Visa resultat

Strategy Creation and Change, TEK280

Your own effort

1. Which master program do you study?

MPQOM»		18		27%
MPSEN»		1		1%
MPPDE»		2		3%
MPNET»		2		3%
MPPEN»		5		7%
MPIDE»		1		1%
Other master program»		27		41%
None, course student»		9		13%

Genomsnitt: 5.01

2. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

65 svarande

At most 10 hours/week»		4		6%
At most 15 hours/week»		13		20%
Around 20 hours/week»		34		52%
Around 25 hours/week»		11		16%
Around 30 hours/week»		2		3%
At least 35 hours/week»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.95

- Actually less than 10 hours/week» (At most 10 hours/week)
- I didn"t read as much as I would have wanted to, due to external factors. » (At most 15 hours/week)
- I spend something like 35/40 hours/week in the last two weeks.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- That"s total divided on the entire courseperiod. Was less in the beginning and A LOT More at the end during the projects.» (Around 20 hours/week)
- For me this was a good workload, but the problem with courses that consists of only team work is free riders. Which we had and that person maybe spend 30-60 minutes per week on the course.» (Around 20 hours/week)

3. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

65 svarande

0%»		1		1%
25%»		8		12%
50%»		13		20%
75%»		26		40%
100%»		17		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.76

- Took three other courses that period that clashed with the schedule.» (0%)
- Very boring lectures.» (25%)
- Very basic lectures, most of which are repetition of previous courses.» (25%)
- There are two reasons for me not attending that many lectures. I took two additional courses during this period and I recognized most of the material communicated through lectures from my previous education (industrial engineering and QOM)» (25%)
- They unfortunately collided with other lectures/labs.» (50%)
- Reason for this was due to a collision with another course with mandatory attendance.» (50%)
- I skipped some fridaymornings...» (75%)
- i just missed one lecture» (75%)
- All lectures that I could attend but I had another course with mandatory lectures.» (75%)
- Schedule clashes, 50-50 in course choice in those situations.» (75%)
- I really like the lesson, the professors and the guesses.» (100%)
- more like 90%» (100%)
- Missed maybe a couple os sessions due to mandatory classes in organisational behaviour.» (100%)
- Really enjoyed them!!!» (100%)

4. How engaged were you in the teamwork?

Not active at all»		0		0%
Not so active»		1		1%
Participated, but was not very engaged»		8		12%
Quite active»		17		26%
Very active»		39		60%

Genomsnitt: 4.44

- The entire team was active, so it"s difficult to say "very". This was one of the first courses where I saw the entire team engaged in the project.» (Quite active)
- The problems is that not everybody were so engaged.» (Very active)
- Because others in the group weren"t someone had to step up. We had especially problem with one of our exchange students... » (Very active)
- i was to a very large extent driving the group work forward» (Very active)
- The problem with having like 85 percent of the grade based on group assignments is that you can work extremely much without "getting paid" if anyone else does not have any ambition. Also others just register for this course and can get a four or five as a grade just by doing nothing.. But I understand the dilemma of not being able to read the amount of assignments being the case of individual ones.. » (Very active)
- Perfect group constellation.» (Very active)
- I had to do a lot of the work in the team since many of my team-members lacked experience from this field.» (Very active)

Goals fulfilment and examination

5. How understandable were the course goals?

I have not seen/read/heard the goals»		8		12%
It was difficult to know what I could expect from the course»		4		6%
The goals gave some guidance, but could have been clearer»		22		34%
It was clear to me what I could expect to learn from the cou»		30		46%

Genomsnitt: 3.15 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Course goals seems as somthing that has to exist at Chalmers without a real purpose. I mean the case must be to gain the knowledge by performing the assignments and take part of the lectures. What else gives the course goals?? » (I have not seen/read/heard the goals)
- The grading was quite hard to grasp(didn´,t like the participation part of grading)» (The goals gave some guidance, but could have been clearer)
- For me it depends very much on if I re-read the course aims or not. In a course I take now in LP2, the assignments clearly link to the course- aims, and therefore I get automatic repetition. I think that the aims were clear but that I forgot them to some extent during the course of the course.» (The goals gave some guidance, but could have been clearer)

6. What would you have preferred as examination form?

66 svarande

(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)

