Students Report

Mini Case Study: Wheels of Fortune Maclaren takes off

The Wheels of Fortune case study and two-part examination question
required candidates to firstly analyse the factors that led to Maclarens failure in
2001 and identify and discuss the reasons why the company is now successful
(75%), and in the second part of the question to discuss what current
vulnerabilities and threats may inhibit Maclarens future success (25%).

Time management did not appear to be a major issue with very few not
answering both questions, most candidates using analytical frameworks and
sufficient exam preparation judging by the amount of prepared material.
However, what was noticeable for such a straightforward case was the lack of
discussion of significant issues or their implications following the analytical
frameworks. This lack of developing the answer often gave the impression of
pre-prepared work being copied into the answer book as if presenting a model
was sufficient without drawing out and developing the issues the framework
generates or attempting to orient it to the requirements of the question. Weaker
candidates failed to genuinely analyse and evaluate and instead simply
described and also struggled to create a structured answer.

a) Question (i) Analyse the factors that led to Maclarens failure in 2001?
(ii) Identify and discuss the reasons why the company is not
apparently successful (75%)

Responses to a (i) were generally the best answered. The better answers
looked at how the company failed to respond to the external changes using
material from the case. Most answers were structured around PESTEL
factors and 5 forces issues e.g. new entrants, consolidation of buyer power
and competitive rivalry with better answers including lifecycle issues for an
integrated answer. Better answers discussed a lack of strategic position with
summary issues in OT and SW for those that looked at internal issues.
Regarding internal issues, the 7s framework was a popular choice with some
using value chain analysis.

a) ii was not typically answered as well, with the best answers making the
linkage with the previous answer. Better answers used material from the
case and discussed positioning through generic strategies, strengths relating
to management, linkages between marketing and skills through the use of
the value chain and value system issues.


(b) What current vulnerabilities and threats may inhibit Maclarens future
success (25%)?
This question was problematic for most students with a typical general listing
of factors with little discussion. Better answers summarized T issues
stemming from previous PESTEL factors and 5 forces issues such as
increasing competitive rivalry, or issues concerning the replicability of design
and skill competences and management issues from value chain or 7s
analysis.