Question

OL 620 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric

Overview The final project for this course is the creation of a benefits and compensation analysis (with revisions) and a stakeholder presentation. Professionals in the human resources field are often tasked with overseeing the benefits and compensation (Total Rewards) functions within any given organization. Human resource professionals often have to examine specific compensation and benefit elements of a total rewards system and compare them with qualitative and quantitative data collected internally, to determine how to fairly and appropriately reward employees for their work. For this summative assessment, imagine you have been tasked with evaluating and revising the current benefits and compensation package of an organization. You will utilize information from a case study to compare and contrast the organization’s total reward system with external benchmarking data, analyze data for gaps, and make revisions to the existing compensation and benefit package. The information you are provided will be based on a specific aspect of a benefits and compensation package (retirement benefits, medical benefits, etc.). You must also create a presentation to stakeholders that explains the proposed changes, your rationale, and the implications of the changes for the organization. The project is divided into three milestones, which will be submitted at various points throughout the course to scaffold learning and ensure a quality final submission. These milestones will be submitted in Modules Three, Five, and Seven. The final project will be submitted in Module Nine. In this assignment, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course outcomes:

 OL-620-01: Analyze qualitative input from stakeholders for prioritizing employee concerns regarding existing organizational total rewards systems

 OL-620-02: Compare existing internal quantitative data regarding benefits and compensation structures to external benchmarking data for determining key areas of concern in organizational total rewards systems

 OL-620-03: Evaluate strengths and weaknesses of organizational benefits and compensation structures for informing the revision of a total rewards system

 OL-620-04: Design revised benefits and compensation packages that address key stakeholder concerns and align with established financial, organizational, and legal constraints

 OL-620-05: Appropriately communicate proposed changes of organizational benefits and compensations structures to various internal stakeholder populations.

Prompt In your new role as a human resources professional, you have been asked to revise aspects of the current total rewards package illustrated in the provided case study and make revisions to the package to accommodate issues and concerns. You have also been asked to prepare a presentation to stakeholders regarding your proposed revisions. You will begin with an analysis of quantitative and qualitative information about the current rewards system. Use this information to identify strengths and weaknesses of the current package and make recommendations, while addressing stakeholder concerns and previously identified weaknesses. You

will communicate these proposed changes in a presentation to stakeholders of the organization. You should also use charts and tables to augment and support your analysis. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:

I. Total Rewards Analysis: For this part of the assessment, you will analyze given aspects of the Total Rewards package from the provided case study. You will analyze qualitative and quantitative data regarding the current system and determine gaps in that system that will inform your future recommendations and revisions.

A. Analyze the issues or concerns of employees through a review of the qualitative data presented in the case study, for their validity and importance. Be sure to consider the needs of different demographics of employees within the organization. [OL-620-01]

B. Determine the key issues or concerns of employees that should be targeted and addressed, based on the provided qualitative data. Justify your response. Why should other concerns be made less of a priority? Consider the underlying reasons behind the issues voiced by employees. [OL- 620-01]

C. Compare and contrast the provided quantitative data regarding the current benefits and compensation system with external benchmarking data from the competitive organization. Use the supplemental data documents to complete your response. What does the current system have that other organization does not? What does the other organization offer that the current system does not? Justify your response. [OL- 620-02]

D. Determine areas of misalignment, differences, and gaps present in the current benefits and compensation system, based on the external benchmarking data. What are the key areas of the current system that are misaligned with the competition? [OL-620-02]

E. Based on the strengths and weaknesses of each plan, determine Emerging Pharmaceuticals’ rewards components that should be increased, reduced or stay the same, and provide your rationale. [OL-620-03]

F. Compare qualitative input data and quantitative analysis with the organization’s employee demographic data to determine the degree of the existing population that will be affected by the proposed changes. In other words, what is the overall impact of each proposed change? [OL- 620-03]

II. Revisions: In this part of the assessment, you will make recommendations and revisions to the current benefits and compensation package to address

any concerns and gaps previously identified. A. Make recommendations to the current total rewards package that address concerns related to your previous analysis of the quantitative and

qualitative data. In other words, what changes would you make to the current benefits and compensation package in order to address any concerns you previously identified? [OL-620-04]

B. Identify potential financial, procedural, and legal constraints regarding the revised total rewards package. [OL-620-04] C. Explain the financial cost of proposed changes to both direct and indirect compensation. Be sure to address fully funded organizational changes,

partially funded changes (and by what percentage), and fully employee-funded benefits. Identify the increase or decrease for total employee costs. [OL-620-04]

III. Presentation: In this part of the assessment, you will develop a brief presentation (PowerPoint or other similar tools for this exercise) to stakeholders that describes your recommended changes and provides both context and rationale for why you believe they should occur. This presentation must be developed in such a way that it is accessible for all stakeholders (leadership, management, employees, and so on).

