MACY’S, INC. (M)

As of March 2018, Macy’s, Inc. operates 690 department stores in 45 states, Washington DC, and outside the USA in Colombia, Guam, Puerto Rico, China, United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait with third party license agreements. Headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio, the company’s brands include Macy’s, Bloomingdales, and Bluemercury. Most stores are located in urban or suburban areas and include a mix of apparel, accessories, cosmetics, home furnishings and various other consumer goods. Macy’s reported revenues in excess of $25 billion in the year ending January 2017 deriving from 382 company-owned stores and the rest being leased.

 Approximately 600 stores are department stores operating under the names Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s, and the remainder are specialty stores that include Bloomindale’s The Outlet, Bluemercury, Macy’s Backstage, and Last Act. Macy’s divested 66 stores in the year ending January 2017 and 43 year-end January 2016, with plans to continue reducing total store numbers by approximately 30 as leases expire.

            Macy’s, Inc. employs 148,300 full-time and part-time employees with 10 percent represented by unions. Closing more and more stores every year, Macy’s, Inc. is struggling financially and needs a clear strategic plan. During the month of December 2017, Macy’s spent $32 million on television advertising, compared to J.C. Penney that spend $27 million that month.

BADM/BUOL 638, Strategic Decision Making Comprehensive Capstone Case Study Instructions

The aim of this assignment is to provide students the opportunity to perform a thorough case analysis. Working with your group, students will be assigned a company by the professor for analysis. The case analysis should include the following elements:

Title Page

Executive Summary

Background

· Introduce the company and provide the reader with background information about the company.

Situation Analysis

· The Environment – PESTLE Analysis

1. Political environment

2. Economic environment

3. Social environment

4. Technological environment

5. Legal/Regulatory environment

6. Environmental environment

· The Industry – Porter’s Five Forces Analysis

1. Bargaining power of suppliers

2. Threat of new entrant

3. Rivalry among existing competitors

4. Bargaining power of competitors

5. Threat of substitutes

· The Firm

1. What is the mission and vision of the firm?

2. What are the strengths of the firm?

3. What is the firm’s financial condition?

4. What are the constraints and weaknesses of the firm (i.e. financial condition, organizational conflict)?

5. What is the management philosophy?

6. What does the organizational structure tell you about how decisions are made?

· The Product

1. What good and/or service does the organization offer?

2. What consumer need does the product solve?

3. What promotional mix, channels of distribution, and pricing strategies are being used by the organization?

4. What competitive advantage does the marketing strategy offer?

Case Study Grading Rubric
Evaluation DimensionsPerformance Rating
BeginningProgressingCompetentAccomplishedScore
1234
Case Study Component Areas – Grading Criteria
Identification of IssuesDoes not recognize the problems or issues of the case, or identifies problems and issues that are not based on facts of the case;Displays little understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic challenges.With several exceptions, identifies and outlines the principal problems and issues in the case;Demonstrates a somewhat acceptable understanding of the company’s issues, current situation, and strategic challenges.With a few exceptions, identifies and outlines the principal problems and issues in the case;Demonstrates an acceptable understanding of the company’s issues, current situation, and strategic challenges.Presents accurate and detailed descriptions of the problems and issues central to the case; Provides a well-focused diagnosis of strategic issues and key problems that demonstrates an excellent grasp of the company’s present situation and strategic challenges;Descriptions are compelling and thoughtful.
Comments:
Stakeholder PerspectivesDoes not identify or explain the perspectives of any stakeholders involved in the case, or explanation is flawed in many respects;Fails to recognize any differences between the interests of the various stakeholders.With several exceptions, identifies and summarizes the perspectives of the principal stakeholders involved in the case;Outlines a few of the conflicts of interest between company stakeholders.With a few minor exceptions, adequately identifies and summarizes the perspectives of the principal stakeholders involved in the case;Outlines some conflicts of interest between company stakeholders.Clearly and accurately describes the unique perspectives of multiple key stakeholders in the case;Demonstrates insightful analysis of strategic tensions or conflicts of interest between the stakeholders.
Comments:
Connections to ResearchMakes little or no connection between the issues and problems in the case and relevant scholarly research and business data, or the connections identified are weak or inaccurate in many respects.Somewhat identifies and outlines connections between some of the issues and problems in the case and relevant scholarly research and business data, the connections identified are somewhat adequately explained.Identifies and outlines connections between some of the issues and problems in the case and relevant scholarly research and business data, the connections identified are adequately explained.Makes appropriate, insightful connections between the issues and problems in the case and relevant scholarly research and business data, effectively integrates multiple sources of knowledge with case information.
Comments:
Case Study Grading Rubric
Evaluation DimensionsPerformance Rating
BeginningProgressingCompetentAccomplishedScore
1234
Analysis and EvaluationSimply repeats facts identified in the case and does not discuss the relevance of these facts;Fails to draw conclusions, or conclusions are not justified or supported;Does not present relevant research or data;Shows no critical examination of case issues.Provides a minimal analysis of most of the issues and problems in the case;In some instances, analysis is adequately supported by research and data;Shows some critical examination of case issues.Provides an acceptable analysis of most of the issues and problems in the case;In most instances, analysis is adequately supported by research and data;Appropriate conclusions are outlined and summarized.Presents a balanced, in-depth, and critical assessment of the facts of the case in light of relevant scholarly research and business data;Develops insightful and well-supported conclusions using reasoned, sound, and informed judgements.
Comments:
Action PlansHas difficulty identifying alternatives and appropriate courses of action;Few, if any, alternatives are presented, infeasible actions are proposed, action plans are not supported, or actions do not address the key issues and problems in the case.Outlines and summarizes one or more alternative courses of action to deal with most of the issues and problems in the case;In some instances, proposed action plans are outlined, are somewhat feasible, and based on relatively sound research and evidence.Outlines and summarizes some alternative courses of action to deal with most of the issues and problems in the case;In most instances, proposed action plans are outlined, are feasible, and based on relatively sound research and evidence.Effectively weighs and assesses a variety of alternative actions that address the multiple issues central to the case;Proposes detailed plans of action;Action plans are realistic and contain thorough and well-reasoned justifications.
Comments:
Case Study Grading Rubric
Evaluation DimensionsPerformance Rating
BeginningProgressingCompetentAccomplishedScore
1234
Evaluation of AlternativesDisplays limited awareness and/or understanding of the consequences of action plans;Fails to identify implications and consequences of proposed action plans;Identified outcomes do not follow from proposed action plans, or outcomes are not related to issues in the case.Demonstrates a somewhat acceptable analysis of the results of proposed action plans;Somewhat adequately outlines and summarizes the implications and consequences resulting from alternative courses of action;With a several exceptions, identified consequences of action plans are related to key issues in the case.Demonstrates acceptable analysis of the results of proposed action plans;Adequately outlines and summarizes the implications and consequences resulting from alternative courses of action;With a few minor exceptions, identified consequences of action plans are related to key issues in the case.Objectively and critically reflects upon alternative plans of action;Effectively identifies, thoroughly discusses, and insightfully evaluates the implications and consequences resulting from the proposed action plans;Identified consequences are tied to the key issues central to the case.
Comments:
Overall Performance Rating on Case Study Analysis
Evaluation CriteriaScore
Identification of Issues
Stakeholder Perspectives
Connections to Research
Analysis and Evaluation
Action Plans
Evaluation of Alternatives
Total Score

"Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us"
Use the following coupon
"FIRST15"

Order Now