| Course Code | Class Code | Assignment Title | Total Points |
| BUS-317 | BUS-317-O500 | Benchmark - Executive Summary Presentation | 130.0 |
| Criteria | Percentage | 1: Unsatisfactory (0.00%) | 2: Less than Satisfactory (65.00%) | 3: Satisfactory (75.00%) | 4: Good (85.00%) | 5: Excellent (100.00%) | Comments | Points Earned |
| Criteria | 100.0% |
| Summarize the Industry and Company Chosen | 9.0% | Summary of the industry and chosen company is not present. | Summary of the industry and chosen company is incomplete or incorrect. | Summary of the industry and chosen company is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | Summary of the industry and chosen company is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | Summary of the industry and chosen company is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Overview of the Liquidity Ratios of the Chosen Company Relative to the Industry Averages and to the Competitor | 10.0% | An overview of the liquidity ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is not present. | An overview of the liquidity ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is incomplete or incorrect. | An overview of the liquidity ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is incomplete or incorrect. | An overview of the liquidity ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | An overview of the liquidity ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Overview the Solvency Ratios of the Chosen Company Relative to the Industry Averages and to the Competitor | 10.0% | An overview of the solvency ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is not present. | An overview of the solvency ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is incomplete or incorrect. | An overview of the solvency ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | An overview of the solvency ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | An overview of the solvency ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Overview of the Profitability Ratios of the Chosen Company Relative to the Industry Averages and to the Competitor | 10.0% | An overview of the profitability ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is not present. | An overview of the profitability ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is incomplete or incorrect. | An overview of the profitability ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | An overview of the profitability ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is included and includes basic explanation and supporting details. | An overview of the profitability ratios of the chosen company relative to the industry averages and to the competitor is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Describe the Importance of the Budgeting Process in the Chosen Company Relative to the Ratios | 8.0% | Description of the importance of the budgeting process in the chosen company relative to the ratios is not present. | Description of the importance of the budgeting process in the chosen company relative to the ratios is incomplete or incorrect. | Description of the importance of the budgeting process in the chosen company relative to the ratios is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | Description of the importance of the budgeting process in the chosen company relative to the ratios is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | Description of the importance of the budgeting process in the chosen company relative to the ratios is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Prepare a Variance Report and Balanced Scorecard for the Chosen Company, Comparative Against the Industry Averages for Liquidity, Solvency, and Profitability (C.1.3) | 8.0% | A variance report and balanced scorecard for the chosen company, comparative against the industry averages for liquidity, solvency, and profitability, is not present. | A variance report and balanced scorecard for the chosen company, comparative against the industry averages for liquidity, solvency, and profitability, is missing is incomplete or incorrect. | A variance report and balanced scorecard for the chosen company, comparative against the industry averages for liquidity, solvency, and profitability, is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | A variance report and balanced scorecard for the chosen company, comparative against the industry averages for liquidity, solvency, and profitability is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | A variance report and balanced scorecard for the chosen company, comparative against the industry averages for liquidity, solvency, and profitability, is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Identification of Impactful Ratios and Description of How These Ratios Impact Capital Budgeting Decisions | 10.0% | Discussion of which ratios impact capital budgeting decisions and a description of how these ratios impact the decisions is not present. | Discussion of which ratios impact capital budgeting decisions and a description of how these ratios impact the decisions is incomplete or incorrect. | Discussion of which ratios impact capital budgeting decisions and a description of how these ratios impact the decisions is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | Discussion of which ratios impact capital budgeting decisions and a description of how these ratios impact the decisions is included and provides basic explanation and relevant supporting details. | Discussion of which ratios impact capital budgeting decisions and a description of how these ratios impact the decisions is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| A Concluding Summary of How the Chosen Company Performed Compared to the Competitor and the Industry | 5.0% | A concluding summary of how the chosen company performed compared to the competitor and the industry is not present. | A concluding summary of how the chosen company performed compared to the competitor and the industry is incomplete or incorrect. | A concluding summary of how the chosen company performed compared to the competitor and the industry is included but lacks explanation and relevant supporting details. | A concluding summary of how the chosen company performed compared to the competitor and the industry is included and provides basic explanation and supporting details. | A concluding summary of how the chosen company performed compared to the competitor and the industry is thorough and includes substantial explanation and relevant supporting details. |
| Presentation of Content | 5.0% | The content lacks a clear point of view and logical sequence of information is unclear. Little or no persuasive information from reliable sources is included. | The content is vague in conveying a point of view and does not create a strong sense of purpose. Some persuasive information from reliable sources is included. Some persuasive Information is included, but the minimum required number of sources may not be met, and information may be unreliable or lack credibility. | The presentation slides are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization or in their relationships to each other. Some persuasive information from the minimum required number of reliable sources is included. | The content is written with a logical progression of ideas and supporting information exhibiting a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Persuasive information is included from the minimum required number of reliable sources. | The content is written clearly and concisely. Ideas universally progress and relate to each other. The project includes motivating questions and advanced organizers. The project gives the audience a clear sense of the main idea. Persuasive, authoritative information from at least the minimum required number of reliable, credible sources is included. |
| Slide Count and Notes | 5.0% | Presentation contains less than seven slides; slide notes are incomplete. | Presentation contains less than seven slides; slide notes are incomplete. | Presentation contains seven to nine slides; slide notes are 50-100 words and are relevant. | Presentation contains seven to nine slides; slide notes are 50-100 words and are relevant and cohesive. | Presentation contains seven to nine slides; slide notes are 50-100 words and are relevant and comprehensive. |
| Layout | 5.0% | The layout is cluttered, confusing, and does not use spacing, headings, and subheadings to enhance the readability. The text is extremely difficult to read with long blocks of text, small point size for fonts, and inappropriate contrasting colors. Poor use of headings, subheadings, indentations, or bold formatting is evident. | The layout shows some structure but appears cluttered and busy or distracting with large gaps of white space or a distracting background. Overall readability is difficult due to lengthy paragraphs, too many different fonts, dark or busy background, overuse of bold, or lack of appropriate indentations of text. | The layout uses horizontal and vertical white space appropriately. Sometimes the fonts are easy to read, but in a few places the use of fonts, italics, bold, long paragraphs, color, or busy background detracts and does not enhance readability. | The layout background and text complement each other and enable the content to be easily read. The fonts are easy to read and point size varies appropriately for headings and text. | The layout is visually pleasing and contributes to the overall message with appropriate use of headings, subheadings, and white space. Text is appropriate in length for the target audience and to the point. The background and colors enhance the readability of the text. |
| Language Use and Audience Awareness (includes sentence construction, word choice, etc.) | 5.0% | Inappropriate word choice and lack of variety in language use are evident. Writer appears to be unaware of audience. Use of primer prose indicates writer either does not apply figures of speech or uses them inappropriately. | Some distracting inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. The writer exhibits some lack of control in using figures of speech appropriately. | Language is appropriate to the targeted audience for the most part. | The writer is clearly aware of audience, uses a variety of appropriate vocabulary for the targeted audience, and uses figures of speech to communicate clearly. | The writer uses a variety of sentence constructions, figures of speech, and word choice in distinctive and creative ways that are appropriate to purpose, discipline, and scope. |
| Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | 5.0% | Slide errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. | Slides are largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. | Writer is clearly in control of standard, written, academic English. |
| 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% |
Nesha125
RubricWeek8.xlsx