A. Provide a brief overview of the qualitative input data, quantitative benchmarking data, and the gap analysis that was conducted. [OL-620-05]

B. Provide a rationale for proposed changes and explain how the proposed changes will achieve targeted organizational goals and address stakeholder concerns. [OL-620-05]

C. Explain the implications of implementing the new system for the organization and for different employee populations. [OL-620-05]

Milestones Milestone One: Total Awards Analysis (Section I, Parts A–C) In Module Three, you will submit a draft of Parts A–C of your Total Rewards Analysis. You will analyze qualitative and quantitative data regarding the current system identified in the additional provided case study Emerging Pharmaceuticals – a key competitor to Medtronic. You will also compare and contrast the provided quantitative data regarding the current benefits and compensation system with external benchmarking data from Medtronic, an organization within the same industry. The submission will have the major heading “Benefits and Compensation Analysis: Parts A–C.” This milestone will be graded with the Milestone One Rubric. Milestone Two: Benefits and Compensation Analysis (Section I, Parts D-F) In Module Five, you will submit a draft of Parts D-F of your benefits and compensation analysis. You will determine key areas of concern regarding the current system identified in the provided case study Emerging Pharmaceuticals that will inform your future recommendations and revisions. The submission will have the major heading “Benefits and Compensation Analysis: Parts D-F.” This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Two Rubric. Milestone Three: Revisions (Section II) In Module Seven, you will submit a draft of Section II (Revisions). You will make recommendations and revisions to the current benefits and compensation package described in the provided case study Emerging Pharmaceuticals to address concerns and gaps previously identified. The submission will include all parts of Section II with the major heading “Revisions.” This milestone will be graded with the Milestone Three Rubric. Final Submission: Benefits and Compensation Analysis and Revisions with Stakeholder Presentation In Module Nine, you will submit the completed benefits and compensation analysis (with revisions) and stakeholder presentation. You will appropriately communicate your proposed changes to the internal stakeholders (leadership, management, employees, etc.) identified in the provided case study Emerging Pharmaceuticals and provide both context and rationale for why you believe they should occur. This presentation should be a complete, polished artifact containing all of the critical elements of the final project. This submission will be graded with the Final Project Rubric.

Deliverables Milestone Deliverable Module Due Grading

One Section I, Parts A–C, Total Rewards Analysis Three Graded separately using Milestone One Rubric

Two Section I, Parts D-F, Total Rewards Analysis Five Graded separately using Milestone Two Rubric

Three Section II, Revisions Seven Graded separately using Milestone Three Rubric

Final Submission Total Rewards Analysis (with Revisions) and Stakeholder Presentation

Nine Graded separately using Final Project Rubric

Final Project Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your total rewards analysis paper must be 8–12 pages in length (plus a cover page and references list) and must be written in APA format. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. Include at least seven academic references. The presentation must consist of 5–10 slides with adequate speaker notes explaining each slide’s content. Use a product such as PowerPoint or Prezi to create your presentation. Sources should be cited according to APA style.

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Total Rewards Analysis: Issues or Concerns

[OL-620-01]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of the value of key issues, from the employee’s perspective

Analyzes the issues or concerns of employees, reviewed through the qualitative data, for their validity and importance, considering the needs of different employee demographics within the organization

Analyzes the issues or concerns of employees, reviewed through the qualitative data, for their validity and importance, considering the needs of different employee demographics within the organization, but analysis is cursory

Does not analyze the issues or concerns of employees, reviewed through the qualitative data, for their validity and importance for organizational review

8

Total Rewards Analysis: Targeted and

Addressed [OL-620-01]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates keen insight on the underlying reasons the issues voiced by employees have arisen

Determines key issues or concerns of employees that should be targeted and addressed, based on the provided qualitative data, justifying response

Determines key issues or concerns of employees that should be targeted and addressed, based on the provided qualitative data, justifying response, but determination is cursory, illogical, or there are gaps in the justification

Does not determine key issues or concerns of employees that should be targeted and addressed

8

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Total Rewards Analysis: External Benchmarking

Data [OL-620-02]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates keen insight into the position of the current benefits and compensation system compared with systems at other organizations

Compares and contrasts provided quantitative data regarding the current benefits and compensation system with external benchmarking data from organizations within the same industry, using the provided table, justifying response

Compares and contrasts provided quantitative data regarding the current benefits and compensation system with external benchmarking data from organizations within the same industry, using the provided table, justifying response, but analysis is cursory, illogical, contains inaccuracies, or there are gaps in the justification

