Business analysis

Group Assignment one 2000 words

Rubric

MGMT90141 – Assignment 1
MGMT90141 – Assignment 1
Criteria Ratings Pts
Identification and description of the problem to be analysed

2 to >1.0 pts

Competent to excellent
Very good-excellent company background is provided. Business optimization problem is clearly identified and justified. Company’s requirements / evaluation criteria have been considered to a competent-excellent requirement.

1 to >0.5 pts

Satisfactory to competent
Company background is provided to a satisfactory standard. Average description of company’s requirements or evaluation criteria.

0.5 to >0 pts

Weak to satisfactory
Problem is either poorly defined or does not exist. Lack of justification of selection and identification of the company’s requirements or evaluation criteria.
2 pts
Collection and discussion of relevant academic literatures

3 to >2.0 pts

Competent to excellent
Very good-excellent description of the method used to collect the journal articles. Very good-outstanding review of at least 10 relevant international journal articles.

2 to >1.0 pts

Satisfactory to competent
Satisfactory-good description of collection/filtering method. Basic-good review of relevant international journal articles.

1 to >0 pts

Weak to satisfactory
Poor quality research selected and/or not integrated. Lack of relevant academic literature.
3 pts
Analysis of the strength of these applications and their “value-add” to the decision making process

4 to >2.5 pts

Competent to excellent
Competent-excellent analysis of the strengths of the articles with respect to the evaluation criteria and their “value-add” to the decision making process.

2.5 to >1.0 pts

Satisfactory to competent
Less clear-average analysis of the strengths of the applications identified in the literature review process. Lack of discussion of their “value-add” to the decision making process.

1 to >0 pts

Weak to satisfactory
Undeveloped or weak analysis of the strengths of the articles with respect to the evaluation criteria. More analysis and evaluation of the strengths of the applications is required.
4 pts
Identification of the knowledge gaps and limitations, if any, and suggestions for improvements

4 to >2.5 pts

Competent to excellent
Very good-excellent analysis of the weaknesses with respect to the evaluation criteria. Suggestions for improvement are provided to a competent-excellent standard.

2.5 to >1.0 pts

Satisfactory to competent
Less clear-good analysis of the weaknesses. Suggestions for improvements are adequate. More analysis with respect to the evaluation criteria can be provided.

1 to >0 pts

Weak to satisfactory
Undeveloped or weak analysis of the knowledge gaps and limitations. Inadequate or lack of suggestions for improvements.
4 pts
Structure and Presentation. Use of appropriate language, spelling, grammar, punctuation

2 to >1.0 pts

Competent to excellent
Excellent, accurate, clear and concise written expression, grammar and spelling. Excellent structure. Accurate citations and referencing.

1 to >0.5 pts

Satisfactory to competent
Basic level or good written expression, grammar and spelling demonstrated. Paragraph structures are mostly correct and can be further improved.

0.5 to >0 pts

Weak to satisfactory
Undeveloped expression, poor grammar/spelling. Requires additional support for improvement. Paragraph structures require reworking.
2 pts
 This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLO100 – Describe the knowledge and comprehension of differ…

Describe the knowledge and comprehension of different approaches to decision making;
threshold: 3.0 pts

5 pts

Exceeds Expectations

3 pts

Meets Expectations

0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations
 This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLO101 – Analyse and evaluate the underlying assumptions an…

Analyse and evaluate the underlying assumptions and implications for practice of the different approaches;
threshold: 3.0 pts

5 pts

Exceeds Expectations

3 pts

Meets Expectations

0 pts

Does Not Meet Expectations
Total Points: 15