Written cases»		32		48%
Individual asignments»		34		51%
Presentations»		30		45%
Class participation»		16		24%
Smaller diagnostic tests»		12		18%
Large traditional written test»		8		12%
Discussions of cases that you have read before class»		16		24%
Exercises in class»		10		15%
No opinion»		6

- discussion of cases in smaller groups, not in big classes...» (Written cases, Presentations, Discussions of cases that you have read before class)
- How can one actively participate in class discussion when there are more than 100 students in class.» (Written cases, Individual asignments, Class participation, Smaller diagnostic tests)
- I like the way it is evaluated. Otherwise i suggested to increase the individual assignment and reduce the group part. In that everybody has to work and they cannot use only the work of the others.» (Written cases, Individual asignments, Presentations, Class participation)
- Class participation is an interesting way of examination. It does however tend to favor those that are more talkative, rather than those that might have relevant remarks but may not get a chance to say them. That being said, class participation is a useful metric, provided the application takes into consideration its biases.» (Written cases, Individual asignments, Presentations, Class participation)
- There is a problem with students not attending class or reading the book, and then try to participate in the writing of the paper. They dont have the theoretical background. Make sertain lectures required to be attended.» (Written cases, Class participation, Smaller diagnostic tests)
- More individual... If you get stuck in a bad group it isn"t that much you could do... » (Written cases, Individual asignments, Smaller diagnostic tests, Large traditional written test)
- as long as supervision of the teachers on the group individuals was not possible, some people didnt work at all in the groups and got the same grade as the whole group members, which could be kind of disappointing for the active people. also about participation despite participating in all classes and even being inside all discussions, sometimes the course assistant asked us if he had ever seen us and on the other hand calling some names in the class because of previous aquintaces altogether these are not standard and motivating but also disappointing. the grouping was based on alphabet and many people got good grades despite not working at all because of being in a powerful group but others although powerful, because of other people got bad grades. it was not so fair. » (Individual asignments)
- The way it is now.» ()
- It was good like it was, but the participation I didn"t like. Eeveryone just said something to get a good rade but the quality of the participation wasn"t good.» (Written cases, Presentations)
- Interactive examinations and divided group literature seminars are quite better, than to have a classroom full of people.» (Individual asignments, Discussions of cases that you have read before class)
- 10% of the final grade is dedicated to class participation. I think it is not fair, because every one didn"t have the opportunity to talk and some were talking quiet a lot and mostly they were just repeating other just to get this 10 points. » (Written cases, Individual asignments, Presentations)
- I think that the mix between individual and group work was good. I am a strong promotor of allowing the students to select groups themselves to allow students that are very driven to join and learn more from challenging eachother.» ()
- I enjoyed the current system and found it very educational.» (No opinion)
- I think a to big part is based upon group assignments today..» (Individual asignments)
- Definitely a large traditional written test, together with everything else.» (Written cases, Individual asignments, Presentations, Class participation, Large traditional written test)
- I do not like the system where people that are active during class get extra credits. Some pople will then talk just for the sake of talking, making the discussions useless.» (Written cases, Individual asignments, Presentations)
- I liked the examination forms, but I would prefer if you did not use class participation as a way of examination. Instead I would prefer that you used seminars in smaller groups as a form class participation.It would also be easier for you to evaluate each person when the groups are smaller.» ()
- the case made on the guest lecture was one the most interesting ever. » (Written cases, Individual asignments, Exercises in class)
- I like when there are many forms in the same course. I think there should have been at least one additional individual examination form. Or a pass/fail literature seminar with some preparation task.» (Individual asignments, Presentations, Class participation, Discussions of cases that you have read before class, Exercises in class)
- I guess the examination form was fine, even though the last assignment become very stressful. It was unfair to have equal time on this as the previous two, since the content of the last assignment was larger it would have been better to have more time on this.» (No opinion)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.15

Teaching and course administration

7. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		3		4%
Some extent»		25		38%
Large extent»		25		38%
Great extent»		12		18%

