HRER803 PSUWC Lesson 09 Global Talent Management Discussion

Video Case Study Assignment (Janet Ang – Lenovo)
The Janet Ang – Lenovo video case study is designed to give you an example of some of the real cross-cultural challenges that face leaders in international organizations today. The video is divided into three segments: (1) discussion of challenge, (2) discussion of decision, and (3) discussion of results. Answer the following questions for each segment. The total length of your submission should be 500-1,000 words.

1. Discussion of Challenge:
   1. What are the challenges that Janet Ang faced?
   2. What options did Lenovo have for setting up the new management structure?
2. Discussion of Decision:
   1. What actions did Janet Ang take?
   2. What are the benefits and drawbacks of these actions?
3. Discussion of Results:
   1. What were the outcomes of Janet Ang’s actions for the people involved?
   2. What skills did Janet have that enabled the success?
   3. What broad lessons can be learned from this case?

Rubric

803 Rubric

803 Rubric

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall ContentExcellent: Excellent selection and application of appropriate lesson tools and concepts to develop an in-depth and critical analysis of the topic. Strong demonstration of a critical understanding of lesson materials. Draws insightful conclusions thoroughly grounded in relevant theory. Excellent use of relevant evidence to support analysis and discussion. Good: Very good selection and application of appropriate lesson tools and concepts to develop a good level of analysis of the topic. Satisfactory: Adequate selection and application of appropriate lesson tools and concepts to develop some analysis. Needs Improvement: Inappropriate, poor, or no use of lesson tools and concepts and failure to develop a coherent analysis. This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysisExcellent: Provides a critical analysis and well structured discussion, including diagnostic tools. Demonstrates an excellent ability to compare, contrast, and critique the available information. Good: Discursive but somewhat critical analysis. Demonstrates adequate ability to compare, contrast, and critique the available information. Satisfactory: Little or no critical analysis. Demonstrates a limited ability to compare, contrast, and critique available information. Needs Improvement: Lacking critical analysis. No attempt to compare, contrast, and critique available information. 10.0 ptsExcellent 7.0 ptsGood 3.0 ptsSatisfactory 0.0 ptsNeeds Improvement 10.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRecommendationsExcellent: Well thought out recommendations with logical justification that flows clearly from the analysis. Fully explores measures, benefits, and risks associated with recommendations and provides a contingency plan. Good: Appropriate recommendations with justification that flows clearly from the analysis. Identifies some measures, benefits, and risks associated with recommendations and considers contingency. Satisfactory: Limited recommendations for improvements with some justification that flows somewhat from the analysis. Suggests measures, benefits, and risks associated with recommendations. Needs Improvement: Minimal or lack of recommendations with no justification that may minimally flow from the analysis. Limited or no identification of measures, benefits, and risks associated with recommendations. 10.0 ptsExcellent 7.0 ptsGood 3.0 ptsSatisfactory 0.0 ptsNeeds Improvement 10.0 pts	10.0 ptsExcellent 7.0 ptsGood 3.0 ptsSatisfactory 0.0 ptsNeeds Improvement	10.0 pts