Order ID |
53563633773 |
Type |
Essay |
Writer Level |
Masters |
Style |
APA |
Sources/References |
4 |
Perfect Number of Pages to Order |
5-10 Pages |
Description/Paper Instructions
Crisis at Wrentham Corporation Essay Paper
Question: Crisis at Wrentham Corporation A Case of Executive…
Bookmark
Crisis at Wrentham Corporation
A Case of Executive Selection after Merger
On the morning of August 1, 2001, Hal Benning, chief executive officer of Wrentham Corporation, a large
diversified manufacturing company located in Houston, Texas, picked up the phone and punched in the number
of Frank Powell, chairman of the board and longtime friend and associate. The news would not be good.
“What’s up, Hal?” Frank asked. “You sound troubled.”
“The quarterly numbers are in and Computerstat is going to show another net loss, about $2.5 million. What’s
more, I’ve just learned that George Steele will be stepping down as division head at the end of the month to take
a position with one of our competitors. He wants to move on while he is still marketable. George feels that if he
stays and the division’s merger with Microstat fails, his career will be damaged”.
“I’m sorry to hear that, but I can’t say I altogether blame him,” said Frank. “This merger has been an
awfully messy business.”
“It’s been rough for all of us,” interjected Hal, “but we told the stockholders when we decided on the
acquisition that we could make the new combined division profitable.”
“That we did, Hal,” agreed Frank. “Obviously, we have quite a task in front of us. Where do we stand
today?”
“We are still well behind the planned integration schedule and our costs are way over budget. I know both
the Microstat people and our folks from Home Computer are trying to work together, but they just don’t share a
common vision for the business.” Hal continued, “For example, no one seems to agree about our international
strategy. The Home Computer managers view the domestic market as our bread and butter and see foreign
markets as only an incremental opportunity. On the other hand, Microstat’s position is that penetrating foreign
markets is the key to our future growth, profitability, and even survival. Operationally, we have the same sorts of
problems. R&D has not made significant headway on any project requiring cooperation between Wrentham and
Microstat people. My feeling is that we are to a large extent still managing two separate organizations.”
“I noticed that many of the manufacturing and financial reports are still segregated,” stated Frank.
“Integrating MIS remains a problem,” acknowledged Hal, “but what concerns me most is a lack of unity
and trust that extends all the way down to the factory floor. Out at the Santa Clara plant, Microstat people won’t
follow the advice of our process engineers because they don’t trust our knowledge of their products and markets,
and some of the Home Computer managers are blaming Microstat for our performance problems. This type of
divisiveness has to go. If it continues, we’ll never achieve greater economies of scale or improve our product
line.”
“The competition is getting ferocious,” observed Frank. “The low-end marketers are beating us on price
and the market leaders have superior products. If that isn’t bad enough, getting access to distribution channels
has never been tougher and some of our costumers believe we may not be around much longer. Our dealers are
getting nervous. If we don’t take some action soon we’ll be in trouble.”
“True enough, but the real problem is here at home, Frank. People are getting burnt out on the integration
program; all those task forces and meetings divert their attention from the problems facing the business in the
marketplace. We have to find someone who is strong enough to turn this division around.”
“You’re quite right, Hal. I think we need to bring in someone to help us with this one. Why don’t you see if
Bill is available?”
“Agreed. I’ll take care of it right away.”
BACKGROUND
Wrentham Corporation was founded in 1936 by William Wrentham as an office equipment firm. In 1978, it
entered the microcomputer industry and two years later was restructured into three autonomous divisions:
Wrentham Office Supply, Wrentham Communications, and Home Computer, now called Computerstat. Before
the merger, Home Computer, with its headquarters and manufacturing facilities located in Houston, Texas,
designed and produced relatively unsophisticated, low-priced microcomputers for both the home user and
business market segments. Its key strength was in the home user market, a segment that represented nearly 80
percent of Computerstat’s total sales. It also sold machines to small and medium-sized businesses. With annual
sales of $214 million per year, Home Computer was one of the larger microcomputer manufacturers in the United
States. The division survived an industry shakeout in the mid ‘90s but had been unable to establish a leadership
position in the PC industry.
Starting in 1998, Home Computer made some tentative attempts to sell PCs in Europe, particularly in
France, Italy, and the United Kingdom, but had not been particularly successful. The great majority of its sales
were still concentrated in the continental United States and distributed through mass market channels.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE |
NO RESPONSE |
POOR / UNSATISFACTORY |
SATISFACTORY |
GOOD |
EXCELLENT |
Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. |
30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. |
40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. |
50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. |
Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). |
Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. |
5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. |
10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. |
15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. |
20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. |
Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors |
10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors |
15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. |
20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. |
Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) |
Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. |
3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. |
5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper |
7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. |
10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. |
|
|
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
|
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!! |
|
|
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!