CASE STUDY & REFLECTIVE ESSAY DIRECTIONS
This document outlines the directions for one of your major assessments in the course- the case study analysis with a reflective essay. It also provides a description of how you will be evaluated (rubric at the bottom of the document).
Deadline: by Thursday, April 04th at 5pm local time.
Overall Assignment Objectives:
There are two parts to this piece of coursework: 1) A case study analysis; and 2) A reflective essay.
The case analysis portion of the assignment requires you to analyze a real business case (provided to you) using content from the class, leading to the preparation of a brief report for the client in the case. This will require you to assess the case as if you were a management consultant tasked with making recommendations to the client (see below). The reflective essay portion allows you to use details and understanding of the case to compare that with what you have learned in class and/or via personal work experience. Detailed instructions for each portion are offered below.
Formatting Details:
Individual Submission
3,000 words +/- 10% (approx. 12 double-spaced, 6 single-spaced pages) excluding references and appendices.
Part 1- Case Study: approx. 2,000 words
Part 2- Reflective Essay: approx. 1,000 words
Part 1- Case Study Analysis
The Business Case: XOXODAY- Solving the Conundrum of Gamification & Well-Being. This case is provided to you on Canvas.
Your client for this case is:
Mary Madhavi Reddy
New marketing head for the Empuls product line of Nreach Online Services Private Limited (Xoxoday)
Your Task: A case study analysis typically requires you to provide a consulting style brief that clearly and compellingly documents the problems of the case as you have diagnosed them, and the issues/symptoms flowing from those problems. From your evaluation, you are also typically asked to provide recommendations to the client on how to move forward from the stated problems. In this case study report assignment, you will only be completing a few of those steps. You will provide detailed answers to the following:
What Happened in the case?
Clearly and concisely describe what happened in this case. This response should be highly descriptive. You are providing a concise summary of the case here, so all major events covered in the case need to be discussed, as well as any pertinent company information. Remember to keep this concise and only focus on what you are told in the case. Outside research about the company will lose you points here. Let the client know that you understand the context and their concerns (approx. 500 words)
How Should the Client Proceed?
How should Mary Madhavi Reddy proceed? Should Xoxoday implement gamification as a strategic HR solution aimed at driving well-being behaviours? Your response here needs to include a theoretical argument (For example, perhaps you argue that due to individual differences in resistance to change or adoption of technology, you believe that too few people will accept the move over to the AI system; or perhaps you argue that the technology will be an issue due to arguments found in social presence theory, or various theories of motivation or engagement), AND a practicality argument (i.e., provide examples of successful implementation of gamification in industries related to well-being solutions if your answer is yes to gamification, or examples of poor implementation or failure if your answer is no to gamification.
Make sure to clearly and concisely discuss:
1) What problems of the case does gamification have the potential to address?
2) Will the digital platform help to bring down attrition rates?
(Section should be approximately 1500 words)
Note. Please number your sections to match the respective questions (1=what happened, 2= how should the client proceed).
Part 2- Reflective Essay
The second part of this report requires more criticality and inward-looking than part 1. You are to use your own work experiences (not expected that you have many, but if you do, use them), and thoughts regarding the course content (most people will just have this), by relating them to what was discussed in the case. Since this is a reflective essay, the use of 1st person is allowed.
This is NOT just a space to provide random opinions with no support in the literature. It is a place to critique factual things that are known. Hence, you need evidence in this section, with that evidence coming from what has been already provided to you in class and in supplemental reading sections for each class topic. Therefore, this part of the report requires a minimum of 3 class resources (academic articles, videos, popular press articles, government documents), to support your claims and observations. At least one resource needs to be an academic article.
Of all the topics covered this semester, you are to pick 1 and go into detail about how this case relates to it. Topics to choose from include:
Precarious Employment
Career Identity
Gig Work
Remote Work/Telework
Emotional Labour (productivity, engagement, and stress)
In-Work Poverty
Women’s Health
Outcomes of Covid-19
You can also discuss the intersectionality as a topic (e.g., gender, poverty and disability)
For the reflection, think about the following:
Provide rationale as to how the class topic relates to gamification and employee well being (ie., the focus of the case).
Do the pros and cons of gamification hold when you consider the class topic you have chosen?
Do you have personal work experiences and/or things that you have read that are related to the class topic and have implications to gamification and well-being?
Considering these points, a general structure for this section will look like:
The case argues (or implies) that _______is a benefit of gamification. However, based on the literature by _______ (or work experience, or statement made in class), this may not hold for women (or disabled persons, or a particular job category) for the following reason(s)_______. This is important to consider, because ____________(some statistic, implication for society, anticipated career trend, challenge to public consensus).
When writing a reflective essay it is important to remain critical and analytical. Weak responses stay at the level of description. Strong responses follow the general structure just written above (or something similar).