Genomsnitt: 2.7 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Nice guest lectures, but confusing exercises in the begining!» (Some extent)
- Unfortunatly, the number of students was too high, which does not help to have a good interaction with other students and the teachers, smaller group would have been preferable.» (Some extent)
- I liked the lecture regarding PESTEL» (Some extent)
- Since I only participated in around 50% of the lectures, most of the knowledge came from the book and articles.» (Some extent)
- but mostly more than what we leant, were requested and because some people had more related backgrounds they could do a better job and our works were being compared with theirs which was not so fair again.» (Large extent)
- As with many I-courses the major benefit is to get the vocabulary and the models, even if all models will have to be changed in real-life, they enable us/me a good way to remember their scope, input and output.» (Large extent)
- It took some classes before i could comprehend the benefits of the in-class case studies...» (Large extent)
- The examples in the courses were of great use in understanding the course matter. Questions and answers rounds, class comments and exercises in class were very useful, although sometimes it seemed that there was not enough time for all the comments and discussions.» (Great extent)
- would be good to follow the order of the book.» (Great extent)

8. To what extent did the excercises contribute to your learning?

Small extent»		7		11%
Some extent»		15		25%
Large extent»		23		38%
Great extent»		15		25%
No opinion»		4

Genomsnitt: 2.76 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Most ones very blury, was more confused when leaving, rhen when I cam to class» (Small extent)
- It didn"t seem as we spoke the same language, so maybe not as much as it could...» (Some extent)
- As mentioned previous, the first couple of cases wasnt that beneficial for me, but later on became.. the teaching else was fine, as well as the guest lectures.» (Some extent)
- I really like the "practical" approach.» (Great extent)
- Especially the scenario planning activity.» (Great extent)
- We explicitly had to use the models. Great!» (Great extent)
- » (No opinion)

9. What did you think of the fact that the lectures were built up on exercises?

Very bad»		0		0%
Bad»		1		1%
Ok»		19		30%
Good»		24		38%
Very good»		18		29%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 3.95

- God thought, but to big group and not good organisation,to short time!» (Bad)
- I cannot really say why, but the exercises just didn"t appeal to me.» (Ok)
- ok, but it would be better if we got the exercises in advance. Most often we only got fifteen minutes to prepare and this only gave us a few minutes to discuss the case since we had to read it aswell.» (Ok)
- But sometimes it got quite out of hand, e.g. in the Cardio presentation, it was almost to much interaction. » (Good)
- you should have more time for them» (Good)
- ...but I already have some kind of preparation on this subject. If someone hasn"t maybe...» (Very good)
- lectures should include most important parts of the litterature, which it did. » (Very good)
- This feature, together with the grading of participation, was excellent! I personally need a push to actually speak up.» (Very good)

10. How well did the course administration, support, handouts etc work?

Very badly»		2		3%
Rather badly»		3		4%
Rather well»		34		52%
Very well»		26		40%

Genomsnitt: 3.29

- Christopher was too slow and unstructured» (Rather badly)
- Mainly because during assignment 3 when our group where supposed to have a meeting with Christopher he came fully unprepared. He hadn"t read or even looked at the report which we mailed two days earlier. He didn"t even read the mail we send to him. » (Rather badly)
- Information came late, the cases was hard to understand what should be done.» (Rather well)
- They worked very well actually, with the minor drawback that changes were done quite often (groups, schedule, date of returning assignments, etc.)» (Rather well)
- Groups were a bit unclear in the beginning. I think that all assignments could have been handed out from the beginning. In this way one can easier plan ones effort.» (Rather well)
- I really appreciated that we could have skype contact with Christopher, it gave us the opportunity to get help all day while working on the papers.» (Very well)
- Very good feedback on assignments etc.» (Very well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.73

Lecturers

11. What is your general impression of the set of lecturers that were engaged in the course

Poor»		0		0%
Fair»		3		4%
Adequate»		13		20%
Good»		38		58%
Excellent»		11		16%

Genomsnitt: 3.87 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- Its hard to get use to teaching style of everyone and if there is lot of shuffling then impact is rather bad.» (Fair)
- Best one was about politics of change» (Good)
- Honestly, I think the lectures would have been more interesting if we had been sitting in a room that was not freezing and with extremely poor acoustics. Mr Flemming (hope the spelling is right) was extremely good.» (Good)
- Guest lectures were very interesting as well.» (Good)
- Interesting gues lectureres, good assignments and generally a good discussion in class. Unfortunate with people that speak only to hear their own voice, but generally a good discussion in class.» (Excellent)