Does not compare and contrast provided quantitative data regarding the current benefits and compensation system with external benchmarking data

8

Total Rewards Analysis: Misalignment,

Differences, and Gaps [OL-620-02]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates the ability to discern key differences from the provided information

Determines areas of misalignment, differences, and gaps present in the current benefits and compensation system, based on the external benchmarking data

Determines areas of misalignment, differences, and gaps present in the current benefits and compensation system, but determination is cursory or illogical

Does not determine areas of misalignment, differences, and gaps present in the current benefits and compensation

8

Total Rewards Analysis: Increased, Reduced or

Stay the Same [OL-620-03]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates keen insight regarding reasons for maintaining status quo or changing specific components

Determines rewards components that should be increased, reduced or stay the same, providing appropriate rationale

Determines rewards components that should be increased, reduced or stay the same, but rationale is cursory, illogical, or there are gaps

Does not determine rewards components that should be increased, reduced or stay the same

8

Total Rewards Analysis: Population Affected

[OL-620-03]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates keen insight into how both qualitative and quantitative analysis will affect employee populations

Compares qualitative input data and quantitative analysis with the organization’s employee demographic data to determine the degree of the existing population that will be affected by the proposed changes

Compares qualitative input data and quantitative analysis with the organization’s employee demographic data to determine the degree of the existing population that will be affected by the proposed changes, but analysis or is cursory or illogical, or there are gaps in determination

Does not compare qualitative input data and quantitative analysis with the organization’s employee demographic data

8

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Revisions: Recommendations

[OL-620-04]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a balance between employee input and organizational objectives

Makes recommendations to the current total rewards package that address concerns related to the previous analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data

Makes recommendations to the current total rewards package that address concerns related to the previous analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data but revisions are cursory, illogical, or contain inaccuracies

Does not make recommendations to the current total rewards package that address concerns related to the previous analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data

8

Revisions: Constraints [OL-620-04]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of the constraints regarding revising benefits and compensation packages

Makes recommendations for accommodating potential financial, procedural, and legal constraints regarding the revised benefits and compensation package

Makes recommendations for accommodating potential financial, procedural, and legal constraints regarding the revised benefits and compensation package, but explanation is cursory or illogical

Does not make recommendations for accommodating potential financial, procedural, and legal constraints regarding the revised benefits and compensation package

8

Revisions: Financial Cost

[OL-620-04]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a balance between addressing expressed employee needs and organizational cost targets

Comprehensively explains the financial cost of proposed changes to both direct and indirect compensation

Explains the financial cost of proposed changes to both direct and indirect compensation, but explanation is cursory, illogical, or not comprehensive

Does not explain the financial cost of proposed changes to both direct and indirect compensation

8

Presentation: Overview [OL-620-05]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of how to communicate appropriate and relevant information for all stakeholders

Provides a brief overview of the qualitative input data, quantitative benchmarking data, and the gap analysis that was conducted, conveyed appropriately for all stakeholders

Provides a brief overview of the qualitative input data, quantitative benchmarking data, and the gap analysis that was conducted, but overview is cursory or is not conveyed appropriately for all stakeholders

Does not provide an overview of the qualitative input data, quantitative benchmarking data, and the gap analysis that was conducted

8

Presentation: Organizational Goals

[OL-620-05]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of how to communicate appropriate and relevant information for all stakeholders

Provides a rationale for proposed changes and explains how the proposed changes will achieve targeted organizational goals and address stakeholder concerns, conveyed appropriately for all stakeholders

Provides a rationale for proposed changes and explains how the proposed changes will achieve targeted organizational goals and address stakeholder concerns but response is cursory, illogical, or not appropriately conveyed to all stakeholders

Does not provide a rationale for proposed changes or explain how the proposed changes will achieve targeted organizational goals and address stakeholder concerns

8

Critical Elements Exemplary (100%) Proficient (90%) Needs Improvement (70%) Not Evident (0%) Value

Presentation: Implications [OL-620-05]

Meets “Proficient” criteria and response demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of how to communicate appropriate and relevant information for all stakeholders

Explains the implications of implementing the new system for the organization and for different employee populations in a manner such that each key stakeholder understands why the changes are being implemented, conveyed appropriately for all stakeholders

Explains the implications of implementing the new system for the organization and for different employee populations in a manner such that each key stakeholder understands why the changes are being implemented, but explanation is cursory, illogical, or is not conveyed appropriately to all stakeholders

Does not explain the implications of implementing the new system for the organization and for different employee populations in a manner such that each key stakeholder understands why the changes are being implemented

8

Articulation of Response

Submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization, and is presented in a professional and easy to read format

Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization

Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas

Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas

4

Total 100%