BUSI 400 Week 4 Individual Case Analysis 1 Example

Reviewed by Thomas Kerrigan, MBA, CPA · Liberty University · Updated

This BUSI 400 Week 4 sample is an individual case analysis applying the course's chapter on the internal assessment to The Hershey Company. It calculates three years of financial ratios from the company's filings, showing gross margin falling from about 47 percent in 2024 to about 34 percent in 2025 and return on equity from about 47 to 19 percent as cocoa costs surged, tests Hershey's core resources against the resource-based view's criteria of value, rarity, inimitability and organization, and builds an Internal Factor Evaluation matrix of strengths and weaknesses. The analysis concludes that Hershey's brands and distribution are durable advantages but its narrow sourcing and geographic base are real weaknesses, and it recommends three actions. Liberty University BUSI 400 grades this first case analysis at 125 points, and BS in Business Administration students write it alone rather than in their groups.

CourseBUSI 400 Strategic Planning/Business Policy (BUSI400)
Module/Week4
AssignmentIndividual Case Analysis 1
Paper typeIndividual strategic case analysis
Lengthabout 631 words, 2 double-spaced pages plus title page and references. Course guide: an individual written case analysis diagnosing the company's strategic position with the module/week's internal assessment tools and recommending actions
FormatAPA 7 student paper
Points125
SchoolLiberty University Online
ProgramBS in Business Administration
Where it sitsModule/Week 4 in Liberty's published BUSI 400 course guide; current sections can differ
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for BUSI 400 Week 4

1

Inside Hershey: Ratios, Resources and an Internal Factor Evaluation

 

[Student Name]

School of Business, Liberty University

BUSI 400: Strategic Planning/Business Policy

Individual Case Analysis 1

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

 

The textbook's assigned case is not public, so an internal assessment of a public company, The Hershey Company, stands in for it; financial figures come from the company's filings, ratios are calculated from them, and the weights and ratings are the analyst's judgments.

Why this part earns its pointsThe ratio table comes first because the numbers frame every judgment that follows.
2

Inside Hershey: Ratios, Resources and an Internal Factor Evaluation

Financial Ratio Analysis

Ratio202320242025
Net sales (billions)$11.16$11.20$11.69
Gross margin44.8%47.3%33.5%
Net profit margin16.7%19.8%7.6%
Return on assets15.6%17.2%6.4%
Return on equity45.4%47.1%19.0%
Liabilities to equity1.901.751.96

The figures are calculated from Hershey's reported net sales, gross profit, net income, total assets and stockholders' equity (The Hershey Company, 2026). Sales grew modestly, by about 4 percent in 2025, in part through price increases. The striking change is in profitability: gross margin fell by almost 14 percentage points in one year as cocoa costs reached record levels, and net income fell by about 60 percent. Return on equity remains respectable even after the decline, partly because Hershey uses substantial debt, which magnifies returns in good years and risk in bad ones. Advertising spending stayed near $600 million a year, about 5 percent of sales, showing that management protected brand support even as margins fell.

A Functional Audit

David and David (2017) recommend auditing each functional area of the business. In marketing, Hershey's strength is plain: well-known brands, steady advertising and strong positions at retail checkouts and in seasonal aisles give it pricing power that helped protect sales in 2025. In finance, the picture is mixed; the company remains profitable and generates cash, but lower earnings and higher liabilities reduce its flexibility for acquisitions or for absorbing another year of high cocoa prices. In production and operations, Hershey runs large plants that make high volumes efficiently, yet it cannot control the price of its main ingredient. Research and development spending is small relative to sales, a little over $60 million in 2025, which suits a business built on established recipes but limits breakthrough innovation (The Hershey Company, 2026). In management information systems, investments in data and forecasting matter more than before, because better demand forecasts reduce waste and help the company decide how much cocoa to buy forward. Management's main challenge is cultural as much as technical: a company long built on chocolate must learn to manage salty snacks and lower-cocoa products with equal skill.

Why this part earns its pointsThe resource test asks which strengths competitors could copy, which the ratios alone cannot show.
3

Testing Hershey's Resources

Barney (1991) argued that a resource yields lasting advantage only if it is valuable, rare, costly for rivals to copy and backed by the firm's organization. Hershey's iconic brands, such as Hershey's and Reese's, pass every test: they create value through pricing power, few competitors own brands with comparable heritage in North America, and decades of consumer memories cannot be copied. Its distribution relationships with retailers and its dominant share of seasonal candy are similar. By contrast, its manufacturing capability is valuable but not rare, and its cocoa supply offers no advantage at all, since rivals buy from the same markets. Hershey's advantages are in the minds of consumers, not in its supply chain.

Internal Factor Evaluation Matrix

Key internal factorWeightRatingWeighted score
Strength: iconic North American brands0.1540.60
Strength: leading share of seasonal candy0.1040.40
Strength: strong retailer relationships and distribution0.1030.30
Strength: consistent brand investment0.0830.24
Strength: growing salty snack portfolio0.0730.21
Weakness: dependence on cocoa with limited hedging protection0.1510.15
Weakness: sharp 2025 margin decline0.1210.12
Weakness: small international presence0.1020.20
Weakness: higher debt relative to earnings after their decline0.0720.14
Weakness: limited presence in fast-growing better-for-you snacks0.0620.12
Total1.002.48

At 2.48, Hershey's internal position sits just below the 2.5 midpoint. Strong brands offset weak cost and geographic positions, but not by much in the current environment. The two most heavily weighted weaknesses, cocoa dependence and the margin decline, are closely linked, so progress on cost protection would lift both ratings at once. If cocoa prices eased and margins recovered toward their 2024 level, the same matrix would likely total above 2.8, which shows how much of Hershey's internal position currently depends on one external price.

