Assignment 3

requirementsandrubric.docx

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Assignment 3

In assignment 3, the saga of Joseph Dunn’s leadership at Dunn’s Ski Emporium and The Deli continues. George Aitkins is getting ready to retire and Dunn has prepared for a clean transition. Dunn has hired you as a consultant to help create the transition organization.

Students will analyze the case study and then write a consultancy report applying concepts and ideas learned throughout the course. Students are expected to effectively use a wide range of the course readings in completing the paper, which means the course readings are used to support ideas and reasoning rather than as stand-alone statements.

The purpose of this assignment is two-fold. First, students will learn how to write a consultancy report and second, students will link the concepts of Dunn as a social architect, change agent, and individual to Dunn as a relationship builder.

Outcomes Met:

· develop and implement methods for establishing a constructive organizational structure and culture that fosters positive employee and employer relationships

· assess the interactions between the external environment and the organization to foster responsible and effective leadership and organizational practices

Perspective:

Students will act as a consultant hired to help Dunn address his role as a relationship builder. Interface the plan you created in Assignment #1- The Role of a Leader, with Dunn’s need to address the potential threats to workforce harmony. Emphasize his role as leader and what he can do to build a relationship with his employees so that he empowers his managers and workforce to implement his vision for the company. Students are expected to be realistic in applying the concepts from the course to expand Dunn’s environment and leadership role. Remember that in order to determine strategic direction, the leader must look inward, outward, forward and beyond.

Step 2: Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 6-8 pages in length excluding the title page and the reference page.

In writing a case study, the writing is in the third person

In your paper, respond to the following elements of leadership and plan design:

In your paper, respond to the following elements of the consultant’s report:

· Discuss the history of the companies before and after the merger to the present (including discussion of present status of businesses);

· Identify and discuss the consultant’s observations regarding Dunn’s role as social architect in the business’ future;

· Identify and discuss the consultant’s observations regarding Dunn’s 21st century leadership challenges (change, diversity, knowledge management etc.) currently in the business;

· Have the consultant draw conclusions based on the case facts and readings from the observations of Dunn’s role as social architect;

· Have the consultant draw conclusions based on the case facts and readings from the observations Dunn’s leadership challenges;

· Make recommendations for Dunn on both areas based on the conclusions as to how Dunn can meet his social architect role and leadership challenges;

· Rubric Name: Assignment #3

Criteria

Outstanding

Superior

Good

Substandard

Failure

Content: History of the Companies

1.5 points

Comprehensively discussed the history including a detailed discussion of the current status.

(1.35 - 1.5)

1.275 points

Sufficiently discussed the history but did not detail the current status sufficiently

(1.2 - 1.34)

1.125 points

Generally discussed the history but missed a few important facts and only mentions current status.

(1.05 - 1.19)

0.95 points

Attempted to discuss the history but was imprecise, vague and contained mistakes or fact and did not include current details of the company.

(0.9 - 1.04)

0 points

Failed to discuss the history of the Companies in any meaningful way.

(0 - 0.89)

Content: Identify and discuss the social architect observations

1.8 points

Identified and discussed all of the major observations with sufficient detail.

(1.62 - 1.8)

1.53 points

Identified and discussed most of the major observations with sufficient detail.

(1.44 - 1.61)

1.35 points

Identified and discussed a few of the major observations but the discussion was missing some key ideas.

(1.26 - 1.43)

1.17 points

Identified and discussed only a few observations which were of minor importance to the facts.

(1.08 - 1.16)

0 points

Failed to Identify and discuss the observations for consultant- social architect in any meaningful way.

(0 - 1.07)

Content: Identify and discuss the consultant’s observations- leadership challenges

1.8 points

Identified and discussed all of the major observations with sufficient detail.

(1.62 - 1.8)

1.53 points

Identified and discussed most of the major observations with sufficient detail.

(1.44 - 1.61)

1.35 points

Identified and discussed a few of the major observations but the discussion was missing some key ideas.

(1.26 - 1.43)

1.17 points

Identified and discussed only a few observations which were of minor importance to the facts.

(1.08 - 1.16)

0 points

Failed to identify and discuss the observations for consultant on the subject of leadership challenges in any meaningful way.

(0 - 1.07)

Content: Consultant’s conclusions based off observations for social architect

1.8 points

Identified and discussed all of the major conclusions with sufficient detail; related the conclusions to the observations.

(1.62 - 1.8)

1.53 points

Identified and discussed most of the major conclusions with sufficient detail; sufficiently related the conclusions to the observations.

(1.44 - 1.61)

1.35 points

Identified and discussed a few of the major conclusions but the discussion was missing some key ideas; attempted to relate the conclusions to the observations.

(1.26 - 1.43)

1.17 points

Identified and discussed only a few conclusions which were of minor importance to the facts; did not relate the conclusions to the observations.

(1.08 - 1.16)

0 points

Failed to identify and discuss the consultants conclusions on the subject of social architect in any meaningful way.

(0 - 1.07)

Content: Consultant’s conclusions based off observations for leadership challenges

1.8 points

Drew and discussed all of the major conclusions with sufficient detail; sufficiently related the conclusions to the observations.

