1-Assignment for Case A: Read the attached case "A Medical Group Explodes Download Read the attached case "A Medical Group Explodes

" from required textbook Chapter 2.

--Notes and Considerations for Case A: As described in Chapter 2 and quite nicely displayed in Figure 2-11 is the McKinsey 7-S Framework which is a new addition to the discussion of this edition. Consider the 7-S approach in the discussion. From a basic perspective:

What has gone wrong with this situation? You have been brought in as a consultant by the CEO to deconstruct the issues here and provide a framework to see them through this challenge before this organization destroys itself.

--Discuss the following:

1. Do these two groups share the same values? One must wonder if in their early merger discussion did they ever discuss what the values were that they were bringing to the table?
2. Consider the structure of the groups and how they differ in decision making? Compensation?
3. Style? Consider how each group goes about managing their practice locations and the front-facing approach to the customer.
4. Staff - it is not easy to suggest one group is of a higher quality than the other, but their approaches to the staff seem to be different in terms of reward. For each group to recognize it is time to change is admirable, join a larger organization or merge. Was this a rush to judgment?

5-What are your recommendations to address this case?

Or you can select Case B:

2-Assignment for Case B: Read the attached case "Podomoro Jackson Hospital Download Read the attached case "Podomoro Jackson Hospital

" from required textbook Chapters 1 and 2.

-Notes and Considerations for Case B: This is a common situation for many hospitals. A donor emerges because the hospital has done a good deed for them or their loved one by saving their life or the life of a person in their family. The end result of course leads to a monetary donation of some significance, but it is a directed gift for a very specific purpose that was not originally envisioned in the strategic plan. As it notes with in the case "no good deed goes unpunished." The rationale behind such a statement with a designated gift such as to build a heart center or a cancer program, it requires a significant amount of downstream costs after the building of a fixed asset building or the build out of space for a specific program.

-- Discuss the following:

1. From a planning perspective how was this heart center plan generated? market driven or in a non-market driven perspective?
2. If the donor gets his wish, and it is generous, what are the related issues for the hospital (the issues of course, all dollars are fungible and thus additional resources not included in the gift will have to be redirected from other areas of the hospital to support this initiative)? That was not in the hospital's plan.
3. Is this wise competitively to be entering given the market dynamics of Podomoro Jackson with this heart center?
4. The most difficult reality is how might the hospital deal with this generous donor and reposition these dollars in a direction the hospital may want that may have been part of its original strategic plan?

5-What are your recommendations for the hospital CEO in this case? Explain.

• All papers will be run through TurnItIn to review theSimilarity Index (content that is similar to other sources such as other submitted papers, content from the internet, and other sources). I only review the similarity within the content of the paper (not the title page and references). Any paper with a significant Similarity Index for the content of the paper may be penalized. Note that you have two chances to submit your assignments. You are strongly encouraged to review the TurnItIn report for your first submission. If necessary, make edits to your paper and resubmit a second version prior to the deadline.
• cited correctly both in-text and in a references section in APA style.