Please write a case analysis

Far Exceeds Standards

Exceeds Standards

Meets Standards

Fails to Meet Standards

1. Identification of Critical Issues and Factors; Depth of Analysis

I will consider how detailed your analysis is, how far into depth you go, and whether you address all of the existing and critical issues in the case.

Identifies all of the critical issues. Thoroughly discusses, evaluates, and analyzes each issue, providing convincing and supported arguments.

Identifies most of the critical issues. Discusses, evaluates, and analyzes each managerial issue, providing convincing and supported arguments, but could have gone into more depth.

Identifies some of the critical issues. Discusses, evaluates, and analyzes some of the managerial issues, providing somewhat convincing and supported arguments, but should have gone into much more depth.

Identifies few, if any, critical issues. Fails to discuss, evaluate, and analyze each issue, does not provide convincing or supported arguments, and lacks any significant degree of depth.

Section 1 Score:

(17-18)

(15-16)

(13-14)

(12 or less)

2. Analysis of the current competitive environment

Identifies all of the parties impacted by the issue. Thoroughly discusses, evaluates, and analyzes the impact, based on Porter’s Five Forces Model: the threat of substitute products/services, established rivals, and new entrants; and the bargaining power of suppliers and of customers.

Identifies most of the parties impacted by the issue. Thoroughly discusses, evaluates, and analyzes the impact, based on Porter’s Five Forces Model, but could have gone more into depth.

Identifies some of the parties impacted by the issue. Discusses, evaluates, and analyzes a few of the impacts, based on Porter’s Five Forces Model, but should have gone much more into depth.

Identifies few of the parties impacted by the issue. Does not discuss, evaluate, or analyze the impact, based on Porter’s Five Forces Model.

Section 2 Score:

(17-18)

(15-16)

(13-14)

(12 or less)

3: Generates Alternatives and Recommendations;

Generates several high-quality alternative solutions; Recommendations are well- argued and based on thorough analysis.

Generates two or more high- quality alternative solutions; Recommendations are fully supported by the analysis.

Generates one or two alternative solutions; Recommendations are not fully supported by the analysis.

Proposes no alternative solution(s).

Section 3 Score:

(17-18)

(15-16)

(13-14)

(12 or less)

4: Develops a Plan of Action for Implementing Recommendations

Develops a thorough, plausible plan for implementing the proposed solutions; Discusses potential problems with the implementation and develops a variety of quality suggestions for minimizing them.

Develops an adequate plan for implementing the proposed solutions; Discusses potential problems with the implementation and develops a few suggestions for minimizing them.

Acknowledges potential problems with implementation, but does not adequately address mitigation; The link between the problem and the action plan is still logically consistent.

Does not develop an action plan; or it is incomplete, vague," or unrealistic for implementing the proposed solution.

Section 4 Score:

(17-18)

(15-16)

(13-14)

(12 or less)

5: Globalization and Cultural Diversity

Considers many multidisciplinary perspectives employed to address global issues; Describes global interdependence and its impacts very well; and Articulates a complete understanding of cultural differences.

Considers a minimum of 2-3 multidisciplinary perspectives employed to address global issues; Adequately describes global interdependence and its impacts; Articulates an understanding of some of the cultural differences.

Considers only 1 multidisciplinary perspective employed to address global issues; Attempts to describe global interdependence and its impacts; Exhibits a limited understanding of cultural differences.

Does not consider multidisciplinary perspectives to address global issues; Does not adequately describe global interdependence and its impacts; Exhibits no understanding of cultural differences.

Section 5 Score:

(17-18)

(15-16)

(13-14)

(12 or less)

Turnitin.com Similarity Rating

Student submits a paper that scores a low similarity rating (below 25%), indicating a high degree of originality of the student’s work.

Student submits a paper that scores a mid-range similarity rating (between 25 and 50%)

Student submits a paper that scores a rather high similarity rating (between 50% and 75%).

Such papers may be investigated and administrative action may be taken.

Student submits a paper that scores a high similarity rating (above 75%), suggesting that there could be an issue with plagiarism.

Such papers will be investigated and administrative action may be taken.

Turnitin Rating:

No points deducted

One point deducted for each percentage 25%

Overall Quality of Written Communication

Student presented a well- written, coherent analysis that was free from any grammar and/or spelling errors.

Student presented a well-written, coherent analysis that contained a few minor errors.

Student presented a somewhat coherent, but lacking analysis that contained several minor errors.

Student presented an incoherent analysis that contained several major errors.

Communication Score:

5 points deducted

10 points deducted

20 Points deducted

Total Score (out of 100):