Description
وزارة التعليم
ر
اإللكتونية
الجامعة السعودية
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Ministry of Education
Saudi Electronic University
College of Administrative and Financial Sciences
Assignment 2
Decision Making and Problem Solving (MGT 312)
Due Date: End of Week 09, 22/03/2025 @ 23:59
Course Name: Decision Making and Problem
Solving
Course Code: MGT312
Student’s Name:
Semester: Second
CRN: 23778
Student’s ID Number:
Academic Year:2023-24; SECOND SEMESTER
For Instructor’s Use only
Instructor’s Name: Dr. Faisal Alhathal
Students’ Grade:
/ 10
Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low
General Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Restricted – مقيد
The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD format only) via allocated
folder.
Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented; marks may be
reduced for poor presentation. This includes filling your information on the cover page.
Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.
Late submission will NOT be accepted.
Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or
other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font. No
pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.
Learning Outcomes:
1. Describe decision making process for complex issues pertaining to business
environment both internally and externally. (C.L.O :1.1)
2. Demonstrate decision tools and employ appropriate analytical business models to
break down complex issues. (C.L.O :2.2)
3. Explain and apply critical thinking and cognitive psychology as it pertains to
analyze and synthesize information for problem solving and decision making.
(C.L.O :2.1)
● Log in to Saudi Digital Library (SDL) via University’s website
● On first page of SDL, choose “English Databases”
● From the list find and click on EBSCO database.
● In the search bar of EBSCO find the following article:
Title:
“Case Study: Should We Deploy a Gen AI Salesbot?”
Author:
Jill Avery and Thomas Steenburgh
Date of Publication:
November–December 2024
Published:
Harvard Business Review
Assignment Question(s):
Read the case study titled as “Case Study: Should We Deploy a Gen AI Salesbot?” by
Jill Avery and Thomas Steenburgh published in Harvard Business Review, and answer
the following Questions:
Q1: Writ the problem statement which should include the followings: [Marks 4]
● the clear concise description and summary of the problem,
● scope of the problem,
● consequences of the problem,
● the methods for resolving the problem in the above case?
Q2: Draw a Cause-and-Effect Diagram for the problems given in the case study
[1.5 Marks]
Restricted – مقيد
Q3: Develop a mind map for the problems given in the case study.
[1.5 Marks]
Q4: Write all the alternative choices of your decision.
[Mark 1]
Q5: Make a decision and write the conclusion.
[Marks 2]
Answers
1. Answer2. Answer3. Answer4. Answer5. Answer-
Restricted – مقيد
Case Study
Should We
Deploy a Gen AI
Salesbot?
by Jill Avery and
Thomas Steenburgh
HBR’s fictionalized case studies present problems
faced by leaders in real companies and offer
solutions from experts. This one is based on the
HBS Case Study “HubSpot and Motion AI: ChatbotEnabled CRM,” by Jill Avery and Thomas Steenburgh
(case no. 518-067), which is available at HBR.org.
148
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
“I T ’S S O NI CE to feel excited
about something again,” Jeannie
Weiss said to John Bart, her chief
technology officer. The pair were
in an Uber on their way to the
Austin airport after attending an
AI conference together. Jeannie’s
fingers tapped the sideboard of
the car in time to the folk music
on the radio. “I feel as if we’ve
been on the defense for the past
five years with Covid, the tight
labor market, inflation. I’m ready
to go on the offense again.”
Jeannie had taken over as the
CEO of PulsePoint Solutions, a
Chicago-based digital marketing
company, seven years earlier,
shortly after its initial public
offering. Under her leadership
the business had grown its top
line consistently year over year.
It had not only expanded its
product line but also entered new
markets, significantly increasing
its global footprint and lifting
annual revenues to $2 billion.
Among investors, PulsePoint was
a highly regarded growth stock,
but some analysts were questioning how long the company, with
its customized content and high
cost structure, could justify being
less profitable than its peers.