(1.62 - 1.8)

1.53 points

Drew and discussed most of the major conclusions but the discussion was still missing some detail; sufficiently related the conclusions to the observations.

(1.44 - 1.61)

1.35 points

Drew and discussed several conclusions but the discussion was missing some key ideas; attempted to relate the conclusions to the observations.

(1.26 - 1.43)

1.17 points

Drew and discussed only a few conclusions which were of minor importance to the facts; did not relate the conclusions to the observations.

(1.08 - 1.16)

0 points

Failed to Draw and discussed conclusions as to leadership challenges in any meaningful way.

(0 - 1.07)

Content: Consultant’s Specific Recommendations for both areas

1.8 points

Drew and discussed all of the major recommendations based on conclusions with in-depth detail.

(1.62 - 1.8)

1.53 points

Drew most major recommendations for both areas based on the conclusions with sufficient detail.

(1.44 - 1.61)

1.35 points

Drew several major recommendations for both areas based on the conclusions with some detail.

(1.26 - 1.43)

1.17 points

Drew a few specific recommendations for both areas based on the conclusions but needed detail.

(1.08 - 1.16)

0 points

Failed to Draw and discuss specific recommendations based on the conclusions for in any meaningful way.

(0 - 1.07)

Critical Thinking/Reasoning

6 points

Concepts and ideas are fully developed. Thinking is consistent in accurately interpreting questions and material/provides solid assumptions, reasoning and evaluation with sound conclusions. Reader can easily follow the author's logic and reasoning.

(5.4 - 6)

5.1 points

Concepts and ideas are developed. Thinking is mostly consistent in accurately interpreting questions and material/ provides good assumptions, reasoning and evaluation with sound conclusions. Reader can easily follow the author's logic and reasoning.

(4.8 - 5.39 )

4.5 points

Concepts and ideas are mostly developed but may need clarification on some aspects of thinking, reasoning or evaluation. Conclusions are drawn. Reader follows the author’s logic but occasionally there are areas that are unclear.

(4.2 - 4.79)

3.9 points

Concepts and ideas are not cohesive. Misinterprets questions or material; ignores or superficially evaluates, justifies little and seldom explains reasoning; draws unwarranted conclusions. At times, the reader must attempt to determine the author's train of thought.

(3.6 - 4.19)

0 points

Concepts and ideas are not fully developed or presented in a cohesive manner. Misinterprets questions or material.

(0 – 3.59)

Application of Resources

6 points

Arguments or positions are well-supported with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.

(5.4 - 6)

5.1 points

Arguments or positions are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.

(4.8 - 5.39)

4.5 points

Arguments are more often based on opinion or unclear views than on position grounded in the readings of material or external sources of material.

(4.2 - 4.79)

3.9 points

Arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in resources; May resort to ad hominem attacks on the author instead of making meaningful application of the material.

(3.6 - 4.19)

0 points

Arguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas. Does not provide facts presented in case study.

(0 – 3.59)

Attention to Instructions

3 points

demonstrated full understanding of requirements responded to each aspect of assignment

(2.7 - 3)

2.55 points

demonstrated understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment

(2.4 - 2.69)

2.25 points

demonstrated some understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment

(2.1 - 2.39)

1.95 points

failed to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment

(1.8 - 2.09)

0 points

did not demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements

(0 – 1.79)

Writing Mechanics

3 points

Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. No errors found. No jargon used.

(2.7 - 3)

2.55 points

Adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One to three errors found.

(2.4 - 2.69 )

2.25 points

Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four to 10 errors found.

(2.1 - 2.39)

1.95 points

Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.

(1.8 - 2.09)

0 points

Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible and errors are too plentiful to count.

(0 – 1.79)

APA Style (6th ed.)

1.5 points

No APA style errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper. Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.

(1.35 - 1.5)

1.275 points

Attempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted.

(1.2 - 1.34)

1.125 points

Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted; inconsistencies in citation usage are noted throughout document.

(1.05 - 1.19)

0.95 points

Attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.

(0.9 - 1.04)

0 points

No APA style errors including all places throughout paper that source material is used is properly cited. Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.

(0 – 0.89)

Overall Score

Outstanding 27 or more

Superior 24 or more

Good 21 or more

Substandard 18 or more

Failure 0 or more

In-text citations should appear in one of the three following ways, depending on how you are incorporating the source:

1. According to Dempsey (2016), students should follow these formats for in-text citations.

2. In-text citations are parenthetical, and are placed at the end of a sentence before the terminal period (Dempsey, 2016).

3. Dempsey (2016) noted the proper usage of page numbers in citations, "Page numbers are only necessary when direct quoting or presenting a list" (p. 3). When no page numbers are present, however, Dempsey suggested the usage of "chapters, sections, and/or paragraphs" (Section 1, para. 5).

(Please note that in the last example, since Dempsey is cited two times sequentially, both references are contained within the same paragraph, and no other works by Dempsey have been introduced, it is okay to not include a date. However, it would be okay to continue citing the date.)