case study:

Mike remembered how excited he had been when he landed his dream job as production facility manager for the region’s largest hog producer. The salary and benefits package were good, but what really caught his eye were the performance incentives. It seemed entirely possible that he could double his base salary after a year on the job and then move up to district manager. Those dreams were fading away as he stared at this month’s production report, which showed his operation dead last for the third consecutive month. The unit was performing close to the company average when he took over six months ago. How could this have happened?    In Mike’s mind, a 1,000-acre hog-corn-bean farm in Indiana was the perfect place to grow up. From his earliest days, he knew he wanted to stay in agriculture. However, he also knew from the time he was 10 years old that he and his younger brother, Ken, would have to find something else to do since their oldest brother, Larry, was going to inherit the farm.    It took a while for him to sort out his life. After high school, he knew more school was not for him so he joined the army, which sent him to medical technician school. For a kid who did not like school, Mike found himself fascinated by what he could do in a biology lab. He went straight from the army to college where he earned a degree in animal science and was on the dean’s list nearly every semester. He had found the perfect way to combine his love of science with his desire to remain in agriculture. This job was the perfect capstone in his career plan.    His lack of job success was not because he was lazy. He was always the first one in every morning and the last one out at night. He worked side by side with the company’s nutritionists and closely supervised the employees in his unit. Mike always volunteered his unit to be the first one to employ new technical innovations. He felt his unit turned out the best hogs of any unit in the company, even if they did not always match the company’s specifications. How could his unit produce such a top-grade product using all the best technology and fail to be a highly productive, successful operation?    If Mike asked you for advice on how to turn things around, what would you tell him?       Reference:    Beierlein, James G. Principles of Agribusiness Management (p. 34). Waveland Pr Inc. Kindle Edition.         What you need to do    The purpose of this case study is to demonstrate your ability to synthesize information regarding the material covered in the class.  Write your response in an essay (500 words maximum). You can use the main textbook required for this course to help you do the assignment, but at least 50% of your analysis should come from external sources (e.g. ASU electronic library, online articles, etc.).   Please be sure to cite the information that you use in the text, and provide a complete reference list of the cited articles at the end of the case study (the reference list is not part of the word maximum). Be sure to paraphrase information in the articles as you synthesize the information and tailor it towards your own case study. While you can read Wikipedia articles, you can’t use them as official sources.   I recommend typing and saving the assignment in a word processor first. Then copy and paste the text here in Canvas.  All your essays will be automatically checked for plagiarism. Make sure you abide by the honor code. Any suspected violations of academic integrity will be taken seriously and result in sanctions.    This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCONTENT  18 pts  Excellent  Complete and organized submissions that adhere to all assignment instructions.  14 pts  Very Good  Submission is missing minor elements and/or is not well-organized and/or missed an assignment instructions.  9 pts  Adequate  Submission is missing minor elements and/or is not well-organized and/or missed an assignment instructions.  5 pts  No Credit  Submission is missing elements and/or is not well-organized and/or did not adhere to assignment instructions.  0 pts  No credit  Did not submit or submission unacceptable.  18 pts  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPPLICATION  18 pts  Excellent  High-quality submissions that clearly demonstrate an understanding of course materials. Thorough explanation of key concepts from the textbook. Need to show application in other situations, countries, and cases. Examples come from magazines, journals, newspapers, and other sources can be included. Citation is needed if you use sources.  14 pts  Very Good  Good submissions with some connections to course materials. Occasionally contributes ideas, relevant personal experience, materials, and/or comments. Moderate explanation of key concepts from the textbook.  9 pts  Adequate  Good submissions with some connections to course materials. Occasionally contributes ideas, relevant personal experience, materials and/or comments. An adequate explanation of key concepts from the textbook.  5 pts  No Credit  Little to no evidence that course materials are understood or incorporated into submissions. Poor explanation of key concepts from the textbook.  0 pts  No credit  Did not submit or submission unacceptable.  18 pts  This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeORGANIZATION AND GRAMMAR  4 pts  Excellent  Properly formatted submissions demonstrating professional, college-level tone, no spelling or grammar errors and well-documented sources (when applicable).  3 pts  Very Good  Submission may be lacking proper formatting or professional tone or may contain minor spelling/ grammar errors or is not well-supported (when applicable).  2 pts  Adequate  Submission may be lacking proper formatting or professional tone or may contain minor spelling/ grammar errors or is not well-supported (when applicable).  1 pts  No Credit  Submission may be lacking proper formatting and/or professional tone and/or may contain multiple spelling/grammar errors and/or is not well-supported (when applicable).  0 pts  No credit  Did not submit or submission unacceptable.  4 pts