Managerial economics looks at the economics of decisions facing and impinging upon managers, the central decision makers in firms.  This includes a discussion of the nature of the firm and looking at relationships between managers and owners and between managers and other employees.  Consideration will be given to the nature of decision-making in different market structures and how a manager is constrained by the market structure in which their firm operates.  We will discuss pricing strategies in different contexts and also look at some economics of information as it relates to managerial decision making.

Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion, students will have the knowledge and skills to:

1. Understand the roles of managers in firms
2. Understand the internal and external decisions to be made by managers
3. Design competition strategies, including pricing, product differentiation, research & development, and marketing, according to the natures of products and the structures of the markets
4. Design optimal incentive schemes, including salary, bonus, and stock options, for employees at different levels of the firm
5. Analyse real-world business problems with a systematic theoretical framework.

Research-Led Teaching

Additional to our textbook Managerial Economics & Organisational Architecture by James Brickley, Clifford W. Smith, Jr. and Jerold Zimmerman, the Course will be based and include very relevant, contemporary and a bit older academic articles on related topics.

Field Trips

One Managerial Economics Field-Trip is under planning

Examination Material or equipment

Closed book 2h written Exam (only exam booklet and pen, no additional devices are allowed )

Recommended Resources

Recommended  Textbook:  http://www.mheducation.com.au/9780073523149-aus-managerial- economics-organizational-architecture

Managerial Economics & Organizational Architecture

by James Brickley, Clifford W. Smith, Jr. and Jerold Zimmerman

Edition: 6th

ISBN: 9780073523149

Recommended Textbook is available in the Library and is placed on Reserve.

Staff Feedback

In this course students will receive feedback in the following formats: eg. written comments, verbal comments, feedback to the whole class, to groups, to individuals.

Student Feedback

ANU is committed to the demonstration of educational excellence and regularly seeks feedback from students. Students are encouraged to offer feedback directly to their Course Convener or through their College and Course representatives (if applicable). The feedback given in these surveys is anonymous and provides the Colleges, University Education Committee and Academic Board with opportunities to recognise excellent teaching, and opportunities for improvement. The Surveys and Evaluation website provides more information on student surveys at ANU and reports on the feedback provided on ANU courses.

Class Schedule

Week/Session	Summary of Activities	Assessment
1	Introduction to Managerial Economics
2	Demand, Production and Cost
3	Market Structure and Pricing
4	Economics of Strategy: Creating Value and Game Theory
5	Incentive Conflicts and Contracts
6	Organisational Architecture	Individual feedback on the first-part of the semester participation
7	Field-Visit/Guest Lecture	Written assignment through Turnitin, due date 19 April 2020, 23:59pm, 40%
8	Decision Rights: Empowerment and Bundling Tasks
9	Attracting and Retaining Employees and Incentive Compensation
10	Performance Evaluation	Team Presentation 20% (at one of Tutorials of week 10 or week 11)
11	Corporate Governance, Vertical Integration and Outsourcing	Team Presentation 20% (at one of Tutorials of week 10 or week 11)
12	Leadership and Motivating Change and Course Revision
13	Examination period 4-21st June 2020	Final Exam 40%

Tutorial Registration

Tutorial signup for this course will be done via the Wattle website.  Detailed information about signup times will be provided on Wattle or during your first lecture.  When tutorials are available for enrolment, follow these steps:

1.   Log on to Wattle, and go to the course site

2.   Click on the link “Tutorial enrolment”

3.   On the right of the screen, click on the tab “Become Member of…..” for the tutorial class you wish to enter

4.   Confirm your choice

If you need to change your enrolment, you will be able to do so by clicking on the tab “Leave group….” and then re-enrol in another group.  You will not be able to enrol in groups that have reached their maximum number.  Please note that enrolment in ISIS must be finalised for you to have access to Wattle.

