The entries for this case were of an exceptionally high quality, making my job of judging them an extremely difficult one. There was pretty little to choose from while separating the top entries from the rest. While there are many ways of analysing a case, I have given more credit to entries that had a bias towards action, as can be seen from the recommendations and action points suggested by them.
Criteria
~ Strength of analysis
~ Application of theoretical frameworks
~ Originality and practicality of ideas (with a bias towards action)
~ Presentation
Results
IIM Kozhikode : Excellent presentation of the case demonstrating a sound understanding of the relevant concepts and requirements of the industry. Also provides some action points which the combined entity can focus on. I wish the students would have been a little more elaborate in highlighting the action points that the combined entity could adopt, particularly vis-à-vis Jio.
NITIE, Mumbai : Nicely presents the analysis of the case, highlighting how the combined entity can leverage the synergies and use an umbrella brand. I, in particular, liked the proposed strategy for the combined entity going forward and the strategy to counter Jio’s aggressive strategy. Some more justification of the actions suggested could have made it a winner.
IIM Calcutta : Excellent analysis of the case covering nearly all the key areas. I wish the students would have listed out actions that the combined entity should undertake. For instance, the analysis ends with calling upon Idea to “procure more and more market share with better schemes”. Some ideas could have been provided here as to what could be the “better schemes”.
IIM Bangalore : The analysis has been provided in a very polished manner and is quite credible, with strong justifications for the broad recommendations. However, the entry could have been much stronger if the students could have highlighted some action points, especially for the last two questions.
IIM Bangalore : Provides a sound analysis of the case, with good justifications for the broad recommendations. Similar to the 3rd and 4th position entries, the weakness is due to the inability to delve into greater specifics.