Master in Decision Making & Innovation
During the last month of November you have study the module Product Management and Productivity.
As part of the first mandatory unit of “Economics” you have developed an interesting activity: Analyse your Smart City!
The idea was to encourage you to approach the Economics definition, the two main areas Microeconomics and Microeconomics go through important questions like: How does the economy change? What is an economic cycle? And some others, to make you reason in a more specific context: The goal of this activity was that the students could be able to make recommendations of Strategic Planning in a medium and long term about a previous chosen City. The recommendations should be framed within the dimensions and indicators selected from the IESE report “Cities in Motion”.
From the Academic team, it is important to share with you some final comments about your performance during this activity.
We have based our assessment in each student’s fulfillment of the different stages
Stage 1: Choose the Smart City
Stage 2: Indicators Analysis
Stage 3: submission of the final document with the city analysis considering some specific requests:
1. Present in a table form the data that you have found of each indicator.
2. Carry out a brief SWOT analysis (Weaknesses, Threats, Strengths and Opportunities) of the chosen city. Do it in a reasoned way and according to the selected indicators (16).
3. Make medium and long-term strategic planning recommendations for the chosen city in two of the chosen dimensions from the IESE study.
4. Depending on the elective unit chosen in your 2nd week (Financial Crises or International Institutions) try to contextualize your answer:
– How has the international financial crisis impacted on your City’s strategy? Compare the evolution of your position in the “Cities in Motion” index and indicate 1 or 2 reasons that, in your opinion, explain this evolution.
– Which are the “Smart Cities” development strategies of the International Institutions operating in the region of the City that you have chosen?
First of all, I would like to congratulate the students who have shown good involvement during the different stages of the Activity, those who have asked for clarifications within the activity section and the participants of the Academic forum who have shared their knowledge and collaborated with other mates after all the research. The exchange of opinions has been beneficial for all.
We have received the answers from a high percent of our students although the have been some students that due to different circumstances have submitted their answer with delay and have been admitted by the Academic Team as exception!
What we have expected for an outstanding answer and what we think that could have been improved:
* The fact of accessing early to the unit content and activity orientation has allowed some students to choose the city they wanted to work with in the first place, it has have been a good way to put them in the mindset for developing the task successfully.
– Some students have accessed in delay and have to work with cities we have assigned at random having less interest in the information they should have researched about.
* The best answers, shows that some of you have followed the activity orientation and the IESE report as a base, but did not constrain your research just to the sources used by the report writers. So we have valued as positive the student who managed to find reliable data from official institutions or local webpages from their respective cities’ administrations.
– Some students’ answers show evidence of poor research and analysis; this resulted in reports without accurate identification of the better and lower performance of the cities in some indicators.
* In any report it is important to make a clear identification of the sources consulted.
– The lack of references and the omission of a correct citation model, has limited some students analysis in some works.
* If you have started by identifying correctly the performance of your city according to the indicators we have listed from the different dimensions and present all the required data in a table, you would have a good base for the rest of the activity.
– Broaden summary based of fragments but with not coherent link to specific dimensions or indicators have not helped.
* If after the preliminary research you have been able to determine the strengths, weaknesses opportunities and threats of the city by means of a SWOT analysis in a reasoned way (having the % of the indicators into account).
– Providing a not reasoned SWOT that was too sketchy or that was of linked to the previous stage also limited the analysis.
* If you were able to identify whether your chosen city has active policies and concrete actions or not related to the dimensions from the provided chart and used the indicators and its units of measurement so as to finally make a diagnosis: Where is that your city need more actions for improvement? How would you think that the weakness could be turn into strengths and so on?
This Feedback is intended to summarize the pros and cons from your analysis in a general sense. But you will have your qualitative result at the personalized feedback that you will find attached to your answer in the activity page or just clicking on the Tutor’s alert and looking for the corresponding notification.
I know you have put a lot of time and effort in the activity development, so I hope you can take advantage of the experience. For me it has been a pleasure to reading your workouts.