Assessment Summary

Assessment task	Value	Due Date	Return of assessment	Learning Outcomes
Written Assignment (through Turnitin)	40 %	19/04/2020	08/05/2020	1,2,3
Team Presentation	20 %	21/05/2020	01/06/2020	1,2,3,4,5
Final Exam	40 %	03/06/2020	01/07/2020	1,2,3,4,5

* If the Due Date and Return of Assessment date are blank, see the Assessment Tab for specific Assessment Task details

Policies

ANU has educational policies, procedures and guidelines, which are designed to ensure that staff and students are aware of the University’s academic standards, and implement them. Students are expected to have read the Academic Misconduct Rule before the commencement of their course. Other key policies and guidelines include:

• Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure
• Special Assessment Consideration Policy and General Information 
• Student Surveys and Evaluations
• Deferred Examinations
• Student Complaint Resolution Policy and Procedure

Assessment Requirements

The ANU is using Turnitin to enhance student citation and referencing techniques, and to assess assignment submissions as a component of the University's approach to managing Academic Integrity. For additional information regarding Turnitin please visit the ANU Online website. In rare cases where online submission using Turnitin software is not technically possible; or where not using Turnitin software has been justified by the Course Convener and approved by the Associate Dean (Education) on the basis of the teaching model being employed; students shall submit assessment online via ‘Wattle’ outside of Turnitin, or failing that in hard copy, or through a combination of submission methods as approved by the Associate Dean (Education). The submission method is detailed below.

Moderation of Assessment

Marks that are allocated during Semester are to be considered provisional until formalised by the College examiners meeting at the end of each Semester. If appropriate, some moderation of marks might be applied prior to final results being released.

Participation

Students attendance of Lectures and Tutorials is highly encouraged! ECON2014/6014 is a highly engaging course, so active regular participation in class discussions is highly expected; the course develops skills critically needed for a successful future Global business/economics Leader. The course employs Culturally-Responsive Teaching Strategies.

Examination(s)

Exam is 2h Individual Assessment in the format of Written Exam (Closed Books). Several formats of tasks will be offered: case study analyses, mini-case study, open questions.

Assessment Task 1

Written Assignment (through Turnitin)

Managerial Economics Company analysis

Assessment Rubrics: See below

Word limit: 2,000 words

Value: 40% of final mark

Assignment release day: Week 1

Estimated return date: 19 April, 2020, 23:59pm via Turnitin submission

Individual Assessment 

Rubric

	Max mark for each Question	Content and the quality of discussion Weight 30%	Theoretical Support Weight 30% (max 9)	Depth of critical discussion/analysis and relevant	Academic writing Quality and Writing Style Weight
Question 1	Max 30	7-9: Excellent quality of discussion, a clear logic used, strong sound evidence is provided 4-6: Good proper quality, a clear logic used, proper reasoning and satisfactory evidence with supporting data is provided 0-3: Lack of logic, fragmented pieces of evidence, not consistent or not relevant elements of discussion	7-9: Excellent theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 4-6: Good theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 0-3: Lack of proper theoretical support	5-6: Excellent quality, a sound academic depth of critical discussion/analysis, very relevant articles found and used in a very proper way, 3-4: Good quality, proper academic depth of critical analysis/discussion, proper support with relevant articles 0-2: Poor quality of discussion, poor use of academic articles and poor support	5-6: Excellent quality of academic writing, clear logic, clear expression of complex ideas, professional terminology language used. 3-4: Good quality of academic writing, proper logic used, proper expression of ideas, proper grammar 0-2: Poor quality of academic writing, not clear expression of the ideas
Question 2	Max 30	7-9: Excellent quality of discussion, a clear logic used, strong sound evidence is provided 4-6: Good proper quality, a clear logic used, proper reasoning and satisfactory evidence with supporting data is provided 0-3: Lack of logic, fragmented pieces of evidence, not consistent or not relevant elements of discussion	7-9: Excellent theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 4-6: Good theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 0-3: Lack of proper theoretical support	5-6: Excellent quality, a sound academic depth of critical discussion/analysis, very relevant articles found and used in a very proper way, 3-4: Good quality, proper academic depth of critical analysis/discussion, proper support with relevant articles 0-2: Poor quality of discussion, poor use of academic articles and poor support	5-6: Excellent quality of academic writing, clear logic, clear expression of complex ideas, professional terminology language used. 3-4: Good quality of academic writing, proper logic used, proper expression of ideas, proper grammar 0-2: Poor quality of academic writing, not clear expression of the ideas
Question 3	Max 30	7-9: Excellent quality of discussion, a clear logic used, strong sound evidence is provided 4-6: Good proper quality, a clear logic used, proper reasoning and satisfactory evidence with supporting data is provided 0-3: Lack of logic, fragmented pieces of evidence, not consistent or not relevant elements of discussion	7-9: Excellent theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 4-6: Good theoretical support with the related concepts from the field 0-3: Lack of proper theoretical support	5-6: Excellent quality, a sound academic depth of critical discussion/analysis, very relevant articles found and used in a very proper way, 3-4: Good quality, proper academic depth of critical analysis/discussion, proper support with relevant articles 0-2: Poor quality of discussion, poor use of academic articles and poor support	5-6: Excellent quality of academic writing, clear logic, clear expression of complex ideas, professional terminology language used. 3-4: Good quality of academic writing, proper logic used, proper expression of ideas, proper grammar 0-2: Poor quality of academic writing, not clear expression of the ideas
Overall Quality	Max 10	Max 3 –Excellent overall impression	Max 3 –Excellent overall impression	Max 2 –Excellent overall impression	Max 2 –Excellent overall impression