“I know you’ve been chomping at the bit to invest in new tech
Illustrations by ANUJ SHRESTHA
GAME CHANGER OR
BIG GAMBLE?
too,” Jeannie told John. “Gen AI
is what we’ve been waiting for.”
The conference demos had been
incredible: The chatbots were conversant, empathetic, 1 and capable
of handling complicated requests.
Jeannie had left eager to team
up with one of the big vendors
to develop a cutting-edge bot for
customer service and sales that,
if done right, would enhance the
client experience while allowing
PulsePoint to shrink its sales force.
John nodded. “What’s the
matter?” Jeannie asked. “This is
a great opportunity for you.”
“I know,” he replied. “And I
know we’ll need to get into the
Jeannie listened as John presented to Mark Thompson, PulsePoint’s head of sales, and Linda
Lau, its chief customer officer.
Since expressing his initial skepticism three weeks before in Austin,
John had become an evangelist
for the gen AI chatbot initiative, so
Jeannie had let him sponsor it. His
presentation included academic
studies showing that the newest
chatbots could be even more creative and responsive than trained
humans. Those qualities would be
essential to nurturing sales prospects, closing deals, and servicing
existing customers’ needs.
“Modeling suggests we could
reduce head count almost immediately through attrition and scale
it back by as much as 30% over five
EXPERIENCE
gen AI game sooner rather than
later. I’m just worried about the
risk of moving first. Hallucinations, data privacy, outages—
these are all concerns. And the
only way to do this cost-effectively
is with a partner—which means
that I will never fully understand
or control the model.”
“But, provided we move
responsibly, isn’t it worth the
risk?” Jeannie asked. “If a
competitor can pull this off—
achieving more-personalized
and -effective sales and service,
cutting expenses, and freeing up
more capital to invest in innovation—I worry that we’ll be left in
the dust. 2 I get your concerns,
and I want you to keep voicing
them. But I don’t think we can
afford to be cautious here.”
“OK,” John replied, “I’m not
going to say no! As you point out,
it’s an exciting opportunity—for
me and the company.”
years,” 3 John said, finishing his
presentation. “But this isn’t about
automating tasks to cut costs. It’s
actually about better attracting
and serving clients. By harnessing
this technology, we can anticipate
prospective customers’ needs and
respond to them faster and more
precisely than before, potentially
increasing our sales and customer
satisfaction.”
After a long pause, Mark broke
the silence. “Look, you can show
me demos, you can cite academic
studies, but I know what I know:
Sales involve intuiting needs and
recognizing hidden opportunities, especially in our B2B context.
If we replace my sales team with
these bots, I am sure the bots will
close some deals. But I’m also
sure we will miss out on upselling
and cross-selling, cutting into
customer lifetime value. And
we might not even be aware that
it’s happening, since it’s hard to
quantify opportunities that we
don’t know exist until our sales
team discovers them.”
“Yes, that’s true,” John conceded. “But these aren’t static
machines. They learn. Generative
AI is about creation—evolving
our capabilities. There’s strong
evidence suggesting that over
time it might well outperform
our most skilled professionals,
discovering new upselling and
cross-selling avenues that we
haven’t even considered.” 4
“Sure, but we don’t know that,”
Mark countered. “We’re hoping
that’s the case.”
Case Study
Classroom
Notes
1. In one study
AI generated
messages that
made people
feel more “heard”
than messages
from untrained
humans did and
also detected
emotions better.
But when people
realized AI had
created the
messages, they
felt less heard.
2. Is Jeannie
right to be concerned about
being overtaken?
How likely are
her clients to
defect?
3. Gains from
new technology
often aren’t
realized for a
long time. It took
decades for
U.S. productivity booms to
begin after the
discovery of
electricity and
the invention of
computers.
4. What could
John and
Jeannie do
better in this
meeting to bring
Mark on board?
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
149
5. HubSpot
research found
that 40% of people don’t care if
they are served
by an AI chatbot,
as long as they
get help quickly
and easily. But in
a survey by the
cloud contact
center Aspect,
90% felt they
should always
have the option
of transferring
to a live agent.
