One of the shortcomings of the MPI presented at the website of MSU-CIBER is that it is not product specific. A company might for instance want to identify the potential of markets across the world in regards to their product. Your textbook gives an example of such a case and how the MPI can be constructed. In the following example, a more general example is given with explicit steps on how to construct such an index and its advantages/disadvantages in assessing markets for firm entry. Your assignment is to replicate the MPI 2009 worksheet for any other year in the period 2004-2008. For this particular research task, your report should be a Word or PDF document that has the final MPI table (e.g., Step 4 table in the excel file below). Make sure that you sort the final MPI table by Overall Ranking. You may find it easier to report the top 10 countries in your first page along with a short paragraph describing your findings and copy/paste the full table in the following pages of your document.

Step 1:

The first step in constructing such an index is to select the variables that measure the various markets’ potential and the sample of countries that you want to include.

In regards to the sample of countries, the more countries we include in the analysis the more representative the sample is and the more options to choose from. Therefore, a sample with more countries is preferred even if we want to focus on emerging markets since we can always isolate the emerging markets after the analysis is performed.

In regards to variables that measure the various markets’ potential, it sometimes is product-specific (e.g., a pharmaceutical company might want to include some different measures in the calculation of MPI than a retail company) but most of the measures will be the same, especially the institutional measures (economic and political freedom, country risk rating). In this example, we have selected the following variables for the year 2009:

Dimension	Weight	Measures Used
Market Size	6/25	Urban population (1000s) -20091 Electricity production (million kwh) – 20091
Market Growth Rate	4/25	Growth rate of primary energy use (%) – between years 2005-20091 Real GDP growth rate (Annual %) – 20091
Market Intensity	3/25	GDP per capita using PPP (current US Dollars) – 20091 Urban population (% of total) – 20091
Commercial Infrastructure / Access to Consumer	3/25	Main Telephone lines – 20091 Cellular mobile subscribers (per 100 people) – 20091 Paved road density (km per million people) – 20091 Secure Internet servers (per million people) – 20091
Market Receptivity	3/25	Trade as a percentage of GDP (%) – 20091 Per capita imports from US (US Dollars per capita) – 20092
Free Market Structure	3/25	Economic Freedom Index – 20093 Political Freedom Index – 20094
Country Risk	3/25	Country risk rating – March 20115

1 Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators
2 Source: U.S. Census Bureau Foreign Trade Division, Country Trade Data – 2009
3 Source: Heritage Foundation, The Index of Economic Freedom – 2009
4 Source: Freedom House, Survey of Freedom in the World – 2009
5 Source: Euromoney, Country Risk Survey – March 2011 (earlier data were not freely available)

Step 2:

After the collection of the data, each measure needs to be standardized in order to be comparable with the rest of the measures. A common formula is called the Z score and is calculated in the following way:

Alt version

Where X denotes a particular measure (e.g., urban population) and its values represent the value for each country in the sample.

Step 3:

After each measure has been standardized, we find the average of all standardized measures within each dimension for each country. That is, for dimension Market Size, its first value will be the average of the standardized urban population and standardized electricity production for country A. Therefore, after this step we have a column of data for each of the seven dimensions of the MPI index.

Step 4:

The resulting scores need to be converted to a scale of 1-100 and for this we use the following formula:

Alt version

Where Y_ij^s is the scaled final value of country j for the dimension i (i=1,.., 7 ); Y_ij is the average score of country j on dimension i; min_i and max_i are the minimum and maximum values for dimension i, respectively. Finally, we find the weighted average of all dimensions using the weights presented in the previous table (based on input from managers).

Now if all the above sounds really confusing, the following Excel file demonstrates the steps in the construction of the Market Potential Index. In the worksheet “Raw Data” you will find the data that are used in the construction of the MPI for the years 2004 to 2009. In the worksheet “MPI 2009” the steps required for the construction of the MPI are demonstrated (see formulas in the first row cells of each table).

Excel file

What are some potential advantages and disadvantages of the index?

Advantages

1. It’s construction is straightforward and it requires only freely available data.
2. It provides an initial screening for attractiveness of the foreign market and can be easily modified to account for product-specific factors using different variables from the World Development Indicators or other sources.

