
financial issues.
[20 Points]
Offers a generally
complete set of issues,
but fails to assign internal
or external issues
correctly.
[16 Points]
Generally analyzes and
correctly assigns internal
and external issues
appropriately.
[18 Points]
Comprehensively
analyzes and correctly
assigns internal and
external issues.
[20 Points]
Lack of any financial or
Financial Analysis payer mix information
(20 Points Total)
SWOT
Analysis
(20 Points Total)
Overall
Writing
Assessment
(25 Points Total)
into the narrative.
[0 Points]
Does not offer a complete
set of issues or does not
assign the internal and
external issues correctly.
[0 Points]
The score from the DSoB writing rubric will be applied to this grading line item. Basically, the total assessed
total writing rubric score will be converted into a percentage (with a maximum of 24 points available) and
applied to the points available for this specific assignment grading rubric line item. [Maximum of 25 Points]
TOTAL POINTS
15
/100 Points
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT REPORT – PART II (TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average
(0%)
Average
(80%)
Very Good
(90%)
Excellent
(100%)
Generally thoughtful and
complete presentation of
industry factors, including demonstration of
some integrative knowledge.
[13 Points]
Superbly thoughtful and
complete presentation of
industry factors, including accurate and complete demonstration of
integrative knowledge.
[15 Points]
Industry
Analysis
Not at all thoughtful
presentation of industry
issues.
[0 Points]
Somewhat thoughtful
presentation of industry
issues, but a general lack
of integrative knowledge.
[11 Points]
Market
Analysis
Not at all thoughtful
presentation of the
market.
[0 Points]
Somewhat thoughtful
presentation of market
issues, but a general lack
of integrative knowledge.
[16 Points]
Generally thoughtful and
complete presentation of
market analysis, including demonstration of
some integrative knowledge.
[18 Points]
Superbly thoughtful and
complete presentation of
market analysis, including accurate and complete demonstration of
integrative knowledge.
[20 Points]
Completed competitive
analysis that
demonstrates no research
and/or a general lack of
the market.
[0 Points]
Completed competitive
analysis that demonstrates little research or a
lack of the market.
[24 Points]
Completed competitive
analysis that demonstrates some research
and a general understanding of the market.
[27 Points]
Expertly prepared
competitive analysis that
demonstrates significant
research and complete
understanding of the
market.
[30 Points]
Mention of the model, but
no demonstration of any
understanding, application, or examples
[0 Points]
Some description of the
model, but an incomplete
application and/or citation of relevant examples.
[8 Points]
Generally complete and
accurate description of
the model, including an
application and citation of
relevant examples.
[9 Points]
Totally complete and
accurate description of
the model, including an
application and citation
of relevant examples.
[10 Points]
(15 Points Total)
(20 Points Total)
Competitive
Analysis
(30 Points Total)
Porter Five
Forces
Analysis
(10 Points Total)
Overall
Writing
Assessment
(25 Points Total)
The score from the DSoB writing rubric will be applied to this grading line item. Basically, the total assessed
total writing rubric score will be converted into a percentage (with a maximum of 24 points available) and
applied to the points available for this specific assignment grading rubric line item. [Maximum of 25 Points]
TOTAL POINTS
16
/100 Points
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT REPORT – PART III (TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average
(0%)
Average
(80%)
Very Good
(90%)
Excellent
(100%)
Vision statement is not
objective, measurable, or
realistic – and does not fit
the definition as outlined
in course materials.
[0 Points]
Vision statement is somewhat acceptable, but
lacks objectivity, realism,
or measurement and
doesn’t conform to the
definition.
[4 Points]
Vision statement generally is objective,
measurable, and realistic
– but could be improved
slightly.
[4.5 Points]
Vision statement is
totally objective,
measurable, and realistic,
and will serve as a
“rallying point” for the
organization.
[5 Points]
Evaluation of
Alternatives
Pros/cons of alternatives
are either not offered or
only covered in a cursory
fashion.
[0 Points]
Pros/cons of most alternatives are offered in a
somewhat objective
fashion, demonstrating
some level of analysis and
thought.
[8 Points]
Pros/cons of all possible
alternatives are offered in
a generally objective
fashion, demonstrating a
high level of analysis and
thought.
[9 Points]
Pros/cons of all possible
alternatives are offered
in a flawless and objecttive fashion, demonstrating the highest level of
analysis and thought.
[10 Points]
Recommended
Courses of
Action
Course of action is offered
with little to no effort in
terms of its defense or
presentation.
[0 Points]
Course of action is
articulated and
presented, but could have
been better defended.
[16 Points]
Course of action is
generally well articulated,
presented and justified or
defended.
[18 Points]
Course of action is
superbly articulated,
presented and defended.
[20 Points]
Does not provide any link
between the proposed
courses of action to the
industry, competitive, or
organizational issues.
[0 Points]
Strategic linkages could
have improved with
response with industry,
competitive, and
organizational issues.
[16 Points]
Generally links the
proposed courses of
action with response to
industry, competitive,
and organizational issues.
