MBA FPX 5910 Assessments 3 Capstone Project Annotated Outline
- High Quality FPX Sample Assessment
- Step-by-Step Guide to master FPX Assessment
- References (APA Format) for related Assessments
- Connect with Top professors for specific class
- Detailed (FAQs) related to Assessment.
- Express Delivery with in 24 hours.
Assessment Overview:
MBA FPX 5910 Assessment 3: requires a terse, substantiation- grounded Capstone structure on Tesla state the problem, epitomize crucial analyses( geek, PESTEL, Five Forces, fiscal shot), diagnose leadership/ quality issues, propose mitigation/ diversification strategies, and end with prioritized recommendations and measurable KPIs.
How to Pass MBA FPX 5910 Assessments 3 Capstone Project Annotated Outline
- The VRIO Advantage: In your Introduction, you mentioned Tesla’s “rare, precious, and incomparable rates.” To be Distinguished, explicitly use the VRIO Framework (Valuable, Rare, Inimitable, Organized). This proves why Tesla’s battery technology is a “Sustained Competitive Advantage” while their car assembly may only be “Competitive Parity.”
- Segment Reporting Accuracy: You noted that the automotive division accounted for a large portion of gross profit. In your final draft, use a Segment Analysis table. This visually proves how dependent Tesla is on the Model 3 and why your “Diversification” strategy is a financial necessity, not just a suggestion.
- Porter’s “Threat of Substitutes”: When using Porter’s Five Forces, emphasize that the threat of substitutes isn’t just other EVs—it’s Legacy ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles that are now offering hybrid alternatives, which may be more “reliable” in the eyes of the consumer.
- PESTEL and the “L” (Legal): Your PESTEL analysis should highlight the Legal/Regulatory risks in China. As you mentioned, governmental delays impacted Model 3 deliveries. This is a “Political/Legal” risk that a unitary structure struggles to manage from California.
- The “Cost of Quality” (CoQ): In your Ethics section, use the term Cost of Quality. Explain that by “taking shortcuts” to meet production goals, Tesla traded low “Appraisal Costs” for high “External Failure Costs” (recalls and lost reputation).
- Leadership: 3D Framework: You cited Kunnannatt (2016) regarding a 3D leadership framework. Clearly define these three dimensions in your paper: Task, Relationship, and Strategy. Argue that Tesla is currently too focused on “Task” (production) and needs to pivot to “Strategy” (long-term sustainability).
- Unitary Structure vs. Matrix: You noted that Tesla’s unitary structure limits flexibility. Recommend a Matrix Organizational Structure for Tesla’s global operations. This would allow regional offices (like Shanghai) to solve local quality issues without waiting for a “centralized” answer from the US.
- Mitigation through R&D: Your strategy to allocate more R&D to batteries is vital. Use a BCG Matrix to show that while EVs are the “Star,” Battery/Energy Storage could be the “Cash Cow” of the future if properly funded.
Sample Assessment:
Executive Summary
Tesla Motors, an each- electric luxury vehicle manufacturer, launched its first buses in 2008. The Tesla Roadster, Model S, and Model X have revolutionized the machine request. Headquartered in California, Tesla operates encyclopedically. In January 2019, Tesla began construction of Gigafactory Shanghai to locally manufacture affordable performances of Model 3 for the Chinese request( ir.tesla.com, 2019). Tesla’s vehicles are known for their rare, precious, and incomparable rates, furnishing the company a competitive edge. Still, the company has faced quality and delivery issues that have negatively impacted its request share.
Leadership has prioritized profit perimeters at the expenditure of performance and quality, leading to client dissatisfaction. To recapture its position, Tesla must foster better collaboration across its global brigades and ensure that quality and performance are restored. Also, leadership should develop strategies to support individual product lines in the event they lose their dominance in the electric vehicle( EV) request.
Introduction
The Organization: Tesla, Inc.
Background and Current State
While Tesla operates in colorful sectors, including energy generation and storehouse, its automotive division accounted for 23% of the company’s gross profit in 2018( Statista, 2019).
Competition in the Electric Vehicle (EV) Sector
Using Porter’s Five Forces frame, Tesla’s competitive terrain can be anatomized. According to John Dudovskiy( 2018), the competition in the EV sector is violent, and Tesla must navigate through it effectively.
Current Product Lines of Tesla, Inc.
Tesla’s core product lines concentrate on the automotive, energy storehouse, and energy generation requests( Kissinger, 2018).