Assessment Task 2

Team Presentation

Managerial Economics problem analysis and Team presentation

Assessment Rubrics: See below

Word limit: Oral presentation

Value: 20% of final mark

Assignment release day: Week 1

Estimated return date: Team presentation at Tutorial of week 10 and week 11

Team Assessment: 4 Students in a Team, 15 min presentation + Q/A

Team formation: Teams of 4 will be formed at each tutorials, students choose the group satisfying several conditions.

 Presentation assessment: Convenor + Tutor

Rubric

	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Fail
Depth of the Analysis (30%) Max 6 marks	Excellent choice of the problem. Deep, well thought, logical and structured analysis. Strong application of relevant theoretical concepts.	Good choice of the problem. Deep, well thought, logical and structured analysis. Proper application of relevant theoretical concepts.	Suitable choice of the problem. More depth, logic and structure in your analysis is required. Stronger application of relevant theoretical concepts is required.	Poor choice of the problem. Much more depth, logic and structure in your analysis is required. Poor application of relevant theoretical concepts.	Poor choice of the problem. Much more depth, logic and structure in your analysis is required. Failed to apply relevant theoretical concepts.
Depth and strength of Recommendations (30%) Max 6 marks	Strong relevant and credible academic and business sources suitably used to support a decision making. Video is relevant and perfectly strengthen the recommendations. Recommendations are smart, well-thought, relevant and practical.	Relevant academic and business sources suitably used to support a decision making. Video is relevant and strengthen the recommendations. Recommendations are well-thought and practical	Some academic and business sources used to support a decision making. Video in some extent is relevant in the analysis and for recommendations. Stronger and more relevant recommendations are expected.	Lack of academic and business sources used to support a decision making. Video is not relevant enough. Recommendations are nor relevant and poor prepared.	Serious lack of academic and business sources Video is not relevant or missing. Recommendations are poor and not relevant.
Delivery (20%) Max 4 marks	Bright, confident, well-prepared, professional delivery. Audience is engaged and interested. Timely, well-structured, smooth, creative, engaging presentation. Excellent delivery!	Confident, well-prepared, professional delivery. Audience is engaged and interested. Timely, well-structured, smooth, creative, engaging presentation. Good delivery!	Confident, well-prepared, professional delivery. Audience is engaged and interested. Timely, well-structured, smooth, creative, engaging presentation. Good delivery!	Poor-prepared delivery. Audience is not engaged and bored. Poor time management, lack of structure, no creativity, poor engagement with the class. Much more efforts are expected on your delivery!	Very poor delivery. Audience is extremely bored. Students don’t know the content. Visible lack of any preparation. Delivery is not at min appropriate level.
Team work (20%) Max 4 marks	Clear evidence of great teamwork and effective team collaboration. Team members are familiar with each other and perform as a strong motivated team. Enjoyable to listen and watch teamwork!	Clear evidence of good teamwork and effective team collaboration. Team members are familiar with each other and perform as a strong motivated team. Good teamwork!	Some evidence of teamwork and effective team collaboration. Team members are familiar with each other and perform as a team. More team spirit and team interaction is expected. More team work instead of individual work is expected.	No clear evidence of teamwork No evidence of team collaboration. Team members don’t know each other and perform as group of strangers.	No evidence of teamwork at all. No evidence of team collaboration at all. Team members don’t know each other at all. Not at min appropriate level.

Assessment Task 3

Final Exam

Assessment Rubrics: Will be added to Wattle

Value: 40% of final mark

Exam Period: 4 -21st June 2020

Individual Assessment: several formats of tasks will be offered: case study analyses, min-case study, open questions.

Exam duration: Exam is 2h Individual Assessment in the format of Written Exam (Closed Books).