150
“It is a gamble, but most
investments are,” Jeannie
said, sensing that John needed
backup.
Jeannie turned to Linda.
“What do you think?” she asked.
“I share your excitement about
this technology,” Linda said. “The
bots have come far in such a short
time. It feels like sci-fi. But I’m
worried about accuracy and the
implications of the head-count
reduction.”
“First, we want to think about
how AI-induced attrition or layoffs will affect our brand,” Linda
continued. “But on the flip side, if
these bots really do generate a lot
more sales, won’t we need to staff
up in creative and elsewhere to
serve all the new clients? And if AI
makes it easier for clients to ask
questions and lodge complaints,
won’t that escalate minor issues
people would have previously
ignored or handled themselves?
And in lots of scenarios, wouldn’t
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
we still need—or want—a human
touch?”
“Those are good questions,”
John replied. “But again, gen AI is
proactive and adaptive, learning
from every interaction how to
handle all kinds of complexity.
One day, LLMs may generate tailored sales contracts and handle
customer service issues and resolutions on their own.”
“And let’s not pretend that
an all-human sales force means
lower risk than an AI-enabled
one,” he went on. “Our people are
fantastic, but they make mistakes.
They botch sales deals; they screw
up efforts to fix service problems;
they defect to competitors, taking
valuable relationships with them.
A bot will never leave, and even
if it starts off as good as our average—or subaverage—human rep,
it will only get better over time.
It will remember every detail of
every customer interaction, work
tirelessly across all platforms
without a break, and continuously
analyze data to optimize outcomes. Eventually, clients might
not even realize that they’re interacting with a machine.” 5
Mark and Linda still looked
unconvinced. Jeannie decided to
speak up. “There is a bigger vision
beyond sales and customer service,” she said. “Once this system
is operational, it will open new
avenues for client services, like
automating content creation that
currently requires a team of writers and editors. This is not just an
evolution; it’s a transformation.”
COLD FEET AMONG
THE CUSTOMERS
Jeannie was reviewing reports in
her office when her phone lit up.
It was a text from Tyrell Durant,
the CEO of Orion, PulsePoint’s
largest client. The two companies
had grown symbiotically over the
years, and Jeannie deeply valued
their partnership. “Have time to
talk?” the message read.
Jeannie called Tyrell immediately, and he wasted no time in
explaining the reason for his outreach. “Jeannie, I heard from our
sales rep that you’re considering
introducing AI-enabled customer
service, and I’m just telling you
now that we want to be exempt
from that. We’re traditionalists
who value deep, personal client
relationships—the type of service
that has always set you apart. We
also have a serious worry about
data privacy and the potential
mishandling of sensitive information. I’m sorry, but we can’t be part
of this journey with you, at least
not for the foreseeable future.
And I predict we won’t be your
only client that feels this way.”
Jeannie’s heart sank. She
thanked Tyrell, hung up, and
exhaled sharply.
At that moment, John walked
past her office. She waved him
in and relayed the conversation.
The CTO listened intently. “When
inside sales teams were introduced, several years ago, there
were concerns that it would kill
business 6—that sales was about
reps who hit the road to ‘wine and
dine’ prospects and hold their
hands,” he said. “But it turned
out buyers were far more self-
sufficient in researching purchases—and buying online—than
many expected. As our clients see
the benefits—faster responses,
personalized interactions—
they’ll come around. Plus, we can
offer opt-outs and hybrid models
during the transition, ensuring
we respect their preferences.”
Jeannie nodded. “Look,”
John said, “we don’t have to do
this, Jeannie. We don’t need to
invest in a gen AI solution. What
if we double down on improving
our existing chatbot?” He was
referring to the basic AI system
that answered simple questions
from prospective customers and
routed customer service inquiries to the correct agent. “We
could improve the scripting so
that it could answer more kinds
of queries on its own. The chatbot already handles most of our
initial service and sales contact.
We could set aggressive goals for
reducing response time, lowering
escalation rates, and increasing
customer satisfaction scores.