Disadvantages

1. Looking at the 2009 MPI, Luxembourg is in the third position owing to ratings in all dimensions of the index apart from Market Size. However, market size is an important determinant in assessing entry. Therefore, while the overall index helps us to split good vs. bad choices, we also need to look at the individual components of the index.
2. It cannot predict potential future economic or financial distress of the foreign market, especially if it is calculated for a particular year. For instance, Ireland is in the 21st place but it recently received a bailout from IMF. Therefore, for more complete picture several years of observation are needed but more importantly measures that more accurately capture deterioration of the economy and financial situation of each country are needed. We will cover these in more detail in later chapters.

What if we don’t have any input from managers to calculate Weights?

If we don’t have any information about appropriate weights to use in the calculation of MPI, then we can follow the textbook’s paradigm and find the average MPI. In other words, in step 4 of the above example, instead of weighted average we calculate the ordinary average.

THIS IS ONLY AN INTERPRETATION, FIVE SENTENCES AND A QUESTION IS ALL I NEED. TELL ME YOUR THOUGHTS

Hands on Birmingham

Hands
on Birmingham, was formed in July 1998 and became a nonprofit
corporation in 1999. HOB provides flexible hands-on volunteer
opportunities for busy people. Due to the difficult economy issues
during the start of the organization, the organization shifted its
funding from corporations to grants and foundations. HOB is in the midst of expanding all of its services into the counties in Alabama. Hands
on Birmingham mission, is to connect people with organized and
meaningful volunteer opportunities to improve their community. Their
vision is that volunteers can inspire change in the community. Basing
beliefs on values such as: helping people, accountability, efficiency,
voluntary giving, and integrity & fairness.

Internl Factors

The
best thing about internal factors is that you can control many of them.
One internal factor that may impede the development of a successful
financial strategic plan within the government, could be the person put
in charge of grant writing for the organization. As mentioned earlier,
HOB receives funding through grants. A grant is a finical award given by
the federal, state or local government to
an eligible organization. A person in this role of grant writing could
be considered the finance officials. They must possess certain skills
to allow them to be successful in this role such as, understanding the
entire knowledge of entity’s operations, resources, and systems (Casey,
2010). Finance officials provide the expertise to best quantify the
funding and related resources that are required to accomplish strategic
plan goals (Casey, 2010). Another internal factor that can have a
negative impact on an organization’s financial strategic plan is high
employee turnover rates. Long- time employees have a deep history with
the company, and when they leave, so does their knowledge, skills, and
abilities, and the company’s investment to train the workers. The
organization probably went a great expense to either acquire or develops
that talent (Sarmad 2016).

External Factors

External
factors are all those things that are beyond your control. There are no
individual or organizational incentives to deviate from existing
controls toward more effective performance. In making budget proposal,
agency administrators are likely to seek more than what is needed to
cover the cost (Moynihan, 2006).
One external factor that may impede the development of a successful
financial strategic plan within the government could be meeting the
criteria to receive grants. Some of the issues that can arise during the
proposal of a grant include:

• Time-consuming research on the granting agency before writing the grant.
• Competition is fierce, and the success rate is low.
• There are strings attached to the money you receive. You can’t do whatever you want with the funds.
• Most grants are short term. When they run out, you have to start over.

Refernce

http://www.handsonbirmingham.org/

Casey, J. P., & Seay, K. T. (2010). The role of the finance officer in strategic planning. Government Finance Review, 26(6), 28–36.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Moynihan, D. P. (2006). Managing for results in state government: Evaluating a decade of reform. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 77–89.

Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.

Sarmad, M., Aimal. M. M.,
Shamim, M., Saleh, M., & Malik,A. (2016). Motivation and
Compensation as Predictors pf Employees’ Retention: Evidence from Public
Sector Oil and Gas Selling Organizations. Journal of Behavioral Science, 26(2), 174-188. Retrieved from Walden Library databases.

