| Course Code | Class Code |
| ADM-560 | ADM-560-O500 | Benchmark – Negotiation Techniques | 100.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | Less than Satisfactory (74.00%) | Satisfactory (79.00%) | Good (87.00%) | Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Content | 70.0% |
| Explain the participants in the situation. | 10.0% | Explanation of participants in the situation is missing. | Explanation of participants in the situation is vague and inconsistent. | Explanation of participants in the situation is present. | Explanation of participants in the situation is present and clear. | Explanation of participants in the situation is clear and concise. |
| Explain the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties. | 10.0% | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is missing. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is vague and inconsistent. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is present and connected to some research. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is present, clear, and connected to research. | Explanation of the difference between influence and negotiation among the parties is clear, concise, and connected to research. |
| Recommend strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation. (comp. 3.4) | 15.0% | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is missing. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is present and connected to some research. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is present, clear, and connected to research. | Recommendation of strategies to build the relationship between the parties in preparation for negotiation is clear, concise, and connected to research. |
| Recommend different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met. (comp 2.4) | 15.0% | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is missing. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is vague and inconsistent. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is present and connected to some research. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is present, clear, and connected to research. | Recommendation of different techniques of negotiation the parties can utilize to get interest or requirements met is clear, concise, and connected to research. |
| Discuss how each party determines the value of their negotiation. | 10.0% | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is missing. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is present. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is present and clear. | Discussions of how each party determines the value of their negotiation is clear and concise. |
| Discuss what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation. | 10.0% | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is missing. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is vague and inconsistent. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is present. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is present and clear. | Discussion of what would make each party agree to a decision within a negotiation is clear and concise. |
| Organization and Effectiveness | 20.0% |
| Thesis Development and Purpose | 7.0% | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. |
| Argument Logic and Construction | 8.0% | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. |
| Format | 10.0% |
| Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | 5.0% | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. |
| Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | 5.0% | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. |
| Total Weightage | 100% |
trooperwarxhw3
Rubric7.xlsx