We could still achieve major cost
reductions if we did that.” 7
He outlined a vision in which
PulsePoint replaced the lowest-
level sales reps and call operators
with bots, using the savings to
recruit more rainmakers.
Jeannie nodded, seeing the
merit in the proposal, but her
mind raced through the broader
implications. “I just don’t know
if I’m comfortable with moving
slowly on this clearly transformative technology while our compet
itors move fast,” she said.
6. According to
an analysis by
McKinsey, an
inside sales rep
can typically
cover four times
as many prospects as a traditional field rep at
50% of the cost.
Top-performing
B2B companies
are 50% more
likely to leverage
inside sales.
7. Jeannie and
John seem
focused on
cost savings.
What other
ways might they
achieve margin
improvement?
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
151
EXPERIENCE
“Of course,” John replied.
“But I don’t need to tell you that
sometimes it’s better to hold back,
observe the mistakes of the pioneers, and then strategically overtake them. Look at how Facebook
beat MySpace as a social network
and Apple beat Napster in digital
music. And how the big carmakers’ EVs are now eating away at
Tesla’s market share.”
“Yes, I’m aware of the firstmover, fast-follower theory,”
Jeannie said. “But gen AI feels different. There’s no question it’s the
future. And if PulsePoint masters
it first, we’ll be so far ahead that
no one will be able to catch us.
I want to lead us into a new technological era.”
After John left, Jeannie
remained by the window, watching the city lights blur in the
dusk. She knew she had to make
a choice. Rumors about potential
job losses from AI implementation
were almost certainly spreading
through the workforce, and indecision at the top was the last thing
the company needed. But as night
fell over the city, the right path
seemed as elusive as ever.
JILL AVERY is a senior lecturer
of business administration
and the C. Roland Christensen Dis
tinguished Management Educator in
the marketing unit at Harvard Busi
ness School. THOMAS STEENBURGH
is the Ralph Owen Dean and Pro
fessor of Marketing at Vanderbilt
University’s Owen Graduate School
of Management.
152
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
Should Jeannie green-light
a gen AI sales and customer
service chatbot?
The experts respond.
JIM LECINSKI is an
associate professor
at the Kellogg School
of Management and a
former VP at Google.
Jeannie’s dilemma might
appear to be about whether
to adopt cutting-edge
AI technology, but the real
underlying issues here
are about strategy and
leadership.
Though she’s captivated by the gen AI
chatbot demos she saw at the conference, she’s at risk of making a significant decision without thoroughly
considering the broader strategic implications. Her approach, which seems to
be driven by a fear of missing out, is not
conducive to sound business management. If I were a board member, I would
be apprehensive about such an act-now,
think-later mentality from a chief executive. Being a first mover isn’t always
the best strategy.
Instead, Jeannie should focus on
the core challenge PulsePoint faces:
improving profitability. Despite healthy
revenue growth, the company’s margins
are much lower than the margins of
its peers. Jeannie should consider
what can be done to address that.
Cost cutting is a natural place to start.
And perhaps raising prices, managing inventory better, or optimizing
the company’s debt structure could
increase margins as well.
As part of a comprehensive program,
she should ask her chief technology
officer, “How could technology—
perhaps AI—help us strengthen our
margins, especially if we applied it in
the sales function?” Notice that the
question states the desired outcome,
and the phrasing gives her team—her
chief technology officer, her chief
customer officer, and her head of
sales—space to collaborate and use
their expertise to determine how best
to achieve that outcome, instead of
dictating tactics to them. (As in “We
need to implement customer-facing AI
chatbots now!”)
Jeannie and her team should recognize that it’s possible to improve the
efficiency of the sales force (and therefore improve profitability) through gen
AI without upsetting customers. They
could leverage it internally to automate
routine sales tasks such as identifying and ranking prospects, drafting
responses to requests for proposals, and
compiling frequently asked questions
into an internal chatbot the sales reps
could use on calls, or to gamify sales
training. If AI helps with tedious and
time-consuming tasks, the salespeople
can focus their efforts on more-strategic
activities.
