In addressing managerial implications, please answer one of the following questions. i. "So what? What does my post (e.g. relevant personal experience or relevant non-course reading outside source) mean relative to this module’s discussion question?” ii. "What issues or questions does my post (e.g. relevant personal experience or relevant non-course reading outside source) raise for further discussion?' iii. “How might I use my post (e.g. relevant personal experience or relevant non-course reading outside source) to challenge classmates?” Be sure to include another student's statement, and then challenge it. iv. “How might I use my post (e.g. relevant personal experience or relevant non-course reading outside source) to build on the comment(s) of another student?” Be sure to include another student's statement, and then react. Rubric for Discussion Board Meets Expectations Approaches Expectations Below Expectations No Evidence 3pts 2pts 1pt 0pts Course One post: a) links concept to course reading b) uses managerial implications One post: a) links concept to course reading b) does not use managerial implications (or vice versa) Posts show no evidence of: a) linking concept to course reading b) the use of managerial implications Did not participate. Outside Tie-in One post: a) links concept to cited non-course reading material or personal experience b) uses managerial implications One post: a) links concept to cited non-course reading material or personal experience b) does not use managerial implications (or vice versa) Posts show no evidence of: a) linking concept to non-course reading material or personal experience b) the use of managerial implications Did not participate. Writing Quality Writing is well organized, clear, concise, and focused; no errors. Some significant but not major errors or omissions in writing organization, focus, and clarity. Numerous significant but not major errors or omissions in writing organization, focus, and clarity. Did not participate. of Posts Initial post on or before deadline (Thursday). Initial post 1 day late (Friday). Initial post 2 or more days late (Saturday or Sunday). Did not participate (W2,4.5,7 =15 Pt) (W2,4,5,7 = 10 Pt) (W2,4,5,7 = 5 Pt) 0 Pt
Rubric for Case Grading Grading Dimension Level of Quality Point Value Poor Average Excellent Strategic Component A. Problem Identification Case analysis does not demonstrate clear identification of the problem(s). Instead a rambling description of facts and data is presented Symptom(s) of the problem may instead be identified. Moderately rambling statement of the problem is made with the inclusion of extraneous facts and data. Clear and crisp identification of the problem(s) is stated. 10% B. Analysis of the Problem The section communicates a superficial grasp of the economics (or other relevant elements) of the problem, with corresponding lack of relevant detail. The economics (or other relevant elements) of the problem are identified. The level of aggregation may not clearly fit the context or the rationale may lack clarity and necessary detail. Complete and concise description of the economics (or other relevant elements) of the problem, with appropriate level of detail. 10% C. Alternative Solutions The section a) displays no alternative solutions and/or b) lacks a sufficient quantity of alternative solutions and/or c) displays alternative solutions having no bearing on the problem A moderate improvement in the level analysis is made, compared to the cell shown on the left. Complete, logical and crisply-written alternative solutions are presented. 10%
D. Pros and Cons of Alternatives Superficial evaluation is done of the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. The section fails to demonstrate mastery. A moderate improvement in the level analysis is made, compared to the cell shown on the left. Complete and crisply-written analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative is displayed. 10% E. Conclusion(s) No conclusion is drawn or the one presented does not list key take-aways. A moderate improvement in the level analysis is made, compared to the cell shown on the left. An over-arching conclusion is drawn from the pros and cons. Key are provided. 10% F. Recommended Action(s) The recommendations may be too vague, do not provide enough detail or are inadequate to address the strategic issues identified. The recommendations are fitted to issues but may not be clearly and concisely described. There may be some ambiguity that could inhibit their evaluation and implementation. The recommendations are fitted to specifically identified issues and are clearly and concisely described - lending themselves to evaluation and implementation. 10% G. Ethical and Social Responsibility The content is either missing or too generic and/or poorly defined to provide a guiding principle to the firm. A moderate improvement in the level analysis is made, compared to the cell shown on the left. The content provides inspiring and compelling direction to the firm in terms of how to act on the recommendations and still remain a conscientious citizen within its environment. 10% _________ _________ _________ _________ ____ Written Component H. Documentation & Formatting A quality case analysis will include: -Citations which are tied to references or a bibliography. Bibliographies / references by 7%
2. Jones, G. 2008. How the Best of the Best Get Better and Better, Harvard Business Review, 86(6): 123-127. Discussion: Post @ DQ Wk +++++ Session 13 – Wk 4/1717 Leadership: Careers and Networking II : 1. Outliers, Introduction, Chapters 3 - 5 2. Uzzi, B. & Dunlap, S. 2005. How to build your network. Harvard Business Review, 83(12):53-60. Course Syllabus Page 10 3. Ready, D.A. et.al. 2010. Are you a High Potential? Harvard Business Review, 88(6): 78-84. 4. Schwartz, T. May 2000. Life/Work, Fast Company, 330, 332, 334. No Discussion nor Written Assignments Due +++++ Session 14 – Wk Leadership: Leveraging Resources to Create Value : Outliers (Chapters 6 – Epilogue) Discussion: Post @ DQ Wk +++++ +++++ 1. Source: Picken, J. and Dess, G. 1997. Critical: Seven Common Strategic Mistakes that Derail Even the Smartest Companies. : Irwin Professional Publishing.