Organizational diagnosis (individual assessment)

Organizational diagnosis assignment rubric

Total marks of the

assignment 100

% score 0-59 60-67 68-71 72-75 76-79 80-84 85-89 90-100

Grades F C B- B B+ A- A A+

Matery level Beginning Developing Competent Exceptional

Standard level Below standard Approaching standard At standard Exceeds standard

Grading criteria Weight

Political factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

political factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on political

factors.

Economic factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

economic factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on economic

factors.

Social factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on social

factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on social

factors.

Technological

factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

technological

factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on

technological factors.

Environmental

factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

environmental

factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on

environmental

factors.

Legal factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on legal

factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on legal

factors.

Ethical factors 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on ethical

factors.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on ethical

factors.

Strengths 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

strengths.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on strengths.

Weaknesses 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

weaknesses.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on

weaknesses.

Opportunities 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on

opportunities.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on

opportunities.

Threats 5

The discussion is

absent of lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on threats.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on threats.

Identified three

challenges and

discussed why

5

The challenges are

missing or

insufficiently

discussed.

The challenges are

mentioned but lack

explanation or analysis.

The challenges are

clearly identified

and briefly

discussed.

The challenges are

clearly identified and

comprehensively

discussed.

Discussed areas for

improvement to

stay competitive

10

The discussion is

absent or lacks

relevance.

The discussion is

minimal and lacks depth

or specificity.

The discussion

provides relevant

insights on areas

for improvement.

The discussion

provides exceptional

insights on areas for

improvement.

Stratregies to

overcome

challenges

15

The strategies are

missing or

insufficiently

discussed.

The strategies are

mentioned but lack

details or feasibility.

The strategies are

relevant and

feasible for

addressing the

challenges.

The strategies are

comprehensive,

innovative, and

highly feasible.

Quality of research

and analysis 5

Limited or no

reesearch or

analysis is evident.

Some research and

analysis present but

insufficient or lacking

depth.

Adequate research

and analysis

supporting the

assignment.

Comprehensive

research and anlysis

supporting the

assignment.

Writing quality 5

Numerous

grammar, spelling,

punctuation, and

citation errors.

Some grammar,

spelling, punctuation,

and citation errors

present.

Minor grammar,

spelling,

punctuation, and

citation errors.

Excellent grammar,

spelling,

punctuation, and

citation accuracy.

Followed

assignment

instructions and

APA guidelines

5

The student did

not follow

assignment

instructions or APA

guidelines.

The student partially

followed assignment

instructions or APA

guidelines.

The student

followed

assignment

instructions and

APA guidelines.

The student

meticulously

followed assignment

instructions and APA

guidelines.