MGMT 601: Assignment #3 – Cross Cultural Differences in Leadership
Case Study: Answer the questions from the case using APA. Maximum 6 pages
Star Alliance 2020
Assume you are the Director General of the STAR Alliance organizarion, what challenges do you anticipate and how would you deal with them with the CEOS of the member airlines and the regulatory authorities in the countries where the airlines fly.?
Before you start working on your report, you should thoroughly explore the grading ru
ic at the end of this instruction and clearly identify key elements based on which your report will be assessed.
Requirements:
· Write the paper using APA style with 8-12 citations and references in addition to the textbook, including several peer reviewed references. All sources must have: authors, publication dates, and publishers. “Anonymous” authors, undated sources will not be accepted as valid sources and marks will be deducted.
· The paper should be at least 2500 words (10 pages), should follow a formal business report format including an introduction, main body, conclusion and recommendations, and must exhibit good writing, research, and analytical skills.
· Report should be written in the formal style; avoid using personal pronouns and sharing personal experience for this assignment; avoid/limit usage of charts, diagrams and other visual components, instead concentrate on making your ideas coherent, relevant and convincing.
· Submit your paper via Turnitin before the due date; late submissions are penalized by 10%/day
This assignment holds a value of 20% of your final mark.
Marks are assigned as per the Grading Ru
ic in this instruction.
Grading Ru
ic for Assignment #3
Criteria
Unacceptable XXXXXXXXXXExcellent
Report Introduction
· Stated purpose & objectives of report (clear and logical)
· Provided background detail/identified problems
· Clarified any limitations of report
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
Main decision making models
· Discussed several models outlined above
· Chose one model as the best and provided solid reasons for the choice
· Outlined key components of the chosen model
· Discussed each supporting point thoroughly and clearly
· Supported assertions with research
0-1 XXXXXXXXXX18-2 XXXXXXXXXX25-30
Explanation of how chosen model is linked to leadership effectiveness
· Gave situational analysis of model use
· Explained how model is linked to leadership effectiveness
· Gave real-life example of connection
· Supported assertions with research
· Tied model components, examples & research together
0-1 XXXXXXXXXX13-1 XXXXXXXXXX17-20
Report Conclusion and Recommendations
· Addressed purpose & objectives of report
· Provided a response to each problem identified
Each recommendation was:
· action-oriented, concise and clearly written
· realistic and feasible
· supported by research
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
Integration of concepts from the textbook/other sources
· Used multiple sources in each section
· Used sources to support personal thought/opinion/idea
· Cited sources match concepts discussed
· Balanced personal thought/opinion/idea and research
0-1 XXXXXXXXXX13-16 XXXXXXXXXX18-20
Professionalism of the document
Grammar, formatting, length
Paper had all required components
References were accurate and were all used in the report
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX
/100
Star Alliance in 2020
9B21M010
STAR ALLIANCE IN 20201
Professor Benjamin Gomes-Casseres and Jacob Judd wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do
not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names
and other identifying information to protect confidentiality.
This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized, or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the
permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights
organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western
University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t XXXXXXXXXX; (e) XXXXXXXXXX; www.iveycases.com. Our goal is to publish
materials of the highest quality; submit any e
ata to XXXXXXXXXX. i1v2e5y5pubs
Copyright © 2021, Ivey Business School Foundation Version: XXXXXXXXXX
Since its founding in 1997, Star Alliance had developed an expertly organized and managed network of
global airlines over the course of 23 years.2 In 2020, however, the airline faced a new and unforeseen
challenge: the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath. Suddenly, the world’s airline industry had to decide
how to respond to a global crisis. Even before the out
eak of the COVID-19 pandemic, Star Alliance was
already facing critical issues related to its organization and strategy. Its success had always depended on
effective management of the network’s member airlines. That factor would prove even more critical during
the pandemic, when airline travel suddenly and unexpectedly dropped to half of its original volume across
the world, and was not expected to regain its status for some time. For over 20 years, Star Alliance members
had contributed value to the alliance and reaped numerous benefits in return that helped them become strong
competitors. Other airlines, recognizing the value and strength of an alliance, had formed their own rival
airline networks. Would this strategy help airlines survive the COVID-19 crisis? Was group-based
competition needed to thrive during a pandemic?
THE GLOBAL AIRLINE INDUSTRY
The COVID-19 pandemic started in early 2020 and spread across the globe. In response, severe travel
estrictions were introduced in all countries. As demand for travel plummeted, passenger occupancy in
planes declined, and health and safety costs mounted. All airlines sought emergency funding wherever they
could, usually from their home governments. Observers recognized that the future of the industry was being
eshaped, although what new form it would take was unclear. Before attempting to accurately predict the
airline industry’s future, understanding its history and economic fundamentals was necessary.
During the preceding decades, the global airline industry had been transformed by new regulatory policies and
company strategies. The United States deregulated pricing and domestic routes in 1978 and the European Union
followed suit in 1997. Although regulatory hurdles still prevented cross-border mergers in many countries,3
airlines were able to pursue various new strategies. One strategy global airlines used to extend their global reach
was a bilateral and multi-partner alliance, known in the industry as a “constellation.”4
Star Alliance was created in May 1997 by an agreement among five international airlines: Deutsche
Lufthansa AG (Lufthansa), United Airlines Inc. (United), Air Canada, Thai Airways International Public
Co, and Scandinavian Airways System. The following year, four more airlines joined the alliance: Varig,
A
ut
ho
iz
ed
fo
us
e
on
ly
in
th
e
co
u
se
M
gm
t 6
01
L
ea
de
s
hi
p
in
a
G
lo
a
l C
on
te
xt
a
t U
ni
ve
s
ity
C
an
ad
a
W
es
t t
au
gh
t
y
R
og
e
C
ha
le
s
f
om
A
p
1
2,
2
02
1
to
J
ul
0
4,
2
02
1.
U
se
o
ut
si
de
th
es
e
pa
a
m
et
e
s
is
a
c
op
y
ig
ht
v
io
la
tio
n.
Page 2 9B21M010
Air New Zealand Limited, Ansett Australia, and All Nippon Airways Co. Ltd.. Expansion continued
egularly and steadily from that point. The main goal of the founding members was to expand their global
network of service and attain many of the synergies that a merger provided, while maintaining their
independent identities. Two years later, two new airline alliances emerged with a plan to reap the same
enefits that Star Alliance seemed to be enjoying. Oneworld was formed by founding members American
Airlines Inc. (American) and British Airways, and SkyTeam was formed the next year by Delta Air Lines
Inc. (Delta), Air France, and KLM Royal Dutch Airlines.5
The Rise of Airline Constellations
Star Alliance was a new type of organizational structure in the airline industry but one that would soon
ecome relatively common. This structure consisted of multiple member airlines enabling collaboration in
certain activities, within limits. Antitrust rules did not allow sharing specific types of information,
coordinating pricing, or sharing profits.6 However, each member paid a share of the costs of the organization
and had specific rights in the governance of joint activities.
Historically, airline alliances had been bilateral—that is, between two companies. In 1998, for example,
Air France was part of 24 different bilateral alliances with different airlines across the globe—all of them
emaining distinct and separate.7 Star Alliance, however, grouped such relationships into one network and
coordinated bilateral a
angements between member companies. Multi-partner alliances established
common
anding and standards for the various member airlines. In some cases, the alliance helped its
members aggregate large aircraft purchases.
Initially, Star Alliance relied mainly on its two largest members—United and Lufthansa. In 1999, these two
airlines together served 578 destinations in 106 countries. By 2020, Star Alliance had grown its membership
to 26 airlines and served over 1,300