Case competition preparation - Ava Lee

Each group got together on Wednesday afternoon and night to go through how much each team has researched so far and consolidate all the information Notre Dame and PKU students have found so far. With the information gathered, both teams divided the case questions and determined what question to focus on initially before getting back together the next day to put together the research and presentation slides.

Throughout this process, since we prepared the initial questions without any cooperation between the two sides, we realized there were significant differences between the ways the two teams conduct research and prepare slides.

When preparing the final slides, we once again discovered major differences between the way both teams work, conduct research, and put together final slides. While both teams both had extensive knowledge on the topic through the initial research done, we ran into troubles trying to consolidate the information found.

There were a couple of challenges involved throughout the process.

First, it seemed like Notre Dame students were much more prepared and skilled in finding the appropriate data needed for this kind of research. Through the projects we do in class and the training we have received from our various business classes, we know how to get extensive data from sources like Capital IQ, Factiva, and various industry reports effectively. However, it seemed like the PKU students didn’t have ready access to these types of information, and were in fact surprised when they saw the research reports we have gathered online.

Second, it took longer for the PKU students to gather their information and translate them into slides because English wasn’t their first language. They did all of their research in Chinese and then had to translate that into English appropriately. Throughout the translation process, a lot of the terms got changed and it was hard for them to often convey what they intended to. However, despite the fact that this slowed down the process, we were very impressed by how they were able to pull this off in a very short amount of time.

Third, there were significant differences in how the teams prepared presentation slides. One conflict we had to resolve was whether to put the conclusion or the most important point of the slide in the title or as a textbox at the bottom of the page. We could see the difference in how we think and present our materials – while we are used to having a heading for the slide at the top, and putting a general conclusion at the bottom, Chinese students preferred to put the conclusion on top as it would convey the message quicker and faster. During the process, instead of insisting on one method over another, we accepted the differences in thinking, and this in itself was a valuable experience for all members.

Overall, it was gratifying to see how delegates from both teams were willing to work together and accept differences in thinking and presenting, and in the process, learn more about each other. There were some funny moments for our SIBC team that we just laughed about, and I am sure there were some things Chinese students found funny about the way we did or understood things. Beyond the research everyone did on the industry and case topic, I would say the time spent working with the Chinese students would have been the part where we all learned so much more and will value forever.