Case Analysis

Case Analysis Option #2

Assignment Specifications & Rubric

“How Dare He Try to Manage Our Talk….”

Instructions: Use our textbook, course readings, and supplemental information from lectures to help you answer the

questions below. Please be sure to use in-depth examples from the case as well as the textbook. Submit this assignment

via Brightspace as a Word document.

Imagine you are an organizational consultant who utilizes a Human Resources approach to diagnose organizational

challenges. Using the Human Resources approach as your theoretical and explanatory lens, answer the following question:

• What went wrong at New Day Hospice as it was described in the case? (Be clear about what went wrong and

what could/should have been done; e.g., “XX style of management was used when human resources approaches

suggest XX style is ideal”)

OR

Imagine you are an organizational consultant who utilizes the Constitutive approach to diagnose organizational

challenges. Using the Constitutive approach as your theoretical and explanatory lens, answer the following question:

• What went wrong at New Day Hospice as it was described in the case? (e.g., you might explain the extent to

which each of the four flows was successful; be sure to define each first)

OR

Imagine you are an organizational consultant who utilizes the Critical approach to diagnose organizational challenges.

Using the Critical approach as your theoretical and explanatory lens, answer the following question:

• What went wrong at New Day Hospice as it was described in the case and how can these issues be addressed?

(Recall the goal of a critical theorist)

A note about writing: I’m most interested in your analysis (the second bullet points below) and less so in your ability to

summarize what you’ve read. I invite you to consider the following structure for your response:

• Short introductory paragraph where you (1) define/describe the approach, in general, (2) introduce a specific

theory or theories you will use as you analyze the case (be strategic with your selections – you shouldn’t/can’t use

all the theories we’ve learned!), and (3) offer a one sentence preview of what is to come in your response.

• In the next two or three paragraphs you will want to identify/explain 2-3 things that “went wrong” when you view

the case through the lens of the specified approach. Be sure to use a specific aspects (or aspects) of a theory. Fully

explain the connections you’re making – don’t leave it up to the reader to try to figure out what you’re saying!

• Short concluding paragraph (2-3 sentences).

Formatting Guidelines: The entire document should be no more than two pages double-spaced. This length will require

you to be concise in your writing, revisit/edit your writing, and to eliminate quotations (for the most part). In addition,

your analysis should meet the following formatting criteria:

• Typed in black, 12-point Times New Roman font, Double-spaced

• 1 inch margins, No extra paragraph spacing

• No headings or titles needed

References: All of your claims should be supported with reference materials using APA style citations for paraphrases

and any direct quotations. However, you do not need to include a separate reference page unless you are citing sources

that were not assigned course reading (if you include a References page, it does not count toward your page total).

• To cite Miller: (Miller, year of publication – 2015?)

• To cite the case: (Bisel & Messersmith, 2016)

Case Analysis Option #2

Assignment Specifications & Rubric

“How Dare He Try to Manage Our Talk….”

• To cite Course Reading: (Author(s), year of publication)

• To cite class material: (class notes or lecture, date)

Case Analysis Option #2

Assignment Specifications & Rubric

“How Dare He Try to Manage Our Talk….”

Case Analysis Evaluation Rubric Note: Multiply Points Out of 10 X 2 to determine Final Score

Unacceptable (1-4) Emergent (5-6) Satisfactory (7) Strong (8-9) Excellent (10)

Writing/Purpose (e.g., Do you have a

thesis? Is the response cohesive? Is your

analysis creative and well-developed?)

It’s not clear what you are

trying to say AND your

analysis is underdeveloped

It’s not clear what you are

trying to say OR your

analysis is underdeveloped

Your thesis is evident, the

response is cohesive and

offers adequate analysis

Your thesis is well-

crafted and supported

by a cohesive response;

analysis is adequate

Your thesis is well-

crafted and supported

by a cohesive response;

analysis is highly

creative

Support/Evidence (e.g., Do you give

examples/reasons for the claim(s) you’re

making? Are you basing claims on readings

from class? Are you accurately characterizing

the source(s) being used?)

All claims are unsupported

and/or evidence is

misrepresented (e.g., an

article is cited but not

related to the claim being

made)

Most claims are

unsupported and/or

evidence is misrepresented

Claims are generally

supported and some

evidence is accurately

represented

Most claims are well-

supported and most

evidence is accurately

represented

All claims are well-

supported and all

evidence is accurately

represented

Structure/Development

(e.g., Have you used best writing practices

such as making sure paragraphs have topic

sentences followed by supporting sentences?

Are paragraphs linked with transitions? Is

there a clear intro and conclusion? Does the

response flow well?)

Ideas are incoherent and

illogically organized;

Paragraphs are undeveloped

and need transitions

Organization of ideas is

barely coherent and logical;

Paragraphs lack

development and/or fail to

employ transitions

effectively

Organization of ideas is

adequate in terms of being

coherent and logical; Some

paragraphs may be well‐

developed and use effective

transitions while others do

not

Organization of ideas is

generally coherent and

logical; Most

paragraphs are well‐

developed and use

effective transitions

Ideas are coherently and

logically organized with

well‐ developed

paragraphs and

effective transitions

Language & Mechanics

(e.g., Have you written for a “professional”

audience? Have you varied your sentence

structure? Have you edited your work?)

Language may be

inaccessible to readers;

Sentences are incomplete

and/or contain errors in

grammar, punctuation

and/or spelling

Some/few sentences are

well‐written with little

variance in structure and/or

numerous errors in

grammar, punctuation

and/or spelling

Language is accessible to

readers; however, many

sentences may lack variation

in structure; Minimally

acceptable number of errors

in grammar, punctuation

and/or spelling

Most sentences are

well‐ written with

varied sentence

structure and virtually

free of errors in

grammar, punctuation

and spelling

All sentences are well‐

written with varied

sentence structure and

virtually free of errors

in grammar,

punctuation and

spelling

Formatting/APA 7th Edition (e.g., Have you

checked your APA formatting especially in

terms of in-text citations? Are you trying to

sneak in a longer paper using 11-point font or

funky margins? ☺)

Does not include and/or fails

to meet most requirements;

Many errors (i.e., 2 pages,

double-spaced, 12 point

font, one-inch margins, in-

text citations)

Only includes and/or meets

a few requirements; Many

errors (i.e., 2 pages, double-

spaced, 12 point font, one-

inch margins, in-text

citations)

Includes and/or meets most

requirements; some errors

(i.e., 2 pages, double-spaced,

12 point font, one-inch

margins, in-text citations)

Includes and meets all

requirements with few

errors (i.e., 2 pages,

double-spaced, 12 point

font, one-inch margins,

in-text citations)

Includes and meets all

requirements with no

errors (i.e., 2 pages,

double-spaced, 12 point

font, one-inch margins,

in-text citations)