Student Case Competition 2013 Guidelines The purpose of the ILA Student Case Competition is to provide undergraduate and graduate students the opportunity to compete and showcase their leadership knowledge through the analysis of a leadership case study concerning contemporary leadership issues.
ILA Student Case Competition Goals 1. To increase student attendance and networking at the Annual ILA Conference. 2. To advance the study of leadership as a discipline. 3. To provide non-student ILA members and conference attendees an opportunity to help develop the next generation of leadership scholars and practitioners by providing students a forum in which they can: a. Engage in conference dialogue that may strengthen the case analysis. b. Develop a deeper understanding and appreciation of leadership in various contexts. c. Apply leadership theory and research to a real-world scenario. d. Gain experience in presenting ideas and leadership analyses in a professional setting. e. Receive encouragement and constructive criticism on their case analyses and presentations. f. Receive personal leadership knowledge and wisdom from established leadership scholars, educators, and practitioners. ILA Case Competition Committee Thank you to the following members of the planning committee: Bridget Chisholm, International Leadership Association Natalie Coers, University of Florida Malka Goldberg, International Leadership Association Tanya Judd-Pucella, Marietta College Eric Kaufman, Virginia Tech University Rob McManus, Marietta College Todd Murphy, Northwestern University Bryan Poulin, Lakehead University If you have questions related to competition, please direct them to the planning committee chair, Eric Kaufman, via email: ekaufman@vt.edu.
Competition Overview Team Composition: Each team will be comprised of three to five students. Students may enter as a team representing their respective college or university, or individuals from multiple institutions may join together to form a team. Schools may register multiple teams into each division of the competition (i.e. Undergraduate and Graduate). Competition Divisions: The competition will consist of two divisions: Undergraduate and Graduate (Master and Doctoral). Teams including students of both levels will compete in the Graduate Student Division. Registration: The cost to participate is covered with conference registration; however, each team must register for the competition via the registration link on the competition website. Structure: The Student Case Competition is divided into three rounds of competition. The structure enables students to use campus resources and develop the foundation of their case prior to the conference, while the best teams will continue to improve their case analyses during the conference. Round One Case Study Brief: Registered teams will receive the selected case study and initial questions on September 16, 2013. Teams must prepare a case study brief of no more 1,600 words (excluding references). See the Appendix A for guidance on appropriate content and the criteria used for evaluation. The case study brief must be submitted electronically for judging no later than October 18, 2013. Round Two Poster Showcase: Each team must prepare a poster of their analysis to be presented during the Student Poster Showcase near the start of the conference. Posters will be evaluated during the Showcase. See Appendix B for more details concerning poster composition the criteria used for evaluation. The top three teams in each division will advance and compete in Round 3. Round Three Finalists Presentations: Finalists will continue building on their case analysis, using the ILA Conference sessions for further learning and supporting material. Each team will deliver a 15-minute oral presentation to a panel of judges and participate in a question and answer discussion of an additional five minutes. These presentations are open to all ILA Conference attendees and will be held on Friday evening. A computer and projector will be provided in each room. Results will be announced on Saturday, during the closing session of the conference. Final results are based on the cumulative rankings of all competition rounds.