12. How would you rate the lecturers in the course?

Matrisfråga

- I cannot recall who did what presentation, I"m sorry»
- It"s difficult to evaluate the lecturers, given their different fields and approaches. Some areas are more "glamorous" than others. Implementing strategy and Market strategy are areas that are considered often in discussions about companies. On the other hand, The Politics of Change is not something that is always discussed and, as such, an interesting subject offering the chance for a very interesting lecture. »
- Dont remember or was not there»
- Christofer seemed unprepaired and Dr Palmås was constantly talking about other things, making the lectures thread hard to follow.»
- Bjorn kept everybody on focus, which was good. Flemming was kind of scary, I was embarrassed and felt fear of raising my hand, but the presentation war so good that it didn"t matter too much.»
- Steady 4s on all. None stuck out exeptionally. Overall high quality on all.»
- Christopher and Karl would have been given higher scores if they did not forward all questions to Tobias. This somewhat gave the impression that they were not comfortable in lecturing about the topic.»
- The lectures I attended were in general very good.»
- Christopher is a lot better than he thinks!»

Tobias Fredberg (multiple lectures, head of course)
64 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		9		14%
4»		27		43%
5»		26		41%
No opinion»		2

Genomsnitt: 4.27

Karl Palmås (Strategy as Truth Creation)
64 svarande

1»		2		4%
2»		2		4%
3»		13		28%
4»		24		53%
5»		4		8%
No opinion»		19

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Fredrik Dahlsten (Market Strategy)
63 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		9		21%
4»		27		64%
5»		6		14%
No opinion»		21

Genomsnitt: 3.92

Christopher Hedvall (Mission & Vision)
63 svarande

1»		1		1%
2»		8		15%
3»		19		37%
4»		15		29%
5»		8		15%
No opinion»		12

Genomsnitt: 3.41

Björn Frössevi (Implementing Strategy)
64 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		1		2%
3»		11		23%
4»		25		53%
5»		10		21%
No opinion»		17

Genomsnitt: 3.93

P-O Nyquist & Magnus Finnström (Crawford case discussion)
64 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		3		7%
3»		7		17%
4»		21		52%
5»		9		22%
No opinion»		24

Genomsnitt: 3.9

Flemming Norrgren (The Politics of Change)
64 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		2		4%
3»		11		23%
4»		21		45%
5»		12		26%
No opinion»		18

Genomsnitt: 3.93

Mårten Westlund (Communication Strategy)
63 svarande

1»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		10		23%
4»		19		45%
5»		13		30%
No opinion»		21

Genomsnitt: 4.07

Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.87

Study climate

13. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

Very poor»		1		1%
Rather poor»		2		3%
Rather good»		33		54%
Very good»		25		40%
I did not seek help»		4

Genomsnitt: 3.34 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- very crowded. student were saying stupid issues just to be seen and to take the 10 points.» (Rather good)
- I sometimes met a rather strange attitude when asking for clarification, advice, etc.» (Rather good)
- Even if we had some problem with the supervision of the third assignment, and when we had it did I got a feeling that the tutor hadn"t looked into it at al, so it didn"t gave as much as I hoped it would have. » (Very good)
- Very good after we got the guiding sessions for the third project.» (Very good)
- It was good that we were allowed to call if we had any questions. The response time on emails was low, which also was good.» (Very good)

14. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked in your teams?

Very poorly»		5		7%
Rather poorly»		8		12%
Rather well»		31		48%
Very well»		20		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.03