Suggested Case Resources
In addition to any relevant articles and theories discussed during lecture, I encourage you to read/watch and do your best at incorporating information from the following:
*Note. This list is not exhaustive and I strongly encourage you to find resources on your own.
Anna Stark, “The Journey from Giftxoxo to xoxoday-Interview with GoodFirms. Xoxoday, https://blog.xoxoday.com/journey-from-giftxoxo-to-xoxoday/.
Arnoldi, T. (October 21, 2021). The Dark Side of Health Gamification. Theravive. https://www.theravive.com/today/post/the-dark-side-of-health-gamification-0004772.aspx.
Atkinson, N. (October 23, 2019). Can Gamification Improve Employee Engagement With Flex Benefits? If So, How? Reward & Employee Benefits Association. https://reba.global/resource/can-gamification-improve-employee-engagement-with-flex-benefits-if-so-how.html.
Boyle, R. (April 27, 2010). Bayer’s Digital Blood-Sugar Monitor Attaches to Nintendo DS, Enticing Kids to Manage Health. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-04/blood-sugar-monitor-attaches-nintendo-ds-enticing-kids-manage-health/.
Bukspan, E. (2006). The Notion of Trust as a Comprehensive Theory of Contract and Corporate Law: A New Approach to the Conception That the Corporation is a Nexus of Contract. Hastings Business Law Journal, 2, no. 1. https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_business_law_journal/vol2/iss1/5.
Bunker, B. (April 17, 2019). Overcoming the Trust Deficit in the Age of AI. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2019/04/17/overcoming-the-trust-deficit-in-the-age-of-ai/?sh=5f3c2cd880da.
Calvo et al., (2020). Supporting Human Autonomy in AI Systems: A Framework for Ethical Enquiry. In Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Multidisciplinary Approach, ed. Christopher Burr and Luciano Floridi (Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 31-54.
Coby, C., & Boillet, J. (March 11, 2021). How Do You Teach AI the Value of Trust? http://www.ey.com/en_gl/digital/how-do-you-teach-ai-the-value-of-trust.
Davenport, T.H. (November 2, 2018). Can We Solve AI’s Trust Problem? MIT Sloan Management Review. Available from Ivey Publishing, Product no SMR60217.
Eitel-Porter, Corcoran, M., & Connolly, P. (2021). Responsible AI: From Principles to Practice. Accenture. https://www.accenture.com/_acnmedia/PDF-149/Accenture-Responsible-AI-Final.pdf#zoom=50.
Feijoo et al., (2020). Harnessing Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Increase Wellbeing for All: The Case for a New Technology Diplomacy. Telecommunications Policy 44, no. 6. 101988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2022.101988.
Firth-Butterfield, K. (October 6, 2021). Building an Organizational Approach to Responsible AI. MIT Sloan Management Review. https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/building-an-organizational-approach-to-responsible-ai/.
Georgiev, D. (2022). Top Gamification Statistics of 2022: Next Level Gaming. Review 42. Accessed August 29, 2023. https://review42.com/resources/gamification-statistics/.
Hyder, S. (June 22, 2021). How to Use Data While Maintaining Consumer Trust: What the Latest Research Reveals. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/shamahyder/2021/06/22/how-to-use-data-while-maintaining-consumer-trust-what-the-latest-research-reveals/?sh=24e4b49d2ddd.
Jirovsky, V. (2022). Can Artificial Intelligence Be Held Responsible? In Human Interaction Emerging Technologies and Future Systems V, ed. Erstes Kapitel, Cham: Springer, 605-610.
Juniper, B. (2011). “Defining Employee Wellbeing,” Occupational Health & Wellbeing. 63, no.10 (25).
Keeman et al., (2017). Employee Wellbeing: Evaluating a Wellbeing Intervention in Two Settings. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00505.
Lee, D. (March 25, 2016). Tay: Microsoft Issues Apology Over Racist Chatbot Fiasco. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35902104.
Mills et al., (September 8, 2020). Six Steps to Bridge the Responsible AI Gap. BCG. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2020/six-steps-for-socially-responsible-artificial-intelligence.
Patel, M.S., Chang, S., & Volpp, K.G. (May 7, 2019). Improving Health Care By Gamifying It. Harvard Business Review. http://hbr.org/2019/05/improving-health-care-by-gamifying-it.
Ransbotham et al., (October 20, 2020). Are You Making the Most of Your Relationship With AI? BCG. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2020/is-your-company-embracing-full-potential-of-artificial-intelligence.
Ravi, R. (June 29, 2021). AI Gone Wrong: 5 Biggest AI Failures of All Time. Jumpstart Magazine. https://www.jumpstartmag.com/ai-gone-wrong-5-biggest-ai-failures-of-all-time.