Case Preparation: In preparing their submissions, teams may explore any public information source that would be accessible by a professional consulting group. Teams may consult books or articles, search libraries, use the Internet, and so forth. Assistance: Teams may be advised prior to the competition; however advisers, coaches, or other individuals may not contribute to any of the team s products (i.e. case brief, poster, and presentation). Teams are free to receive verbal feedback on initial drafts and practice presentations. Team Check-In: A representative from each competing team must check-in and receive final instructions on Wednesday afternoon, in the poster showcase location. A Case Committee Member will be present at a check-in table to assist and answer questions at that time. Awards: The top 3 teams in each category will be recognized during the conference's closing session for their achievements. The first and second place teams in each category will receive 1- year ILA memberships for each team member. In addition, the first place team in each category will receive $1,000 to divide among the team members. Important Dates: September 16 October 18 Case narrative is distributed for analysis Written case brief due electronically October 30 Team Check-In, 15:30-16:30, (Hochelaga 5) October 30 Poster Showcase, 18:00-19:30, (Hochelaga 5) October 31 Finalists in each division posted by 08:00, (Mezzanine) November 1 Presentations by Finalists, 17:00-18:00 (Hochelaga 5 & 6) November 2 Winners announced, 14:15-15:30, (Le Grand Salon)
Appendix A ILA Student Case Competition Round One Case Study Brief After reviewing the designated case for the competition, students are to formulate a response to the case in the form of a case study brief. Judges will have the opportunity to review and score each team s Round One submission prior to arrival at the conference. Judges will submit a rank order of teams based on the written brief prior to the poster showcase. Written submission: The case study brief should be no more than 1,600 words (excluding references) and must be submitted electronically via an online survey form. Teams should use the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA) to guide preparation of the case study brief, particularly with regard to crediting sources. Round One Judging Criteria CRITERIA WEIGHT CONSIDER THIS Rationality and logic of points and Connection made to related leadership theory and research Awareness of risks or limitations of points made Connection to conference theme or experience Professionalism (grammar, spelling, APA formatting, etc.) 30% Are the suggestions or observations made feasible to implement or change? Are sources noted and points supported? 40% Is the theory to practice/application connection made? 10% Are participants aware of the implications of their actions/decision? Were they strategic? 10% Is a connection made to relate personal experience or the conference theme to the analysis or? 10% Is the content formatted professionally? Following provided instructions?
Appendix B ILA Student Case Competition Round Two Poster Showcase The poster showcase offers student teams the opportunity to share their work on the case with the ILA conference attendees. The poster showcase provides a location for discussion and questions from conference participants. Judges will visit with each team about their poster during the showcase to ask questions and discuss their perspective on the case. At the conclusion of the showcase, judges will submit a rank order of the teams. The Round One and Round Two rankings will be combined to determine the advancing teams in the competition. For guidance on preparing an effective poster, see http://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters or http://gradschool.unc.edu/student/postertips.html. The poster should be no larger than 4 feet high by 4 feet wide. It should encompass the general ideas presented in the written brief submission. Self-standing boards, 4 feet wide by 4 feet high, will be provided at the conference. Teams should bring their own tacks or Velcro to attach the poster to the board. Round Two Judging Criteria CRITERIA WEIGHT CONSIDER THIS Organization of content 2 Does the poster design flow well? Can someone understand the case if you are not present? 1 Are the participants knowledgeable of and believe in their? Persuasive strength of Clarity of presentation 2 Does the poster summarize the? Team participation 10% Do all members contribute to the presentation? Response to questions 2 Do students fully understand the case, their analysis, and?
Appendix C ILA Student Case Competition Round Three Finalists Presentations The final presentation allows teams to formally present their thoughts on the case. The formal presentation allows 15 minutes for each team, in addition to 5 minutes of questions from the judges. Student teams should have a strong, prepared presentation on their analysis of the situation and utilize the final 3-5 minutes of the presentation to address any additional prompts provided for the final round of competition. At the conclusion of the presentations, judges will submit a rank order based on the final presentation; this ranking will be combined with the rankings from Round One and Round Two to determine the final results of the competition. Round Three Judging Criteria AREAS CRITERIA WEIGHT CONSIDER THIS Organization of content Analysis Presentation Evidence presented in support of points made Connection made to leadership literature Connection to conference sessions or experience Awareness of risks or limitations of points made Rationality and logic of Organization of content Persuasive strength of Clarity of presentation Team participation 2 10% 10% Is the content formatted professionally? Following provided instructions? Are sources noted and points supported? Is the theory to practice/application connection made? Is a connection made to relate the conference theme to the analysis or? Are participants aware of the implications of their actions/decision? Were they strategic? Are the suggestions or observations made feasible to implement or change? 10% Does the presentation flow? Can someone sit down and understand their view without knowing the background? Are the participants knowledgeable of and believe in their? 10% Is the presentation direct? Easily understood? Are clearly identified and explained? Do all members contribute to the presentation? Response to questions 10% Do students fully understand the case, their analysis, and? Can participants think on their feet?