Case Study 1: Carlson Companies Kesha Gray

Points: 140

Case Study 1: Carlson Companies

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 70% F

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Assess how the Carlson SAN approach would be implemented in today’s environment.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely assessed how the Carlson SAN approach would be implemented in today’s environment.

Partially assessed how the Carlson SAN approach would be implemented in today’s environment.

Satisfactorily assessed how the Carlson SAN approach would be implemented in today’s environment.

Thoroughly assessed how the Carlson SAN approach would be implemented in today’s environment.

2. Compare the pros and cons of consolidating data on a SAN central data facility versus the dispersed arrangement it replaces. Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely compared the pros and cons of consolidating data on a SAN central data facility versus the dispersed arrangement it replaces.

Partially compared the pros and cons of consolidating data on a SAN central data facility versus the dispersed arrangement it replaces.

Satisfactorily compared the pros and cons of consolidating data on a SAN central data facility versus the dispersed arrangement it replaces.

Thoroughly compared the pros and cons of consolidating data on a SAN central data facility versus the dispersed arrangement it replaces.

3. Evaluate the issues raised from the Carlson SAN mixing equipment from a number of vendors and determine the management options for dealing with this type of situation.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely evaluated the issues raised from the Carlson SAN mixing equipment from a number of vendors and did not submit or incompletely determined the management options for dealing with this type of situation.

Partially evaluated the issues raised from the Carlson SAN mixing equipment from a number of vendors and partially determined the management options for dealing with this type of situation.

Satisfactorily evaluated the issues raised from the Carlson SAN mixing equipment from a number of vendors and satisfactorily determined the management options for dealing with this type of situation.

Thoroughly evaluated the issues raised from the Carlson SAN mixing equipment from a number of vendors and thoroughly determined the management options for dealing with this type of situation.

4. Justify the reduction of administration and management of storage networking through Carlson’s IP SAN.

Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely justified the reduction of administration and management of storage networking through Carlson’s IP SAN.

Partially justified the reduction of administration and management of storage networking through Carlson’s IP SAN.

Satisfactorily justified the reduction of administration and management of storage networking through Carlson’s IP SAN.

Thoroughly justified the reduction of administration and management of storage networking through Carlson’s IP SAN.

5. Assess how cloud computing could be used by Carlson instead of a SAN. Create a diagram using Visio or its open source alternative software to illustrate the use of cloud computing.

Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely assessed how cloud computing could be used by Carlson instead of a SAN and did not submit or incompletely created a diagram using Visio or its open source alternative software to illustrate the use of cloud computing.

Partially assessed how cloud computing could be used by Carlson instead of a SAN and partially created a diagram using Visio or its open source alternative software to illustrate the use of cloud computing.

Satisfactorily assessed how cloud computing could be used by Carlson instead of a SAN and satisfactorily created a diagram using Visio or its open source alternative software to illustrate the use of cloud computing.

Thoroughly assessed how cloud computing could be used by Carlson instead of a SAN and thoroughly created a diagram using Visio or its open source alternative software to illustrate the use of cloud computing.

6. 3 references

Weight: 5%

No references provided

Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices.

Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.

Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.

7. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements

errors present

5-6 errors present

3-4 errors present

0-2 errors present