Talent Management Institute. (October 31, 2018). Level Up Your Talent With Gamification in Talent Management. https://www.tmi.org/blog/level-up-your-talent-with-gamification-in-talent-management.
Van Otterloo, S. (March 19, 2019). Irresponsible and Dangerous: AI Specific Risks. TCT Institute. https://ictinstitute.nl/ai-risk-management-checklist/.
Suggested Reflective Essay Resources:
Include, but are not limited to direct details from the case (required); academic articles, videos, and resources listed for the relevant week’s content; specific work experiences; work-related events read about in popular press sources.
REPORT RUBRIC/EVALUATION
For this assignment you are evaluated on the quality of your writing, but more importantly how much depth and insight you provide in answering the questions above, and offering a critical reflective essay. Therefore, you are evaluated on the overall quality of the paper (organization/mechanics; depth of answers) as well as your response to each individual question. The total score you can earn on the assignment is out of 100 points, and points are allocated in line with Heriot Watt policy (70+A Excellent, 60+B Good, etc.).
Each criterion is weighted according to it’s importance. Here is an explanation of each criterion, including: 1) a description of what an ‘excellent’ versus ‘satisfactory’, versus ‘poor’ rating entail; 2) whether it refers to the entire paper or just a question response; and 3) how many points the evaluation is out of.
Criterion 1: Organization, Mechanics, Writing Quality. This is an overall evaluation of your report. Out of 10 points.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Organization/ mechanics/writing quality
Information was well organized, easy to follow and flowed well. Included a response to all questions. All formatting requirements are present with use of correct grammer, spelling and punctuation.
Information presented was occasionally difficult to follow. All sections included. One of more formatting requirements not folllowed. Several spelling, grammar, punctuation errors.
Very difficult to follow the information as presented. Missing one or more questions. Many spelling and grammar errors.
Criterion 2: Depth of Answers- Reasoning, Integration & Evidence. This is an overall evaluation of your report. Each of your answers are considered in terms of quality of reasoning and quality and quantity of evidence used to support your claims. Out of 10 points.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Depth of Answers- Reasoning, Integration +Evidence
Reponses demonstrate a thorough understanding of the case and subject matter. Accurate, insightful answers. Use of specific and convincing examples to support ideas and make connections. Links are directly made to the case, course lectures/readings, personal experiences, and any relevant articles.
Demonstrates adequate understanding of the case and subject matter. Utilizes some vaguely developed examples to support claims made in case report. Some links are made to additional sources.
Little to no understanding of the case and/or subject matter. None or very few specific examples are used to support claims made in your case report.
Criterion 3: Response to Question 1- What happened in the case? This is an evaluation of the quality of your response to question 1. Out of 10 points.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
What Happened in the Case?
Clear and concise summary of the case, including all relevant company details and events. This should not exceed 500 (+/-10%) words.
The summary of the case could benefit from clarity and/or conciseness. No missing details, but explanations are sparse.
Little to no attempt made to summarize the case. Substantial amount of missing pertinent information.
Criterion 4: Response to Question 2- Proposed Solution. This is an evaluation of the quality of your response to question 2. Out of 30 points.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Effective Solutions/ Strategies
Well documented and reasoned solution(s) to issues presented in the case study. A theoretical argument and a practical argument are clearly and concisely presented.
Sufficient solution(s) provided to case issues. Feasability is sufficient. Theories, models , and examples are applied, with room for improvement in each or all categories.
Little to no attempt provided at providing feasbile solution(s). Theories, models, or examples are not used.
Criterion 5: This is an evaluation of the quality of your reflective essay. Out of 40 points.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Reflective Essay
A class topic is critically covered by discussing the implications of the case towards that particular topic. Reponse is detailed, accurate, insightful, and supported with extensive evidence. 3 or more class resources are used.
A class topic is covered, primarily in a descrptive and non-critical manner. Evidence is vague or weakly tied to the case details. 3 or fewer class resources are used.
Little to no understanding of how the case details relate to course content.
Thus, your feedback will look like this, with detailed feedback offered in the forms of comments for each section.
Criterion
Excellent
Good
Satisfactory
Fair
Poor
Organization/ mechanics/writing quality
Depth of Answers- Reasoning, Integration +Evidence
What Happened in the Case?
Effective Solutions/ Strategies
Reflective Essay
Total Score:
Organization, Mechanics, Writing Quality /10
Depth of Answers- Reasoning, Integration & Evidence /10
Response to Question 1: What Happened? /10
Response to Question 2: Proposed Solution /30
Reflective Essay /40
/100
GENERAL COMMENTS:
The post CASE STUDY & REFLECTIVE ESSAY DIRECTIONS This document outlines the directions for appeared first on essayfab.