Case study on Miami University

asif597k

Download

Post to :

URL :

Related Presentations :

Add to Flag Embed

Views: 418

Category: Entertainment

Presentation Description

during studying strategic management in MBA i have to prepare a case study on MIAMI University, Oxford, OH. In this presentation we have prepare all related matrix like EFE, IFE, CPM, SWOT, IE and grand strategy matrix,

Comments

By: barkhordari (4 month(s) ago) Private Comment

i couldn't to download it. Please send me by this email: somaryam@yahoo.com i need it very very . please help me soon. thanks a lot

By: ahmaam0p (6 month(s) ago) Private Comment

i couldn't too asif. Please upload it again.

By: asif597k (6 month(s) ago)

i think it is the problem of web server so that you could not able to download it...... kindly give your email so that i could send you the softcopy of this presentation.........

By: cottoneyejoe (7 month(s) ago) Private Comment

no i am not able to download u can check

By: asif597k (6 month(s) ago)

i think it is the problem of web server so that you could not able to download it...... kindly give your email so that i could send you the softcopy of this presentation.........

By: asif597k (7 month(s) ago) Private Comment

you can also download this presentation from this website directly

Presentation Transcript

PowerPoint Presentation:

Case Study Strategic Management on

Presented To: Sir Liaqat Ali:

Presented To: Sir Liaqat Ali Presented by: Asif Mahmood Khan 09-NTU-5008 M. Muzzam Irshad 09-NTU-5033 M. Majid Mahmood 09-NTU-5032

History:

History It was founded in 1809 in the small town of Oxford, OH. It has an enrollment of around 15,000 undergraduates and is located just 35 miles north of Cincinnati. The landscape of Miami consists of numerous red brick buildings and is considered one of the most beautiful campuses in the nation.

Mission Statement :

Mission Statement To held educate students by developing, maintaining and supporting safe, functional and attractive campuses for Miami University

Vision Statement by University :

Vision Statement by University Our vision is to provide quality service, timely service, and friendly service and to create an atmosphere of shared responsibility in which all employees have the opportunity to contribute to the process of improving the service we provide our customers.

Revised Mission Statement:

Revised Mission Statement Our Mission is the advancement of learning through teaching, scholarship and service to society: by offering to outstanding undergraduate and graduate students the best education available; by carrying out scholarly activities judged to be excellent when measured against the highest international standards; in those ways for which we are well-suited by virtue of our academic strengths.

Revised Vision Statement:

Revised Vision Statement We are committed to establishing a campus culture that reflects a fundamental respect for different ways of living, working, and learning. We intend to assure every individual the opportunity to reach her or his potential.

Matrices:

Matrices IFE Matrix EFE Matrix CPM Matrix SWOT Analysis Space Matrix IE Matrix The Grand Matrix QSPM

IFE Matrix:

IFE Matrix Key Internal Factors Weight Rating W. Score Strength Brand Image of the university 0.10 4 0.4 Graduate Rate 64% per year 0.05 3 0.15 Enrollment ratio increase every year 0.10 4 0.4 Top Rank in 21 Universities in USA 0.05 4 0.2 75 % full time and part time PhD faculty 0.15 3 0.45 Most frequent class size 20-30 0.10 4 0.4 Decentralized System 0.05 3 0.15 Business related education 0.05 3 0.15 Weakness High Student Cost 0.10 2 0.2 Low Ratio of Higher Education 0.05 1 0.05 Hamilton and Midtown Campus are non residential 0.05 2 0.1 High fee 0.05 2 0.1 High strength of students from same state 0.10 2 0.2 Total 1.00 2.95

EFE Matrix:

EFE Matrix Key Internal Factors Weight Rating W. Score Opportunities Government Support 0.15 4 0.6 Private endorsement and Gift 0.15 3 0.45 High Employment Ratio 0.10 4 0.4 Student Exchange Programmes 0.10 2 0.1 Wireless internet facility in campus 0.05 3 0.15 Online Fulltime Education System 0.05 3 0.15 Student’s Organization (more than 400) 0.10 3 0.3 Strong linkage with social societies 0.05 3 0.15 Threats Reduce subsidiary due high enrollment (upto 16000) 0.10 2 0.2 Negative public perception (too white, too rich, too expensive) 0.075 3 0.225 Perception of people (Only Liberal Art) 0.075 2 0.225 Total 1.00 2.95

PowerPoint Presentation:

CPM Matrix Miami University University of Virginia University of Michigan Critical Success Factors W R Sc R Sc R Sc Advertisement 0.20 2 0.4 2 0.4 2 0.4 Service Quality 0.10 4 0.4 3 0.3 2 0.2 Fee Competition 0.10 3 0.3 4 0.4 3 0.3 Management 0.10 3 0.3 2 0.2 4 0.4 Financial Position 0.15 3 0.45 2 0.3 1 0.15 Loyalty 0.10 2 0.2 3 0.3 3 0.30 Market Share 0.25 4 1.0 3 0.75 2 0.5 Total 1.00 3.05 2.65 2.25

Strategy-Formulation Analytical Framework :

