SCM 822 Spin Master Toys
Quarterback05
CaseQuestionsandGuidelines.docxSpin Master Toys (A) Case Assignments
Please answer the following questions:
1. What criteria should be used to select the supplier for the E-Chargers and why?
2. Evaluate (score) each supplier on the selection criteria discussed in number 1. Defend your scoring scheme.
3. Based on 1 and 2, which supplier would you recommend and why? What are the risks associated with your choice and what mechanisms/contingencies would you put in place to mitigate these risks?
Assignment Guidelines
Word document, max of two pages, single-spaced (not smaller than 11-point font), plus not more than two pages of charts, tables, or figures. Citations can be listed on a separate page and are NOT included in the page count.
This assignment will be graded by criteria provided on a rubric. ( on the next page)
CriteriaPts
25.0 pts20.0 pts15.0 pts10.0 pts
EXCELLENTt: Thoroughly addresses
all of the assignment questions or
requirements
GOOD: Addresses most of the
assignment questions or
requirements
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Does not address most of
the questions or does so
superficially
UNACCEPTABLE: Non-
responsive to the
assignment
40.0 pts30.0 pts20.0 pts10.0 pts
EXCELLENT: Answer demonstrates
evaluation, synthesis, and anaylsis
of readings and other material
used for the case solution;
assumptions are stated and
justified
GOOD: Analysis demonstrates
the previous, but lacks support
for the conclusions/solutions
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Analysis is mainly
comprised of restating
what is in the course
readings
UNACCEPTABLE:
Analysis is too
superficial.
20.0 pts15.0 pts10.0 pts5.0 pts
EXCELLENT: Course reading
material is included and integrated
into the presentation; citations are
provided
GOOD: Course readings
included but not well
integrated into presentation;
citations are included
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT:
Course readings included
but not well integrated
into presentation;
citations are not included
UNACCEPTABLE:
Course readings are
not included in the
presentation
5.0 pts3.0 pts1.0 pts
EXCELLENT: Written work is well
organized and easy to understand.
COMPETENT: The organization
is generally good, but some of
the parts seem out of place.
NOT COMPETENT: The
presentation is
disorganized to the
extent that it prevents
understanding of content.
5.0 pts3.0 pts1.0 pts
EXCELLENT: The work has been
thoroughly spell-checked and
proofread.
COMPETENT: There are a few
spelling and grammatical
errors.
NOT COMPETENT: There
are frequent misspelled
words and serious
grammatical errors,
indicating that time was
not taken to spell-check
and proofread.
5.0 pts3.0 pts1.0 pts
EXCELLENT: The team developed a
writing style that is uniform
throughout the presentation. There
is no indication that the report
involved multiple authors.
COMPETENT: There is some
indication of multiple authors
(e.g., different fonts,etc.)
NOT COMPETENT: Report
is clearly the work of
multiple authors with
different writing styles,
margins, printer fonts,
poor transition between
sections.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
Communication:
Integration of
Writing Styles
5.0 pts
Total Points: 100.
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Incorporation of
Course Reading
Material
20.0 pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
communication:
Organization
5.0 pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeWritten
communication:
Grammar
5.0 pts
Team Case Rubric
Ratings
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Responsiveness
to the Questions
Asked
25.0 pts
This criterion is
linked to a
Learning
OutcomeMain
Case Solution:
Quality of Answer
40.0 pts