- I seriously did about 95% of the work since my team members did not have any prior knowledge what so ever. Unfortunately grades do matter and I am results-oriented..» (Very poorly)
- Halve of the team worked very well, but not the whole team. » (Very poorly)
- No cooperation. Persons who did not do anything. Other who preferred to work alone and erased everything others had done and rewrote them etc...» (Very poorly)
- Lottery teams suck. You have no chance to learn anything and the only way to get good grades/learn is to do everything by yourself and let the rest just float through the course. The fact that there are students from so many master programs also makes it hard to meet.» (Very poorly)
- Good in the end, but had problem with a french guy that we could communicate with do to langugae bariers. He could not write or speak good enougth english for taking a course!» (Rather poorly)
- there are free riders, but as it is professionally involved shouldnt complaint, but the burden is on some people becuase of free riders. » (Rather poorly)
- I will put rather poorly here because some of the students I worked with in my group were excellent. However, there were also some that were almost impossible to work with. I urge you to be more open once approuched with problems around the groups.» (Rather poorly)
- Better in the end, at the begin was quite difficult. » (Rather well)
- 3/4 was very good, 1/4 was the worst exchangestudent ever... he didn"t really even try. » (Rather well)
- but not the same for all of them» (Rather well)
- some of the group member dont want to work ,thats a big problem when you want good grades and need to carrey the load» (Rather well)
- Could be enhanced by letting people chose their own teams.» (Rather well)
- One of our teammembers did not contribute much at all and blamed it on that he was to busy, he was reading 3 other courses besides TEK280. This should be forbidden in some way because it put us in a very bad position! » (Rather well)
- I was not satisfied, I think its better to give a training to the guys how to work in the team beofore giving a tast to them. They must know how to beahve in the meetings and how to move forward as a team. I think any one can pass the course with the exams and other things but If we are supposed to work in a team then we must make our best effort for the team. There must be very clear instructions about this.» (Rather well)
- Not everyone accepted the used process and thereby some conflicts arose.» (Rather well)
- It worked out fine, but one must understand that people have different ambitions... This makes it hard when some people think somthing is good enough, and you self has to work for the whole group to reach the grade your aiming for.» (Rather well)
- We were on very different levels regarding prior experience and knowledge. Maybe there is some process that can be used in order to create better balanced groups. This would create a better opportunity for learning to take place.» (Rather well)
- I think i was lucky and ended up in a good group, with good cooperation. However, in general i"m against groups being created by teachers, because it is hard to work in a group with different goals, ie. grades and time put on work, as well as for an example, synchronizing the schedules in order to find a good time for meeting and working together.» (Rather well)
- Perfect group. Best group I have been in since I started this Master"s Program. Everybody contributed to the report equally, which is very very rare.» (Very well)
- We had a very good group where everyone participated in the groupwork.» (Very well)

15. What did you think in general of the work in your teams?

Very bad»		4		6%
Bad»		4		6%
Ok»		13		20%
Good»		29		44%
Very good»		15		23%
No opinion»		0

Genomsnitt: 3.72

- Half of my group had competence similar to a junior high student.» (Very bad)
- This is how I see it, my experience of the course is probably quite bad because of the group. I mean if the group had been good I know I could have learned more. » (Bad)
- Too large groups. Three is better if you want everyone to do something.» (Ok)
- Could be enhanced by letting people chose their own teams.» (Ok)
- When the groups are assigned randomly and everyone has different schedules it is not easy to make the "teamwork" work. Mixing the groups also puts a lot of constraint on the swedish student because they have to be the ones fixing the language since the exchangestudents (for the more part, not everyone!) have reallt poor skills in english, especially writing! For example we had two exchangestudents writing most parts of the information and two swedish students had to rewrite it. The hours we put on rewriting could have been places on writing it from the start which would have lead to increased learning and probably grade in the end but then the exchange students would have nothing to do... » (Ok)
- there is the problem of different skill backgrounds. I as a I school student feel that i could have more learning from working with others that have already done things in this field and are driven» (Ok)
- Between 3 of us it was good. Then we had 1 who didn"t help at all, and one who help a bit but he was not that good so we had to rewrite all his parts.» (Ok)
- Our group performed quite well and was engaged in the task, other groups had some minor conflicts» (Good)
- Very good in the end, a crap at the begin.» (Good)
- Different backgrounds and different mindsets sometimes lead to a less than perfect cooperation. This, however, is to be expected and any such situations were solved amiably.» (Good)
- I liked maybe a bit more directions... In the first assignement when we were told to be innovative and bla ha it almost felt that you looked for some more general paper, so we missed interpriated it maybe...» (Good)
- The team worked well. We had dome problems in communications and equal distribution of work but later on things got smooth and we bring good papers as a team. I personally was discouraged by attitude of a person and thought to talk to you and to take the issue in the disciplinary committee in chalmers about him but then I think we must forgive him and must give him a second chance to improve his attitiude and will advise him to learn how to work in a team and respect the team mates and to be active in the meetings and etc. And one thing more you should do and must instruct about in your introductory lectures that in the international environment people should not do racism and must work in a friendly environment.This is not necessary to have a white skin means a brilliant mind aswell. Secondally the people from the host country has more responsibility and must care about the incming international students. These are very few small things but they matter alot. » (Good)
- Firly good results, great atmosphere» (Good)
- Everyone was engaged» (Good)
- I think it is good to mix groups with people from different backgrounds since this provides the group with a more thorough understanding of the content of the course. While I may have my glasses and focus on some aspects of the models, a TWM-student will have another pair of glasses and see other things as important. As we were quite good in iterating our hand-ins, I got to read a lot of things that I did not see as important, but that someone else clearly did, and we could then discuss it and let rationality win (mostly).» (Good)
- Many were new to it, so it was a good experience» (Very good)
- Everyone contributed to the work and we all had the same goal with the course which helped when we needed to spend alot of time on the papers, especially paper3. » (Very good)

