A great course however, I think it could have explored more the agile concepts, and how to scale it.

Good course, easy to follow. You will learn the very basics of organizational design.

Need more depth

too much theory

I really liked all the specialization courses, but with this I had two problems: One, in the videos the cameraman moved the camera a lot (he preferred the previous format of the videos) and that makes me dizzy; second, the practice questionnaires are disorganized, there were questions from lesson 3 in the questionnaire from lesson 1, for example. If it wasn't for those 2 things I would give it 5 stars.

Compare to the other course this one was not so well structured in the first modules. Presentation was a bit vage in flow and wording. Questions in quizes and in the finale exam were some times not really covered in the lecture. As well the first modules were very noise with having the professour sitting on street enviroments making it hard to

The course is quite good and the professor is motivated. However, I do not like much confused theories which is totally boring and hard to understand. Compared to that, I prefer some case study and analysis.

It was good but I felt other courses from Coursera were better. Sometimes I felt it was too much detail on not too important or fundamental matters.

Interesting but not as much as the previous ones of the strategy specialisation. In some aspects it is no so clear or doesn't go too deep.

Given that I didnt pay for the course, I have to say that it was successfull in giving me a decent amount of information and an introduction into thought processes underlying strategic design. Furthermore it has a nice choice of filming locations. Yet there is two reasons for my low rating: 1) lack of a systematic approach and 2) lack of detail going beyond the obvious and sometimes lack of arguments for certain claims.

More specficially things that could be improved on would be:

* red line is sometimes missing (or at least not very obvious), concepts just seem to pop up semi randomly, which may be similiar to my second critique point:

* often the scope of concepts wasnt clear, i.e. one slide deals with capabilities, the next one deals with shared activities such as capital, is the latter now a capability? the heading in the slides suggests its an entirely different subtopic, but there is no other sign of such a transition, neighter in slides nor in the oral presentation; this happens quite alot of times, so please make the relationship between the different parts of the presentation and concepts clearer

* often, a real example would help: how does concept A look in a specific company (titles, organization trees and procedures), how does a centralized vs decentralized company strcuture look like, which capabilities are where; maybe use the companies where you film the lectures at as examples, this would make the choice of location also seem less random

* not much beyond the slides is explained: refinancing is mentioned as a way of improving performance; what debt is refinanced here, how does this pertain to company everyday workings (i.e. does a company buy another random company and makes somehow money? -> please detail more and give a clear example)

* maybe add a little bit of readings (i.e. including examples if there is no space in the presentation for this)

* discussions dont receive any replys nor any moderation (but that seems more like the usual case on coursera; and the separation into different forums for each course period leads to only a sinlge post per thread per period which doesnt encourage peer discussion); yet as this seems to be a coursera wide applicable critique this didnt factor into my rating

As it is, this course can be finished rather very quickly, and i think people would be willing to spend more time on the course to gain actual depth knowledge (as is often said but not achieved in the class unfortunately)

The quizzes are ridiculous. The lecture is just a guy reading from his iPad. I just stopped after week 1. Terrible.