Why this part earns its pointsThe diagnosis draws the ratios, audit and resource test into one conclusion.
4

Diagnosis and Recommendations

Hershey's internal position rests on brands that are durable advantages and on a cost structure that is exposed to a single volatile commodity. Three actions follow. First, broaden cost protection through longer hedging programs, recipe innovation that reduces cocoa content in some products without disappointing consumers, and productivity savings. Second, continue building the salty and better-for-you snack portfolio, which uses the company's distribution strength while reducing cocoa dependence. Third, grow international sales selectively in markets where Hershey brands are already known, rather than spreading resources thinly. Each action should carry a measurable target, such as gross margin restored above 40 percent within three years, salty snacks reaching a larger share of sales and international sales growing faster than domestic sales, so that later strategy evaluation has clear benchmarks.

5

References

Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108

David, F. R., & David, F. R. (2017). Strategic management: A competitive advantage approach, concepts and cases (16th ed.). Pearson.

The Hershey Company. (2026). Annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000047111&type=10-K

What the BUSI 400 Week 4 instructions ask

Module/Week 4 assigns chapter 4 of David and David, on the internal assessment, with one presentation, and the first Individual Case Analysis is due, worth 125 points. The course's case analyses are written reports on real business problems drawn from the textbook's cases, in which students diagnose strategic issues, evaluate alternatives and recommend workable action plans. Chapter 4 supplies the tools for this one: financial ratio analysis, the resource-based view and the Internal Factor Evaluation matrix. Because the textbook cases are not public, this sample uses a public company, and every number in it can be traced to the company's annual filings.

How this BUSI 400 Week 4 example is built

The analysis moves from numbers to resources to a judgment. A ratio table compares profitability, efficiency and financial leverage across three years, and the text explains what changed and why. The resource-based view then tests which of Hershey's capabilities could sustain an advantage. An Internal Factor Evaluation matrix weights and rates the key strengths and weaknesses, and the total is interpreted against the average of 2.5. The analysis closes with a diagnosis and three recommended actions, each tied to a weakness the assessment revealed. Headings follow the steps chapter 4 describes, which makes the reasoning easy to follow. Every ratio is traced to the company's filings with its year. The resource test separates advantages that rivals could copy quickly from those built over decades.

BUSI 400 Week 4 grading rubric: where the points go

Case analyses are graded on how accurately they diagnose the company's strategic situation with the chapter's tools, on the quality of the evaluation and recommendations, and on professional writing with sources in current APA format. In an internal assessment, instructors look for correct ratio calculations with years and sources, interpretation of what the ratios mean, an honest separation of strengths from weaknesses and an IFE matrix whose weights sum to 1.0 with justified ratings. Recommendations should follow from the weaknesses identified. Analyses that list strengths without evidence, or present ratios without explaining them, earn less. A ratio presented without the trend behind it rarely tells the reader much.

BUSI 400 Week 4 help: mistakes that cost points

Start with the company's financial statements and calculate ratios for at least three years so trends are visible. Explain each important change in a sentence, using the company's own explanation where available. Test the firm's resources against the criteria of value, rarity, inimitability and organization rather than calling every asset a strength. Build the IFE matrix with ten to twenty factors, weights summing to 1.0 and ratings on the chapter's scale. Interpret the total and connect it to recommendations. Show your calculations or sources for every figure. Check your ratios against the company's own reported figures before interpreting them, and note any unusual items, such as large one-time gains or charges, that distort a year's results.

Related BUSI 400 sample papers

Other BUSI 400 weeks

More BS in Business Administration sample papers

BUSI 400 Week 4 questions, answered

What is BUSI 400 Individual Case Analysis 1?

The first individual case analysis, worth 125 points in Module/Week 4, diagnosing a company's position with David and David's internal assessment tools and recommending actions.

Where can I find a free BUSI 400 Week 4 sample paper?

The sample below is a complete BUSI 400 Week 4 case analysis of Hershey with three years of ratios, a resource-based view test and an IFE matrix.

How do you build an IFE matrix?

List key strengths and weaknesses, weight each by importance from 0.0 to 1.0 with weights summing to 1.0, rate each from 1 (major weakness) to 4 (major strength), multiply and total.

What is the resource-based view?

The view that lasting advantage rests on resources that are valuable, scarce, difficult for competitors to copy and backed by the firm's own systems.

What else is due in BUSI 400 Module/Week 4?

The case analysis is the only graded work, with chapter 4 of David and David and a presentation as the reading. Students read chapter 4 on internal assessment.

Use it as a model, or ask for your own

This paper is an original model written by our desk for study. It is not a submitted student paper and not an official Liberty University document. Read it for structure and reasoning, then write your own to the instructions in your Canvas course. If you want a version built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.