Strategic Management Project 2

Rubric Name: Project #2 20%

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

0.4 points 0.34 points 0.3 points 0.26 points 0 points

(0.36 - 0.4) (0.32 - 0.35) (0.28 - 0.31) (0.24 - 0.27) 0

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

No attempt at

presenting an

introduction.

Thoroughly and

correctly provides

company

background from

inception to present

day research to

support

conclusions.

Correctly provides

company

background from

inception to present

day research to

support conclusions

but needs clarity or

some development.

Attempts to

provides company

background from

inception to present

day research to

support conclusions

but significant

clarity or

development is

needed.

Incorrectly provides

company

background from

inception to present

day using little

research to support

conclusions or does

not provide enough

background for a

reader to know

what business the

company is in or

does.

Little to no

company

background

provided from

inception to present

day .

Introduction

Writes an

introduction that

captures the

reader's attention,

gives context to the

paper, and builds to

the thesis that

defines the main

points to be

discussed in the

paper.

Writes an

introduction that

provides context to

the paper and

presents the thesis

statement that

defines the main

points to be

discussed in the

paper.

Writes an

introduction that

provides a general

context to the paper

or the thesis is

vague or

underdeveloped.

Attempts to write an

introduction but has

little to no context

to the paper and

the thesis is

missing main points

or no thesis

statement

provided.

Provide

historical

company

background

analysis from

beginning to

present

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Thoroughly and

correctly performs

a strategic

analysis of the

company's

mission, vision

and objectives

using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

performs a

strategic analysis

of the company's

mission, vision

and objectives

using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

perform a

strategic analysis

of the company's

mission, vision

and objectives

providing some

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Strategic analysis

of the company's

mission, vision

and objectives

provided using

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support of the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material to

support ideas or

the research.

Little to no

attempt to

perform a

strategic analysis

of the company's

mission, vision

and objectives.

Thoroughly and

correctly presents

corporate-level

strategies using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly presents

corporate-level

strategies using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

present corporate-

level strategies

providing some

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Corporate-level

strategies

presented using

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support of the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material to

support ideas or

the research.

Little to no

attempt to provide

corporate-level

strategies.

Corporate-

level

strategies

Perform a

strategic

analysis of

the

company's

mission,

vision and

objectives

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Thoroughly and

correctly presents

an IFE matrix

analysis and

address the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly presents

an IFE matrix

analysis and

address the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

presents an IFE

matrix analysis

and address the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions providing

some use of the

course material

AND research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Presents an IFE

matrix analysis

and address the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions using little

course material

AND/OR research

to support of the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material to

support ideas or

the research.

Little to no

attempt to an IFE

matrix analysis

and address the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions.

Create an IFE

matrix

analysis and

address the

strategic

inferences/im

plications

Thoroughly and

correctly presents

a SW table and

analysis and

addresses

strategic

inferences/

implications using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly presents

a SW table and

analysis and

addresses

strategic

inferences/

implications using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

presents a SW

table and analysis

and addresses

strategic

inferences/

implications

providing some

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Presents a SW

table and analysis

and addresses

strategic

inferences/

implications using

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support of the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material.

Little to no

attempt to

presents a SW

table and analysis

and addresses

strategic

inferences/

implications.

Create a

partial SWOT

table and

perform a SW

analysis and

address the

strategic

inferences/im

plications

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Thoroughly and

correctly

evaluates the

company's

product line,

target market and

its competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

evaluates the

company's

product line,

target market and

its competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs some

development.

Attempts to

evaluate the

company's

product line,

target market and

its competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level providing

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

development.

Evaluates the

company's

product line,

target market and

its competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using little

course material.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development.

Little to no

attempt to

evaluate the

company's

product line,

target market and

its competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level.

