Understanding of the case
An evaluative look at the author’s write-up regarding the case study (Boeing’s e-Enabled Advantage) shows that the author demonstrates a good understanding of the case.
Here, it is worth noting that the author reviews the case relative to the company’s background, market situation, changes in leadership/management strategies, and new innovations/opportunities in a precise, coherent, and accurate manner (Applegate et al., 2006).
However, it is equally evident that the author limits the case review to matters concerning the company’s background, new opportunities, and competition at the expense of other important issues such as changes in company leadership/management strategies and the new vision, which played a greater role in shaping the current status of the company (Applegate et al., 2006, p. 187).
Moreover, the case review takes a descriptive approach as opposed to an analytical approach, which might have given the readers an opportunity to see the case from the author’s perspective.
Further, regarding the e-Enabled Advantage, the author is single-sided when elaborating on the impact of this concept on the company’s business environment.
Here, it is recommended that the author should have provided both the positive and negative (ethical implications) sides of the concept in Boeing’s business model just in case the reader wishes to evaluate its practical implications from a wider perspective.
Logical flow of arguments
Relative to the arguments presented by the author, it is certain that the logical flow of arguments in the write-up is moderate.
Here, the author presents arguments that flow from the beginning to the end by discussing the background of the company through major changes the company has undertaken to the conditions that lead to the company’s decision to implement a new business strategy (Applegate et al., 2006).
However, it is important to note that the author presents some vague arguments in the middle of the discussion, which need extensive elaboration.
For instance, by stating that ‘…with all the changes and even the purchasing of additional airline services….the company still faced cultural challenges’, the author leaves the reader hanging considering that the subsequent discussions are not logically relevant to the foregoing statement.
Therefore, it is recommended that the author should have provided a logical explanation of this statement in order to bring the reader into perspective of what these cultural challenges are.
Furthermore, the author mentions that besides Boeing becoming a potential competitor of IT companies such as Oracle and IBM, it also faces competition from Airbus. In this case, by the author failing to show the connection between these companies, there is the risk that this statement remains vague to many readers.
Critical Thinking
As mentioned earlier, the author takes a descriptive approach in reviewing the case, and thus the level of critical thinking applied in this case review is just acceptable.
In this regard, the author fails to give an adequate analysis of the information derived from the case besides neglecting to apply any theoretical knowledge in supporting the arguments presented in the case review.
However, through having a good understanding of the case, the author manages to present acceptable arguments in the long run.
Overall Quality
Overall, this case review is a good one considering that the author has a good grasp of the case information, and thus, chances are that the arguments presented in the case review are based purely on the information derived from the case.
Furthermore, despite failing to apply theoretical knowledge in analyzing the case, the author demonstrates a broader understanding of the business environment under which Boeing is operating.
To this end, it is recommended that the author should ensure that the arguments presented in subsequent paragraphs should connect with preceding paragraphs besides following from topic sentences.
Moreover, the author should try as much as possible to apply knowledge from outside sources in order to make the case review more analytical rather than descriptive.
Reference
Applegate, M.L. et al. (2006). Case 807-011: Boeing’s e-Enabled Advantage. USA: Harvard Business School.