Business Issue
Tesla has been losing request share due to colorful challenges, including quality, performance, and delivery issues. In Q1 2019, share prices declined due to delivery problems with the Model 3 in China, primarily caused by product faults and governmental detainments( Alverez, 2019).
The Electric Vehicle (EV) Sector and the Future of Tesla, Inc.
Threats to Tesla’s Future in the EV Market (PESTEL Analysis)
PESTEL analysis is critical for relating areas of enhancement and implicit pitfalls. According to Yuksel( 2012), this tool helps associations address external factors that may impact their operations. A major concern for Tesla is its focus on solar cell development, which could abstract from its battery technology advancements. Other manufacturers are instituting a fleet, which may hang Tesla’s leadership in this area( Barcom, 2019).
Five Forces Analysis of Tesla in the EV Market
A Five Forces analysis helps estimate Tesla’s position in the EV sector by examining competition and assiduity challenges( Fern Fort, n.d.).
Pros and Cons of Independent Product Lines
Tesla’s diversification into independent product lines could have both positive and negative impacts on the company’s capability to contend and maintain request leadership.
Tesla’s Ethical Issues in the EV Market
Trust
Building trust is essential for invention and organizational effectiveness. Tesla faced ethical challenges when dealing with preliminarily registered buses to a company in Germany, affecting its character and eligibility for original duty impulses( Hyatt, 2019).
Quality
Tesla’s focus on profit over quality has compromised product norms encyclopedically, leading to a loss of request share. Workers reported taking lanes to meet product pretensions, which further damaged the company’s character( Kolodny, 2019).
MBA FPX 5910 Assessments 3: Leadership
Leadership Environment
Although Tesla’s leadership has maintained a strong presence, the focus on profit has swerved from core business values, leading to performance issues. Strong oversight is demanded to ensure quality aligns with organizational pretensions( Kunnannatt, 2016).
Team Leadership
Team leadership at Tesla must be more cooperative, encouraging individual benefactions toward organizational objects. Leaders should inspire and empower their brigades to achieve collaborative success( Kunnannatt, 2016).
Collaboration
Tesla’s functional/ unitary structure limits inflexibility and global collaboration. For example, centralized decision- making restricts indigenous services from addressing original issues, which hinders overall performance( Meyer, 2018).
Strategies
Mitigation of Loss in the EV Market
Tesla can alleviate losses by addressing quality issues and developing a comprehensive threat operation plan. For example, Tesla offered to repair blights in over 5,000 Model 3 vehicles following Consumer Reports pulling their recommendation( Olsen, 2019).
Diversification of Product Lines
Tesla should also concentrate on diversifying its product lines to reduce reliance on a single request member.
Recommendations
Mitigation of Loss in the EV Market
Tesla should allocate further exploration and development( R&D) coffers to the EV request rather than fastening primarily on solar technology( Barcom, 2019).
Solidifying Individual Product Lines
Tesla has developed innovative battery and drivetrain technologies, giving it a competitive edge over rivals like Ford and Toyota. Despite being a youngish company, Tesla’s request capitalization surpasses that of Ford( Hoium, 2018).
Conclusion
Tesla, Inc. is a global company with a different portfolio across multiple sustainable energy sectors, but the EV member remains its largest profit source, counting for 85 of total profit( Tesla, 2017). Tesla has made sweats to address quality and performance issues, but farther R&D in battery technology and strong leadership are essential for maintaining request share. By fastening on long- term invention and client satisfaction, Tesla can secure its place in the EV request and continue to develop a strong base of individual product lines.
MBA FPX 5910 Assessment 3 Capstone Project Annotated Outline
Kunnannatt, J. T. (2016). 3D leadership-strategy-linked leadership framework for managing teams. Economics, Management and Financial Markets, 11(3), 30.
Meyer, P. (2018). Tesla Inc.’s organizational structure & its characteristics (analysis). Retrieved from http://panmore.com/tesla-motors-inc-organizational-structure-characteristics-analysis
Olsen, P. (2019). Tesla Model 3 loses CR recommendation over reliability issues. Consumer Reports. Retrieved from https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/tesla-model-3-loses-cr-recommendation-over-reliability-issues/
Statista (2019). Tesla’s gross margin from FY 2014 to FY 2018, by segment. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/783477/gross-margin-by-segment-of-tesla/
Tesla, Inc. (2017). Tesla annual report 2017. Retrieved from
Yuksel, I. (2012). Developing a multi-criteria decision-making model for PESTEL analysis. International Journal of Business and Management.