Evaluate the

company's

product line,

target market

and its

competition to

identify its

competitive

advantage

Thoroughly and

correctly develops

a Grand Strategy

Matrix with an

analysis that

discusses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

develops a Grand

Strategy Matrix

with an analysis

that discusses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

develop a Grand

Strategy Matrix

with an analysis

that discusses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level providing

some use of the

course material

AND research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development.

Develops a Grand

Strategy Matrix

with an analysis

that discusses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level using little

course material

AND/OR research

to support of the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development.

Little to no

attempt to

develops a Grand

Strategy Matrix

with an analysis

that discusses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions at a

corporate level

and business-unit-

level.

Develop a

Grand

Strategy

Matrix with an

analysis that

discusses the

strategic

inferences/im

plications at a

corporate

level and

business-unit-

level

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

0.6 points 0.51 points 0.45 points 0.39 points 0 points

(0.54 - 0.6) (0.48 - 0.53) (0.42 - 0.47) (0.36 - 0.41) (0 - 0.35)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Little to no

development of a

BCG matrix.

Develop a

Boston

Consulting

Group (BCG)

Matrix and

address the

strategic

inferences/im

plications

Thoroughly and

correctly identifies

and explain

business-level

strategies using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

identifies and

explain business-

level strategies

using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

identify and

explain business-

level strategies

providing some

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Identification and

explanation of

business-level

strategies provide

with little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material to

support ideas or

the research.

Little to no

identification and

explanation of

business-level

strategies.

Thoroughly and

correctly develops

a BCG matrix and

addresses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

develops a BCG

matrix and

addresses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

develops a BCG

matrix and

addresses the

strategic

inferences/implica

tions providing

some use of the

course material

AND research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Develops a BCG

with little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development in

using course

material to

support ideas or

the research.

Identify and

explain

business-level

strategies

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

0.8 points 0.68 points 0.6 points 0.52 points 0 points

(0.72 - 0.8) (0.64 - 0.71) (0.56 - 0.63) (0.48 - 0.55) (0 - 0.47)

Thoroughly and

correctly explains

how the identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly explains

how the identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material.

Attempts to

explains how the

identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements

providing some

use of the course

material AND

case scenario

facts to support

reasoning and

conclusions but

needs

development.

Explains how the

identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements with

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development.

Little to no

explanation of

how the identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements.

Explain how

these

strategies

align with the

company's

vision and

mission

statements

Thoroughly and

correctly

assesses the

company's

interactions with

its stakeholders,

org structure, org

culture &

communication/

decision making

among managers

in human res.,

marketing

production,

operations,

finance/accountin

g, R&D, and CIS

using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

assesses the

company's

interactions with

its stakeholders,

org structure, org

culture &

communication/

decision making

among managers

in human res.,

marketing

production,

operations,

finance/accountin

g, R&D, and CIS

using both

research AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs some

development.

Attempts to

assesses the

company's

interactions with

its stakeholders,

org structure, org

culture &

communication/

decision making

among managers

in HR, marketing

production,

operations,

finance/accountin

g, R&D, and CIS

providing some

use of the course

material AND

research to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs

significant

development.

Assesses the

company's

interactions with

its stakeholders,

org structure, org

culture &

communication/

decision making

among managers

in human res.,

marketing

production,

operations,

finance/accountin

g, R&D, and CIS

with little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development.

Little to no

assessment of

the company's

interactions with

its stakeholders,

org structure, org

culture &

communication/

decision making

among managers

in human res.,

marketing

production,

operations,

finance/accountin

g, R&D, and CIS.

Assess the

company's

interactions

with its

stakeholders,

org structure,

org culture &

communicatio

n/ decision

making

among

managers in

human res.,

marketing

production,

operations,

finance/

accounting,

R&D, and CIS

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

0.8 points 0.68 points 0.6 points 0.52 points 0 points

(0.72 - 0.8) (0.64 - 0.71) (0.56 - 0.63) (0.48 - 0.55) (0 - 0.47)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Thoroughly and

correctly

discusses

corporate

financial standing

based on financial

ratio analysis

using both

calculations AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

discusses

corporate

financial standing

based on financial

ratio analysis

using both

calculations AND

course material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

discuss corporate

financial standing

based on financial

ratio analysis

using both

calculations AND

course material

to support

reasoning and

conclusions but

needs significant

clarity,

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Explains how the

identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements with

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information.