Jeannie needs to shift from a
technology-centric approach to a
strategy-centric one. That means starting with the business problem she’s
trying to solve and then collaboratively
exploring various solutions—instead of
simply replacing customer-facing salespeople with a chatbot. By doing that,
she can enhance margins at PulsePoint
while maintaining the full support of
her team and her customers.
DHARMESH SHAH
is the chief technology
officer of HubSpot.
Jeannie should move
forward with the AI
investment at PulsePoint
Solutions.
The mistake leaders often make when
assessing generative AI is underestimating how rapidly it will develop. Gen AI
capabilities have been doubling every
six to nine months, so by the time the
company deploys the technology, it will
be significantly more advanced and
efficient. Chatbots can already provide
humanlike service, exhibiting empathy
and other human traits. They will only
continue to improve.
Sales seems like a logical place to
launch gen AI at PulsePoint. I’ve been in
the customer-relationship-management
industry for 30 years, and in my experience, when people are interacting with
a sales force, they typically seek three
things: competence (dealing with someone or something knowledgeable and
capable of resolving issues), consistency
(receiving the same accurate information regardless of whom they interact
with), and convenience (interacting on
their own terms). Delivering convenience often used to mean sacrificing
competence and consistency. But gen AI
can provide all three, operating around
the clock without trade-offs.
Although Jeannie is under pressure to increase margins, she should
not position this AI implementation
primarily as a way to reduce head count
and achieve cost savings. That will just
cause anxiety and resistance among the
staff. Instead, she should maintain that
this investment is about R&D and innovation, with the goal of better serving
customers and capturing market share
and enhancing the productivity of the
employees, not replacing them. For
instance, gen AI’s ability to assimilate
vast amounts of information rapidly
can revolutionize PulsePoint’s training processes for sales and customer
service. AI can absorb new product
information and service updates in
minutes, ensuring that the most accurate and current information is always
available to the sales force. That can dramatically reduce the time it takes new
employees to ramp up and will keep
the entire team aligned with the latest
offerings, increasing overall customer
satisfaction.
Jeannie shouldn’t worry too much
about her hesitant client, because
there are ways to ease customers into
new technologies. At HubSpot, for
example, some customers prefer not
to make some of our gen-AI-powered
features available to their teams, and
we accommodate them by offering an
opt-out option. But over time resistance
to new technology weakens. That was
the case with cloud computing, where
initial pushback gave way to widespread
acceptance and adoption.
At HubSpot we took an early leap
into gen AI, integrating it within our
platform for tasks like ticket routing,
customer relationship management,
analytics and reporting, and drafting
sales emails. AI solutions now permeate
our platform. Internally, we use AI to
empower our marketing teams to create
content more efficiently.
The most important thing for
Jeannie and PulsePoint to avoid is getting caught in endless deliberation. The
company should jump in right away—
but perhaps with a partially autonomous chatbot that keeps humans in the
loop. That approach will yield valuable
insights that help PulsePoint successfully navigate the transformative journey of gen AI adoption.
HBR Reprint R2406M
Reprint Case only R2406X
Reprint Commentary only R2406Z
Harvard Business Review
November–December 2024
153
Copyright © Harvard Business Publishing. All Rights Reserved. This content is intended for
individual research use only, subject to the following:
Unless permission is expressly granted in a separate license, this content may NOT be used
for classroom or teaching use, which includes teaching materials, electronic reserves, course
packs or persistent linking from syllabi. Please consult your institution’s librarian about the
nature of relevant licenses held by your institution and the restrictions that may or may not
apply.
Unless permission is expressly granted in a separate license, this content may NOT be used in
corporate training and/or as corporate learning materials. For corporate users, please consult
the specific terms of your company’s license(s) for complete information and restrictions.
For more information and teaching resources from Harvard Business Publishing including
Harvard Business School Cases, eLearning products, and business simulations please visit
hbsp.harvard.edu.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
