INFOSYS 306 2025 S1
Individual Case Analysis Assignment
Overview
This assignment is based on the case “Cardagin: Local Mobile Rewards” (Venkatesan 2014). (You can also find it at Modules – Assignment documents – Individual assignment 1”).
Cardagin is a mobile app that provides consumers access to the loyalty programs of merchants that participate in the Cardagin network. In addition to the case provided, you may also watch the following two videos better understand Cardagin’s business model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0af1mrm5c2w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVMn5slk9Bk&t=89s
The assignment will demonstrate your ability in applying the key concepts/theories of platform. businesses to real world situations and solving real-life challenges faced by the managers of platform businesses.
Questions
Read the case “Cardagin” and answer the following questions.
1. Discuss the factors that influence merchants to (a) join Cardagin and (b) continuously use the system (7 points) (The factors influencing the decision to join and the decision to continuously use should differ.)
2. Discuss the factors that influence consumers to (a) join Cardagin and (b) continuously use the app (7 points) (The factors influencing the decision to join and the decision to continuously use should differ.)
3. Describe the network effects on Cardagin (7 points) (You need to explicitly indicate the sidedness and valence of the effects)
4. Which side does Cardagin charge? Do you think it is appropriate? Why? (4 points)
5. Suppose that the budget at Cardagin only allows it to acquire one side, do you
recommend Cardagin to focus on acquiring more merchants or more consumers? Justify your recommendation. (5 points)
Requirements
1. Your assignment should NOT exceed 1500 words. Marks will be deducted for exceeding the word limit. The length of answers does not determine grades, but quality.
2. No references are expected for this assignment. However, if there are references in your answers, please use the APA format.
3. The Cardagin case does not need to be referenced.
4. The assignment is due on Canvas at 11.59 pm on 11 April 2025.
5. Late submissions will receive a penalty. The penalty will follow the general practice of the university.
Guidelines
1. Answer the questions directly. Introduction and conclusion are not needed.
2. Your answers to the questions should draw on the information provided by the case,
the knowledge of platform businesses covered in the lectures, and logical thinking and analysis.
3. Critical thinking and problem-solving abilities are important for all the questions. The questions also assess different aspects of your learning and ability. Questions 1 and 2 focus more on your ability to extract and process information of the case and your understanding of the general business operations and consumer behaviours. Questions 3-5 focus more on your ability to apply the knowledge of platform. businesses to real situations and make decisions to solve real-world business issues.
Grading and Indicative Marking Rubrics
1. The assignment carries 30 points and is worth 10% of your total course marks.
2. There are no absolute right or wrong answers, though some may make more business and economic sense than others. Your grades will be determined by
a. Whether you can derive key information from the case
b. How logical and thoughtful you are in approaching the questions
c. How well you organize and integrate the information of the case and your own ideas.
d. Whether your answers are relevant and meaningful
e. Whether there are flaws in your reasoning and justifications
f. Whether you can consider the issues by having a big picture and without omitting important information
g. Whether you can effectively present your ideas/solutions/arguments in a clear structure
|
Points
|
Performance
|
Evaluation Criteria
|
|
(75%~100%) *30
|
Excellent
|
• Excellent knowledge and understanding of the case
• Excellent ability to concisely and accurately extract the essence of the content
• Excellent presentation of own thoughts, opinions and learnings based on the content
• Clear logic and reasoning with sufficient justification and argumentation
• Excellent ability to organize and structure the
content, allowing readers to follow the logic easily
• Excellent and professional writing
|
|
(50%~74%) *30
|
Good
|
• Generally, good knowledge and understanding of the case, though there are a couple of points missed or less well developed
• Good ability to extract the essence of the content, though some points could be further developed and elaborated
• Good presentation of own thoughts, opinions and learnings based on the content though some aspects could be further developed or supported with better justifications
• Good logic and reasoning with justification and argumentation, but there are a few logic flaws
• Good ability to organize and structure the content, though the logic could be further improved
• Overall good writing ability
|
|
(25%~49%) *30
|
Adequate
|
• Demonstrates adequate knowledge and
understanding of the case, though some important content is missing or not developed
• Only repeat the information in the case but own ideas are not adequately presented
• Logic and reasoning are unclear. Justification and argumentation are inadequate
• The content is just presented piecemeal, without sufficient content organization
• Barely OK writing ability
|
|
(0~24%)*30
|
Poor
|
• Inaccurate knowledge and understanding of the case
• Unsatisfactory summary of the case. Own thoughts and analysis are missing.
• No content organization and flow
• Writing is hard to follow
|