Academic Integrity

Academic integrity is a core part of the ANU culture as a community of scholars. At its heart, academic integrity is about behaving ethically, committing to honest and responsible scholarly practice and upholding these values with respect and fairness.

The ANU commits to assisting all members of our community to understand how to engage in academic work in ways that are consistent with, and actively support academic integrity. The ANU expects staff and students to be familiar with the academic integrity principle and Academic Misconduct Rule, uphold high standards of academic integrity and act ethically and honestly, to ensure the quality and value of the qualification that you will graduate with.

The Academic Misconduct Rule is in place to promote academic integrity and manage academic misconduct. Very minor breaches of the academic integrity principle may result in a reduction of marks of up to 10% of the total marks available for the assessment. The ANU offers a number of online and in person services to assist students with their assignments, examinations, and other learning activities. Visit the Academic Skills website for more information about academic integrity, your responsibilities and for assistance with your assignments, writing skills and study.

Online Submission

You will be required to electronically sign a declaration as part of the submission of your assignment. Please keep a copy of the assignment for your records. Unless an exemption has been approved by the Associate Dean (Education) submission must be through Turnitin.

Hardcopy Submission

For some forms of assessment (hand written assignments, art works, laboratory notes, etc.) hard copy submission is appropriate when approved by the Associate Dean (Education). Hard copy submissions must utilise the Assignment Cover Sheet. Please keep a copy of tasks completed for your records.

Late Submission

Late submission of assessment tasks without an extension are penalised at the rate of 5% of the possible marks available per working day or part thereof. Late submission of assessment tasks is not accepted after 10 working days after the due date, or on or after the date specified in the course outline for the return of the assessment item. Late submission is not accepted for take-home examinations.

Referencing Requirements

Accepted academic practice for referencing sources that you use in presentations can be found via the links on the Wattle site, under the file named “ANU and College Policies, Program Information, Student Support Services and Assessment”. Alternatively, you can seek help through the Students Learning Development website.

Returning Assignments

Mid-term Exam: written at home assignment, submitted via Turnitin

?Final Exam: In Class written Exam

Extensions and Penalties

Extensions and late submission of assessment pieces are covered by the Student Assessment (Coursework) Policy and Procedure. Extensions may be granted for assessment pieces that are not examinations or take-home examinations. If you need an extension, you must request an extension in writing on or before the due date. If you have documented and appropriate medical evidence that demonstrates you were not able to request an extension on or before the due date, you may be able to request it after the due date.

Resubmission of Assignments

No Resubmission is allowed

Privacy Notice

The ANU has made a number of third party, online, databases available for students to use. Use of each online database is conditional on student end users first agreeing to the database licensor’s terms of service and/or privacy policy. Students should read these carefully. In some cases student end users will be required to register an account with the database licensor and submit personal information, including their: first name; last name; ANU email address; and other information.
In cases where student end users are asked to submit ‘content’ to a database, such as an assignment or short answers, the database licensor may only use the student’s ‘content’ in accordance with the terms of service – including any (copyright) licence the student grants to the database licensor. Any personal information or content a student submits may be stored by the licensor, potentially offshore, and will be used to process the database service in accordance with the licensors terms of service and/or privacy policy.
If any student chooses not to agree to the database licensor’s terms of service or privacy policy, the student will not be able to access and use the database. In these circumstances students should contact their lecturer to enquire about alternative arrangements that are available.

Distribution of grades policy

Academic Quality Assurance Committee monitors the performance of students, including attrition, further study and employment rates and grade distribution, and College reports on quality assurance processes for assessment activities, including alignment with national and international disciplinary and interdisciplinary standards, as well as qualification type learning outcomes.

Since first semester 1994, ANU uses a grading scale for all courses. This grading scale is used by all academic areas of the University.

Support for students

The University offers students support through several different services. You may contact the services listed below directly or seek advice from your Course Convener, Student Administrators, or your College and Course representatives (if applicable).

• ANU Health, safety & wellbeing for medical services, counselling, mental health and spiritual support
• ANU Diversity and inclusion for students with a disability or ongoing or chronic illness
• ANU Dean of Students for confidential, impartial advice and help to resolve problems between students and the academic or administrative areas of the University
• ANU Academic Skills and Learning Centre supports you make your own decisions about how you learn and manage your workload.
• ANU Counselling Centre promotes, supports and enhances mental health and wellbeing within the University student community.
• ANUSA supports and represents undergraduate and ANU College students
• PARSA supports and represents postgraduate and research students