Little to no

explanation of

how the identified

strategies align

with the

company's vision

and mission

statements.

Financial

analysis

Correctly

calculates no less

than a total of ten

(10) key financial

ratios to the

business using a

mix of four

different key

categories

inclusive of the

leverage, liquidity,

profitability, and

efficiency ratios

that are relevant

to the business

and provides

correct industry

averages.

Calculates no

less than a total

of ten (10)

key financial

ratios to the

business using a

mix of four

different key

categories

inclusive of the

leverage, liquidity,

profitability, and

efficiency ratios

and provides

correct industry

averages but one

or two of the

ratios are

calculated

incorrectly.

Calculates less

than ten (10)

key financial

ratios to the

business using a

mix of four

different key

categories

inclusive of the

leverage, liquidity,

profitability, and

efficiency ratios

and provides

correct industry

averages but

three or four

ratios are

calculated

incorrectly.

Does not

calculate the

key financial

ratios but takes

them from a

source document

OR calculates

ratios that are in

the same

category or

presents ratios

that are irrelevant

to the business

OR five or more

ratios are

calculated

incorrectly,

industry averages

may be incorrect

or missing.

Does not provide

required ratios or

industry

averages.

Ratios

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

Thoroughly and

correctly develops

a QSPM and

addresses the

strategic

inferences/

implications using

the course

material AND the

Tools &

Techniques

developed

throughout the

course to support

reasoning and

conclusions.

Correctly

develops a QSPM

and addresses

the strategic

inferences/

implications using

both the course

material AND the

Tools &

Techniques

developed

throughout the

course to support

reasoning and

conclusions but

needs some

development.

Attempts to

develops a QSPM

and addresses

the strategic

inferences/

implications

providing some

use of the course

material AND he

Tools &

Techniques

developed

throughout the

course to support

reasoning and

conclusions but

needs significant

development.

Develops a

QSPM with little

use of course

material AND/OR

the Tools &

Techniques

developed

throughout the

course to support

the reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information OR

needs major

development.

Little to no

development of a

QSPM.

Thoroughly and

correctly develops

a composite and

consistent view

on internal factor

strategy analysis

based on the

qualitative and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly

develops a

composite and

consistent view

on internal factor

strategy analysis

based on the

qualitative and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes using

both research

AND course

material to

support reasoning

and conclusions

but needs clarity

or some

development in

using the course

material to

support ideas or

in the research.

Attempts to

develop a

composite and

consistent view

on internal factor

strategy analysis

based on the

qualitative and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes

providing some

use of the course

material AND

case scenario

facts to support

reasoning and

conclusions but

needs significant

development.

Develops a

composite and

consistent view

on internal factor

strategy analysis

based on the

qualitative and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes with

little course

material AND/OR

research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions.

Needs major

development;

missing key

information.

Little to no

development of a

composite and

consistent view

on internal factor

strategy analysis

based on the

qualitative and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes.

Develop a

composite

and

consistent

view on

internal factor

strategy

analysis

based on the

qualitative

and

quantitative

analytical

outcomes

Develop a

Quantitative

Strategic

Planning

Matrix

(QSPM)

analysis and

address the

strategic

inferences/im

plications.

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

0.4 points 0.34 points 0.3 points 0.26 points 0 points

(0.36 - 0.4) (0.32 - 0.35) (0.28 - 0.31) (0.24 - 0.27) (0 – 0.23)

2 points 1.7 points 1.5 points 1.3 points 0 points

(1.8 - 2.0) (1.6 - 1.79) (1.4 - 1.59) (1.2 - 1.39) (0 – 1.19)

The paper

contains

completion of all

major assignment

tasks including

writing the report.