For several years, “The MacDonald Triad”, named after the forensic psychiatric, JM MacDonald, was used as a predictive tool when examining the common traits of serial killers. The three traits primarily found in these suspects were:

1. Cruelty to animals
2. Obsession with fire
3. Bed wetting past the age of 5.

In this assignment, you will examine “The MacDoanld Triad” study and its conclusions. Using at least FOUR external sources, you will discuss strengths and weakness of the study. Be sure to address the impact it has had on various criminal investigations. Is this a reliable tool to use when profiling these offenders? Are there better indicator(s) of violent, criminal behavior?

Required Resources

Compton, P. B. (2010). Federal acquisition: Key issues and guidance. Vienna, VA: Management Concepts, Inc.

Feldman, Steven W. (2016). Government contracts in a nutshell (6th ed.). St. Paul, MN: LEG, Inc. d/b/a West Academic.

Supplemental Resources

Brown, T. L., Potoski, M., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2009). The challenge of contracting for large complex projects: A case study of the coast guard’s Deepwater program. IBM Center for the Business of Government. Retrieved from http://www.businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/deepwater_magazine_0.pdf

Rendon, R. G. Critical success factors in government contract management. Retrieved from http://www.ippa.org/IPPC4/Proceedings/19Others/Pap…

Schwartz, M. (2009). Defense Acquisitions: How DOD Acquires Weapon Systems and Recent Efforts to Reform the Process. Retrieved from http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34026_20090710.pd…

Assignment 5: Announcing Contract Award and Responsibilities of the Contracting Officers’ Representative
Due Week 10 and worth 170 points

Imagine that you are working on a project to purchase 5,000 electrical generators with an electrical capacity of three (3) kilowatts and will be used

by the U.S. Army for battlefield communications systems.

Choose to respond to this scenario from a government or a contractor perspective. If you select government, then you will complete the assignment as if you are a government employee (or military personnel) receiving the proposal from the contractor. If you select contractor, then you will complete the assignment as if you are a contractor employee submitting a proposal to the government.

Write a ten (10) page paper in which you:

• Evaluate the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Determine how these requirements apply to this scenario.
• Establish the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract.
• Evaluate the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general.
• Create a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators.
• Assess the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Propose two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario.

Use at least seven (7) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

• Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
• Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

• Apply the methods for announcing the contract award, notifying, and debriefing the unsuccessful vendors.
• Apply the federal supply schedule to select contract items and review the training requirements for the contracting officer’s representative.
• Use technology and information resources to research issues in government acquisition.
• Write clearly and concisely about government acquisition using proper writing mechanics.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Points: 170	Assignment 5: Announcing Contract Award and Responsibilities of the Contracting Officers’ Representative
Criteria	Unacceptable Below 70% F	Fair 70-79% C	Proficient 80-89% B	Exemplary 90-100% A
1. Evaluate the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Determine how these requirements apply to this scenario. Weight: 20%	Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Did not submit or incompletely determined how these requirements apply to this scenario.	Partially evaluated the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Partially determined how these requirements apply to this scenario.	Satisfactorily evaluated the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Satisfactorily determined how these requirements apply to this scenario.	Thoroughly evaluated the requirements for announcing federal contract awards. Thoroughly determined how these requirements apply to this scenario.
2. Establish the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely established the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract.	Partially established the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract.	Satisfactorily established the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract.	Thoroughly established the responsibilities of the Contracting Officers Representative (COR) for this contract.
3. Evaluate the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general.	Partially evaluated the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general.	Satisfactorily evaluated the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general.	Thoroughly evaluated the existing training and certification requirements for CORs in general.
4. Create a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators. Weight: 15%	Did not submit or incompletely created a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators.	Partially created a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators.	Satisfactorily created a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators.	Thoroughly created a set of specific requirements for the COR working on the contract for 5,000 electrical generators.
5. Assess the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Propose two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario. Weight: 20%	Did not submit or incompletely assessed the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Did not submit or incompletely proposed two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario.	Partially assessed the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Partially proposed two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario.	Satisfactorily assessed the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Satisfactorily proposed two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario.	Thoroughly assessed the importance of safeguarding proprietary information. Thoroughly proposed two (2) ways that proprietary information can be safeguarded in this scenario.
6. 7 references Weight: 5%	No references provided	Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.	Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.	Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements Weight: 10%	More than 6 errors present	5-6 errors present	3-4 errors present	0-2 errors present