Strategy-Formulation Analytical Framework Stage 2 The Matching Stage SWOT Matrix Space Matrix IE Matrix Grand Strategy Matrix

STAGE 2 THE MATCHING STAGE:

STAGE 2 THE MATCHING STAGE Strength Weakness Opportunities Threats

Four Types of Strategies :

Four Types of Strategies Strength-Opportunity (SO) Weakness-Opportunity (WO) Strength-Threats (ST) Weakness-Threats (WT)

SWOT Matrix :

SWOT Matrix Leave Blank Strength – S 1 Brand Image of the university 2 Graduate Rate 64% per year 3 Enrollment ratio increase every year 4 Top Rank in 21 Universities in USA Weakness – W 1 High Student Cost 2 Low Ratio of Higher Education 3 High fee 4 Nonresidential Campus Opportunities – O 1 Government Support 2 High Employment Ratio 3 Student Exchange Program 4 Strong linkage with social societies SO Strategies New building required O1+ S3 WO Strategies Build New Residential Campus O1+w4 Threats – T 1 Reduce subsidiary (16000) 2 Negative public perception (too rich, too white, too expensive) 3 Perception of people (ART) ST Strategies Strict admission policy could be implemented to control the enrolment ratio T1 + S3 WT Strategies Reduce fee T2 + W2

Space Matrix:

Space Matrix Two Internal Dimensions Financial Strength (FS) Competitive Advantage (CA) Two External Dimensions Environmental Stability (ES) Industry Strength (IS)

Space Factors:

Space Factors Internal Strategy Position External Strategy Position Financial Strength (FS) Fee & Other Charges +6 Federal Grant +4 State & Local Grant +3 Endowment Income +2 Alumni +3 Other Sources +2 20/6 = 3.3 Environmental Stability (ES) Technological changes -4 Rate of inflation -5 Fee of competing institutions -4 -13/3 = -4.3

Space Factors:

Space Factors Internal Strategy Position External Strategy Position Competitive Advantage (CA) Market Share -3 Service Quality -2 Loyalty -1 Competitor capacity utilization -1 Technology -1 -8/5 = -1.6 Industry Strength (IS) Growth potential +5 Financial Stability +6 Technological know how +6 Resources Utilization +3 Goodwill +3 23/5 = 4.6

Space Matrix:

Space Matrix FS ES CA IS +6 +5 +4 +3 +2 +1 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 +1 +2 +3 +4 +5 +6 Conservative Aggressive Competitive Defensive

IE Matrix :

IE Matrix It based on two key dimensions: The IFE total weighted scores on the X-axis The EFE total weighted scores on the Y-axis Divided into three major regions: Grow and Build – Cells: I, II, or IV Hold and Maintain – Cells: III, V, or VII Harvest or Divest – Cells: VI, VIII, or IX

The IE Matrix :

The IE Matrix I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX Strong Average Weak 3.0 ~ 4.0 2.0~2.9 1.0~1.9 High 3.0~4.0 Medium 2.0~2.9 Low 1.0~1.9 As our EFE Weight score is 2.95 IFE weight score is 2.95 HOLD & MAINTAIN

Grand Strategy Matrix:

Rapid Market Growth Quadrant II Quadrant I Quadrant III Quadrant IV Slow Market Growth Weak Competitive Position Strong Competitive Position Grand Strategy Matrix

QSPM (Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix) :

QSPM (Quantitative Strategic Planning Matrix) Key Internal Factor Strength Weight New building Required Reduce fee Brand Image of the university .02 4 .08 3 .06 Graduate Rate 64% per year .03 2 .06 3 0.09 Enrollment ratio increase every year .06 1 .06 3 .18 Top Rank in 21 Universities in USA .02 2 .02 2 .04 75 % full time and part time PhD faculty .1 4 .4 2 .2 Most frequent class size 20-30 .1 4 .4 3 .3 Decentralized System .05 3 0.15 2 0.1 Weakness High Student Cost .05 2 .1 2 .1 Low Ratio of Higher Education .02 1 .02 1 0.02 Hamilton and Midtown Campus are non residential .05 4 .2 2 .1 High fee .05 3 .15 3 .15

QSPM :

QSPM Key External Factor Opportunities Weight New building Required Reduce Fee Government Support .04 4 .16 3 .12 Private endorsement and Gift .09 1 .09 3 0.27 High Employment Ratio .08 1 .08 3 .24 Student Exchange Programmes .05 2 .1 2 .1 Wireless internet facility in campus .04 4 .16 2 .08 Online Fulltime Education System .05 4 .2 3 .15 Student’s Organization (more than 400) .02 2 0.04 2 0.04 Threats Reduce subsidiary due high enrollment (upto 16000) .03 2 .06 2 .06 Negative public perception (too white, too rich, too expensive) .02 1 .02 1 0.02 Perception of people (Only Liberal Art) .03 4 .12 2 .06 Total 1 2.67 2.48

Conclusion:

Conclusion Our strategy is to: Reduce fee and admit the students of all classes including middle class peoples so that every talented person can got the education even a poor person who can’t bear the fee of their study.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH :

THANK YOU VERY MUCH