Case Write-ups

24 course points · Three individual analyses · 8 points each

🌎 Overview

For three of our cases—Evan Williams, Savage Beast, and Rent the Runway—you’ll write a recommendation of no more than 400 words for the person facing the case’s central decision. Figure out what matters, weigh the available choices, and explain what they should do next.

Assume your reader already knows the case. Your job is to help them make a decision. That means using the facts to build an argument, rather than spending your page retelling the story.

🤔 Rationale

Entrepreneurs make consequential decisions with incomplete information, limited resources, and several plausible paths forward. These write-ups give you practice doing the same: identify the essential problem, make a defensible choice, and turn that choice into a workable plan.

There may be several strong answers to a case. What matters is how well you support yours. A recommendation that sounds exciting still needs to make sense for this founder, with these resources, at this moment. The word limit is part of the exercise: deciding what to leave out requires understanding what matters most.

🏗️ Structure

The deliverable

Submit an individual, professionally written analysis of no more than 400 words of analysis text, excluding headings and the title in the Case Write-ups section of your shared course workbook. Once it is there, it is submitted; there is no separate eLC upload. Your grade will appear in eLC. Include the five sections below, using headings so your reader can find each part quickly. Open with the executive summary; arrange the remaining sections in whatever order makes your argument easiest to follow. You don’t need a salutation or a formal introduction before the summary.

Write for an executive who needs to act on your recommendation. Use direct statements rather than first person: “The company should…” gets to the point more quickly than “I believe the company should…”. Proofread, and make the analysis easy to read. Write the first four sections in prose and Implementation in bullets, describing observable actions. The thinking, argument planning, writing, and revision must be yours. AI may check spelling and grammar only; it may not plan, draft, rewrite, rephrase, or shorten your analysis.

1. Executive summary

In about three to five sentences, identify the critical context, the central problem or decision, and your recommendation. Give the reader the essentials of your argument right away. Save the company’s full history for the case itself.

2. Problem statement

Identify one central problem or decision the decision maker needs to address. Distinguish the underlying issue from its symptoms, and be specific about the choice in front of them.

3. Alternatives

Evaluate the pros and cons of at least one viable alternative to your recommendation. You’re weighing at least two realistic paths: the one you recommend and another that deserves serious consideration. Explain the tradeoffs that make your recommendation the better choice.

Keep these options available from the point where the case ends. Explaining what the founder should have done years earlier doesn’t give them an alternative they can act on now.

4. Conclusion

Make your recommendation and explain the reasoning behind it. Use relevant case evidence and course concepts to show why this choice addresses the problem better than the alternative. Consider the resources it requires and the risks it creates.

If your plan depends on customers, investors, employees, or partners doing something, explain why they would. “Find an investor” needs a reason someone would want to invest.

5. Implementation

Give the decision maker concrete next steps. Identify what needs to happen, in what order, and with what resources. Consider time, cost, revenue, and the people needed to make the plan work. If the founder doesn’t have a resource your plan requires, explain how they could obtain it. A short, specific action list can do this well.

The plan should follow from your recommendation closely enough that someone could begin acting on it. “Improve marketing” leaves the next decision to your reader; a specific action gives them a place to start. Use the cameras-and-microphones test: could someone observe the actions you propose? Include preparation, sequence, resources, a useful outcome, and a contingency when relevant.

Preparing your analysis

Read the case and its exhibits, identify the decision, and test your initial recommendation against the evidence. Useful calculations can sharpen your argument; unsupported precision won’t. Distinguish facts from assumptions, and revisit your problem statement if your analysis shows that you started in the wrong place.

The case-analysis resources in eLC include an introduction to the case method, an expectations video, and sample analyses. Read the feedback on the weaker example carefully: a long recap, hindsight in place of alternatives, unsupported claims, and vague next steps can undermine an otherwise promising idea. Use the examples to examine the reasoning; follow the requirements here for your own submission.

📓 Grading

Each write-up earns one overall score out of 8. Across the three analyses, you can earn 24 course points. I’ll evaluate how well the parts work together as a recommendation, using six criteria:

Executive summary: Does it efficiently present the critical context, problem, and proposed solution?
Problem statement: Does it identify the essential decision and show an understanding of its complexity?
Alternatives: Does it fairly weigh the advantages and disadvantages of another practical, forward-looking option?
Conclusion: Is the recommendation supported by evidence and sound reasoning, with realistic attention to resources and other parties’ incentives?
Implementation: Are the next steps specific, feasible, and attentive to time, cost, revenue, and resources?
Structure, grammar, and professionalism: Is the analysis coherent, easy to follow, polished, and within the 400-word limit?

Performance levels

8 — Excellent: A clear, concise, persuasive recommendation. All five sections work together; evidence and course concepts support the reasoning; alternatives receive fair consideration; and the implementation plan is specific and realistic. The analysis handles meaningful complexities and tradeoffs with care.
6.8 — Strong: A sound recommendation with all required parts, relevant evidence, a viable alternative, and actionable next steps. A few gaps in precision, depth, feasibility, or concision keep the argument from being fully developed.
5.6 — Developing: The analysis identifies a relevant problem and offers a plausible recommendation, but important reasoning is thin or uneven. Alternatives, evidence, resource constraints, or implementation need more development.
4 — Needs substantial work: Significant gaps weaken the recommendation. The write-up may focus on symptoms, rely on recap or hindsight, overlook major constraints, or offer alternatives and next steps that aren’t workable.
1.6 — Limited evidence: Some relevant work is present, but major parts are missing or show substantial misunderstanding. There isn’t enough supported analysis to guide a decision.
0 — No assessable work: No submission or no relevant analysis to evaluate.

These descriptions guide the overall score; they aren’t separate point buckets. A polished page still needs a strong argument, and a promising idea still needs enough explanation to make it usable. Expect a numeric grade and brief comments. Ask if you would like detailed feedback, including on work that earned a strong grade. The course’s late-work and academic-integrity policies apply.

⏰ Timeline

Complete each analysis in your shared workbook by its deadline below. For Evan Williams, a draft before class is encouraged, and the final analysis is due at the end of the day.

Case analysis 1: Evan Williams — Oct 6, 2026 — end of day
Case analysis 2: Savage Beast — Oct 22, 2026 — before class
Case analysis 3: Rent the Runway — Nov 3, 2026 — before class

“Before class” means 11:35 a.m. Eastern for the 11:35 section and 2:55 p.m. Eastern for the 2:55 section.

Start early enough to draft, test your reasoning, and cut what the reader doesn’t need. Bring your recommendation to the discussion, and use feedback from each write-up to strengthen the next one.

Source: Fall 2026 course syllabus — Case Write-ups, reviewed October 13, 2026 and reconciled with John’s current instructions. Current requirements and deadlines are maintained on this course site.