[18 Points]
Flawlessly links the
proposed courses of
action with response to
industry, competitive,
and organizational issues.
[20 Points]
Implementation timeline
is either not complete or
inaccurate, missing major
areas (e.g., identification
of responsible parties,
dates, etc.).
[0 Points]
Implementation timeline
appears complete, but
has issues in accuracy,
realism, and/or identifycation of dates, responsibilities, etc.
[8 Points]
Implementation timeline
is generally complete,
accurate, and realistic,
with identification of
appropriate dates,
responsibilities, etc.
[9 Points]
Implementation timeline
is complete, accurate, and
realistic, with an identification of appropriate
dates responsibilities, etc.
[10 Points]
Balanced scorecard items
are a list of measures that
are not linked in any
meaningful way to the
proposed strategies.
[0 Points]
Balanced scorecard items
are either not totally
objective and/or appear
to be weighted on one
strategy – but not all of
the proposed strategies.
[8 Points]
Balanced scorecard items
reflect totally objective
measures that are
generally aligned to the
proposed strategies.
[9 Points]
Balanced scorecard items
reflect totally objective
measures that are
perfectly aligned to the
proposed strategies.
[10 Points]
Vision
Statement
(5 Points Total)
(10 Points Total)
(20 Points Total)
Strategic
Linkages
(20 Points Total)
Implementation
Timeline
(10 Points Total)
Balanced
Scorecard
(10 Points Total)
Overall
Writing
Assessment
(25 Points Total)
The score from the DSoB writing rubric will be applied to this grading line item. Basically, the total assessed
total writing rubric score will be converted into a percentage (with a maximum of 24 points available) and
applied to the points available for this specific assignment grading rubric line item. [Maximum of 25 Points]
TOTAL POINTS
17
/100 Points
COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT PRESENTATION — PROJECT GRADING RUBRIC (TOTAL OF 100 POINTS AVAILABLE)
Below Average (0%)
Average (80%)
Very Good (90%)
Organization and
Student covers all of the necessary
Student presents information in logical
Student presents information in a disorareas, but does so in an illogical format. sequence which can be followed. [18
Discussion
ganized fashion. [0 Points]
[16 Points]
Points]
(20 Points Total)
Subject
Knowledge
(20 Points Total)
Student does not have a grasp of
information. [0 Points]
Slide Grammar,
Slides are not formatted correctly and
Spelling, and
are difficult to read. [0 Points]
Graphics
(10 Points Total)
Cohesion and
Transitions
(10 Points Total)
Student does not appear to have
rehearsed or planned the presentation
so that it fits together. [0 Points]
Student is at ease. [18 Points]
Student demonstrates full knowledge
(more than required) by answering all
class questions with explanations and
elaboration. [20 Points]
Slides contain no grammatical or
spelling errors and are generally wellformatted, but could be improved. [8
Points]
Slides contain no grammatical or
spelling errors, are well formatted, and
easy to follow along. [9 Points]
Slides contain no grammatical or
spelling errors, are excellently
formatted, and easy to follow along. [10
Points]
Transitions from one slide to the other
are acceptable but could be more
polished. [8 Points]
Transitions from one slide to the other
are generally well-done. [9 Points]
Slide transitions from one slide to the
other are expertly handled. [10 Points]
Student speaks clearly and loudly
enough much of the time for all in the
audience to hear every word, throughout the presentation. [9 Points]
Student speaks clearly and loudly
enough for all in the audience to hear
every word, at all times throughout the
presentation. [10 Points]
Student seems generally tethered to
his/her slides and/or notes, only
glancing to the class from time to time.
[8 Points]
Student is evenly balanced between
looking at the audience and glancing at
the slides or his/her notes. [9 Points]
Student maintains constant eye contact
with the audience, only glancing at the
slides or his/her notes. [10 Points]
Student looks and acts professionally,
evidenced in only one category (dress,
poise, or content). [8 Points]
Student looks and acts professionally,
Student looks and acts professionally,
evidenced in only two categories (dress, evidenced in all three categories of
poise, and content). [9 Points]
dress, poise, and content. [10 Points]
Within three minutes (+/-) of allotted
time. [8 Points]
Within two minutes (+/-) of allotted
time. [9 Points]
(10 Points Total)
(10 Points Total)
Student reads all of his/her slides with
little or no eye contact. [0 Points]
Professional
Student neither looks nor acts in a
Appearance and professional manner, suitable for
Poise
graduate students. [0 Points]
(10 Points Total)
Length of
Presentation
(10 Points Total)
Within four minutes (+/-) of allotted
time. [0 Points]
Student presents information in logical
and interesting sequence which
audience can follow, engaging them in
discussion as appropriate. [20 Points]
Student is uncomfortable with information being presented. [16 Points]
Elocution and Student does not speak loudly enough to
Student speaks clearly and loudly
Public Speaking be heard and seems very uncomfortable enough some of the time. [8 Points]
presenting. [0 Points]
Eye Contact
Excellent (100%)
TOTAL POINTS
18
Within one minute (+/-) of allotted time.
[10 Points]
/100 Points