The paper also

includes

completion of all

minor aspects of

the assignment

such as third

person writing,

required use of

course readings,

outside sources if

needed, and

assignment

format.

The paper

contains

completion of all

major assignment

tasks including

writing the report.

The paper missed

1 minor aspect of

the assignment

such as third

person writing,

required use of

course readings,

outside sources if

needed, and

assignment

format.

The paper missed

1 major

assignment task

(including writing

the report) or 2

minor aspects of

the assignment.

Fails to show a

firm

understanding of

requirements;

missed two key

elements or

several minor

aspects of

assignment.

Fails to

demonstrate

understanding of

assignment

requirements.

Thoroughly and

correctly presents

conclusion that

emphasizes the

purpose/significan

ce of the analysis,

the

consequences of

findings, and

indicate the wider

application

derived from main

points using the

course material

and research to

support reasoning

and conclusions.

Correctly presents

conclusion that

emphasizes the

purpose/significan

ce of the analysis,

the

consequences of

findings, and

indicate the wider

application

derived from main

points using

course material

and research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions made

but needs clarity

or some

development.

Attempts to

presents

conclusion that

emphasizes the

purpose/significan

ce of the analysis,

the

consequences of

findings, and

indicate the wider

application

derived from main

points using

course material

and research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions but

significant clarity

or development is

needed.

Attempts to

presents

company

conclusion that

emphasizes the

purpose/significan

ce of the analysis,

the

consequences of

findings, and

indicate the wider

application

derived from main

points using

course material

and research to

support the

reasoning and

conclusions but

significant clarity

or development is

needed.

Failed to discuss

conclusion.

Conclusion

Attention to

Instructions

Criteria Above Average Sufficient Developing Needs Improvement Failure

2 points 1.7 points 1.5 points 1.3 points 0 points

(1.8 - 2.0) (1.6 - 1.79) (1.4 - 1.59) (1.2 - 1.39) (0 – 1.19)

1 point 0.85 points 0.75 points 0.65 points 0 points

(0.9 - 1.0) (0.8 - 0.89) (0.7 - 0.79) (0.6 - 0.69) (0 – 0.59)

No APA style or

usage errors;

Proper citation of

source material is

used throughout

paper; Reference

titles follow APA

with only the first

word, the first

word after a colon

and proper nouns

capitalized.

Attempts in-text

citations and

reference list but

one or two APA

style errors noted

or fails to use

APA citations

when appropriate

1-2 times.

Attempts in-text

citations and

reference lists;

APA style errors

are noted

throughout

document; Fails

to use APA

citations when

appropriate 3

times in

document.

Attempts in-text

citations and

reference lists;

Fails to use APA

citation when

appropriate 4-5

times; or presents

only 1-2 in-text

citations and

reference list in a

paper that

requires APA

citations

throughout the

document.

No attempt at

APA style; or

attempts either in-

text citations or

reference list but

omits the other.

Strictly adheres to

standard usage

rules of written

English, including

but not limited to

capitalization,

punctuation, run-

on sentences,

missing or extra

words, stylistic

errors, spelling

and grammatical

errors. No errors

found. No

contractions or

jargon used.

Excellently

adheres to

standard usage of

mechanics:

conventions of

written English,

including

capitalization,

punctuation, and

spelling. One to

three errors

found.

Satisfactorily

adheres to

standard usage

rules of

mechanics:

conventions of

English, including

capitalization,

punctuation, and

spelling. Four to

10 errors found.

Minimally adheres

to standard usage

rules of

mechanics:

conventions of

written English,

including

capitalization,

punctuation, and

spelling. More

than 10 errors

found.

Does not adhere

to standard usage

rules of

mechanics:

conventions of

written English

largely

incomprehensible

; or errors are too

plentiful to count.

Writing

Mechanics

APA Style

(6th ed.)