16. What would you suggest as the fairest way to form teams?

- This is fair from one perspective, but having group examination in courses where the students" academic backgrounds differ so immensely as in this one will always be unfair.» (?)
- I want to be able to choose by the student portal. It wass a HELL to find time togheter now since everyone ead different courses beside. And I do want to work whit person who have some ability to speak and write some basic eglish at least...» (?)
- Even if hetrogenity is good, sometimes its prefferible to be able to pick the own team due to other courses... » (?)
- Problems to find time to worktogether du to different courses.» (?)
- For the random way was perfect cause I"m an exchange student and have been in a group with a lot of Swedes. That was the best way to see how Swedes study and also I learned something about the culture. Very nice experience.» (?)
- See question 15.» (?)
- The cultural benefits will only happen if the students are on the same competence level, and that happens way to seldom :( » (?)
- Even though I like working with my friends, I find it better to pick, or randomly select teams, since this allows for people to increase their contact network.» (?)
- Hard question.. Maybe the random placement or mixing different background is the most fair alternative. But you can have real bad luck, and then you have work for the whole group and maybe wont be able to reach a good grade anyway.. What I like with picking your own groups is that you can chose pople with the same ambitions..» (?)
- To make the teams as even as possible would be fairest. Especially regarding exchange students.» (?)
- This may contradict my comment above, but I think that it was pure luck that I got such a good group. In most cases, random selection does not turn out so well. The different background selection is entirely USELESS. It is by far the worst possible way of grouping people. I see the "positive" side of mixing people of different backgrounds, but in 9/10 cases (personal experience), this turns out to be a hazzle.» (?)
- I think that groups should be balanced so that students with a business background are portioned out among the groups. This to better balance groups, enhance performance and learning» (?)
- Again I will not rank them here, because I believe it is good sometimes to randomize groups, but if the group doesn"t work is is higly important to be able to make some kind of change.» (?)
- Its good to learn how to work with different personalities and backgrounds, even if it sometimes requires alot of energy.» (?)
- I think they are equally good/bad, and that it is more important to make sure that it is the individual that is assessed (somehow) and that the team work should be a way to teach/learn. If we choose teams, students with many friends will have a good time (easier high grade). If we randomize, lucky students will have a good time (easier high grade). » (?)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.34

Summarizing questions

17. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		2		3%
Fair»		4		6%
Adequate»		8		12%
Good»		42		64%
Excellent»		9		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.8 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- The first lecture made me very motivated and interested but after meeting with my group this course was just a big pain.» (Poor)
- I think this depends on my background from industrial engineering. The lectures were not very novel to me.» (Adequate)
- To big group in the b» (Good)
- Very interesting!» (Good)
- I think strategy is a very interesting subject and therefore I liked working with the different papers. The only think I did not like was the class participation, I do not think it works in a class of 60 people. Much better with seminars in smaller groups (appr. 15)» (Good)
- Good overview of strategy, without digging to deep. Perhaps even more methods should be discussed in classes and how to implement them in different scenarios?» (Good)
- Important topic. Some great lectures. Superb text-book!» (Excellent)

18. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

19. What should definitely be changed to next year?

20. Would you recommend this course to other students?

Yes»		59		90%
No»		6		9%

Genomsnitt: 1.09

- the course outcome was great and wonderful, but the marking was not fair» (Yes)
- If the groups are made up in a different way.» (Yes)
- Thank you for a nice course.» (Yes)
- At least not to someone with a business background. » (No)

21. Additional comments