Analyze this case. Groups who include more key issues (e.g., structure, culture, leadership, power, learning, teams/groups), fully consider those issues and show how the issues contribute to the outcomes of the case will receive more marks than those groups who include fewer issues, and/or don’t explain the issues, and/or don’t show how the issues are related. For example, in some analyses where culture is an issue that should be considered some groups simply use the word culture, but never describe culture, nor do they show how culture fits in with other issues discussed (i.e., integration). Other people have used the word culture and described the key elements of culture briefly, but have not shown how culture is a factor in the case. My suggestion is that if you deal with the issue of culture, describe the cultural issues and you might well ask why the culture is as it is, and lastly show how culture is related to issues/problems in the case (this last connection is the integration issue). Please bear in mind that there is no magic number of issues, but there are some key issues that groups should deal with. Please do not mix recommendations with your analysis –your analysis should focus only on your understanding and explanation of what has happened in the case. Please use subheadings freely, but please remember to wrap up each section and indicate how the section is relevant to the problem and/or other elements. Please use transitions as you move on to the next sections. Your analysis should conclude with a summary of the analysis, a brief restatement of the problem, and a closing that suggests you are now presenting your recommendation.