References (APA 7 Format)
- Alvarez, S. (2019). Tesla (TSLA) to hold Q1 2019 financial results and earnings call on April 24. Retrieved from https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-tsla-q1-2019-earnings-call-date/
- Barcom, G. (2019). Capstone Project summary, PM-FPX5910 Asst Capstone Project Summary. Capella University.
- Dudovskiy, J. (2018). Tesla Porter’s Five Forces Analysis. Retrieved from https://research-methodology.net/tesla-porters-five-forces-analysis-2/
- Fern Fort. (n.d.). Tesla, Inc. Porter Five Forces Analysis. Retrieved from http://fernfortuniversity.com/term-papers/porter5/analysis/862-tesla–inc-.php
- Hoium, T. (2018). Better buy: Ford Motor Co. vs. Tesla. Retrieved from https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/07/21/better-buy-ford-motor-co-vs-tesla.aspx
- Hyatt, K. (2019). Quality issues lead NextMove to bail on its massive Tesla Model 3 order. Retrieved from https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/tesla-model-3-nextmove-german-cancels-order/
- Kolodny, L. (2019). Tesla employees say they took shortcuts, worked through harsh conditions to meet Model 3 production goals. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/15/tesla-workers-in-ga4-tent-describe-pressure-to-make-model-3-goals.html
- Kissinger, D. (2018). Tesla, Inc.’s marketing mix (4Ps) analysis. Retrieved from http://panmore.com/tesla-motors-inc-marketing-mix-4ps-analysis
Rubric Breakdown
| Criterion | Emerging | Proficient | Distinguished |
| Problem Identification | Mentions issues without linking them to strategy. | Identifies quality and delivery issues as the primary business problem. | Critically analyzes the tension between high-volume production goals and long-term brand equity/quality. |
| Analytical Tools | Lists PESTEL/Five Forces without specific Tesla data. | Applies PESTEL and Porter’s Five Forces to diagnose Tesla’s competitive environment. | Synthesizes multiple frameworks (VRIO + PESTEL) to predict specific external threats and internal weaknesses. |
| Leadership & Ethics | Describes general leadership styles. | Connects Tesla’s unitary structure to its global collaboration and quality gaps. | Deeply evaluates the ethical cost of “shortcuts” and proposes a collaborative, 3D-leadership framework for recovery. |
| Strategic Recommendations | Suggests generic fixes like “improve quality.” | Provides evidence-based recommendations for R&D allocation and product diversification. | Proposes a prioritized, time-bound strategic roadmap with specific KPIs to measure transition and success. |
| APA & Professionalism | Significant formatting or citation errors. | Professional tone with appropriate APA 7th edition citations for all major claims. | Executive-level outline; authoritative voice; clear hierarchy with sophisticated integration of scholarly sources. |
Step-by-Step Guide
- Write a 2 – 3 judgment Administrative Summary — state the central question( e.g., Tesla’s survivability without EV dominance) and the top 2 findings.
- Draft the preface( 1 paragraph) — describe Tesla, compass, timeframe, and exploration sources.
- Insert core analyses as short subsections — add 3 – 4 pellets under each PESTEL, Five Forces, geek, and a one- paragraph fiscal shot( profit blend, perimeters).
- Document leadership & ethics findings 3 pellets on leadership style, quality issues, and collaboration gaps with one supporting citation per pellet.
- List strategies & recommendations — 3 prioritized conduct( quality program, diversify energy B2B, corridor OEM strategy) with a 0 – 12/12 – 36 month timeline.
- Finish with conclusion, KPIs & references — 2 – 3- judgment conclusion, 3 KPIs to cover( energy profit, disfigurement rate, free cash inflow), and a short reference list
Frequently Asked Questions
Q How long should the annotated figure be?
About 2 – 4 runners( terse headlines 1 – 3 pellets per section).
Q Which analyses are essential?
PESTEL, Porter’s Five Forces, geek, and a brief fiscal member analysis.
Q How many recommendations?
3 prioritized recommendations with short timelines and possessors.
Q What KPIs should I include?
Energy profit, disfigurement/ recall rate, free cash inflow( or EV request share if applicable).
Q Do I need full citations then?
Include short reference entries for all major claims; full APA references go in the final paper.
Integrity Note
Note: Only use this assessment example for learning and structure purpose. Do not submit as your own work.
We are an independent resource and are not affiliated with Capella University.