Submission Criteria

2017 EFMD Case Writing Competition Supported by The Case Centre

casecentrelogo

 

Submission Criteria

  1. Applicants
  2. Conditions for Participation
  3. Evaluation Criteria
  4. Publication
  5. Judging Criteria

1. Applicants

  • Applicants can apply individually or as a team.
  • Applicants must represent a school or an institution - Independent applicants cannot submit a case.
  • Applicants may enter the category of their choice except the one for which their institution is the sponsor.
  • Judges may submit a case in any category of their choice except the one in which they are a judge and/or in which their institution is a sponsor.
  • Judges will not be allowed to participate in the selection of prize winners in categories in which they themselves have submitted a case.
 

2. Conditions for Applicants

The case studies and associated material must:

  • be presented in English and include an executive summary and teaching notes;
  • be anonymous (Anonymous means that nowhere in any of the documents submitted should your name nor the name of your institution be mentioned - No logo etc...
  • deal with real enterprises and/or organisations (company release form to be submitted if applicable);
  • If your case has been published, please be aware that EFMD can only accept cases published after January 1st 2016;
  • THERE IS NO LIMIT ON THE LENGTH OF THE CASES (we encourage innovativeness; limiting the number of words would affect it).

Cases that do not meet these conditions will be excluded from the competition. Note: copyright ownership will remain with the author. Multi-media presentation of cases is acceptable. The case must not have been a winner in previous EFMD case competitions.

 

3. Evaluation Criteria

The jury will apply the following evaluation criteria:

  • Content: The relevance of the topic; the ability to create a strong and interesting learning experience by including contentious issues and multiple perspectives; case authors are expected to take a critical perspective on the different dimensions of the subject of investigation.
  • Form: The style of writing; quality of the presentation; clarity of data; a good balance between a well told story and sufficient data through the use of annexes or industry notes; reasonable length (in event of too much information a split between case A and B should be considered).
  • The Teaching Notes: The teaching notes, which must accompany each submission*, should include as a minimum the following issues: an introduction to the programme on which the case is used and to the background of students who will use the case; pedagogical objectives of the case; possible questions for class discussion; any other comments that might be of assistance.
  • Innovation: ideas concerning the whole concept of the case and which should improve teaching and student engagement.

(Please note that the EFMD case jury will put a strong emphasis on the quality of the teaching note as well as on original fieldwork in making its judgment.)

 

4. Publication

The executive summary of the winning cases will be posted on the EFMD website. A digest of the winning cases (the executive summary submitted by the author) may be published in a limited selection of international newspapers, in accordance with the agreements between those newspapers and EFMD. All authors will be encouraged to register with The Case Centre.

 

5. Judging Criteria

  • Case Quality accounts for 50% of overall weighting. This is judged on the basis of ability to satisfy the educational objectives and student expectations; the correctness of the research and data; the manner of presentation of the data; the writing style, the useful life of the case, versatility of usage; the summary of the case, abstract.
  • The Teaching Notes account for 30% of overall weighting. These are judged on the basis of immediate issues, underlying issues, key points or highlights; indication of level of analysis (graduate, undergraduate, executive,...); suggested student assignment; suggested additional readings or references; possible discussion questions; potential uses of the case (marketing, strategy,...); analysis; suggested teaching approach; computer support; audio-visual support; proposed session plan.
  • Innovation accounts for 20% of overall weighting. The judges are seeking innovative materials, not necessarily presentation of the case, but new concepts and learning.