Strategic Dissection
In this exercise, students will identify strategies presented in this course that are currently being used by the organization discussed in the mission and vision paper. The strategies should be identified and discussed at corporate, business, and functional levels.
By completing this assignment, students will meet the outcome(s):
- evaluate the outcomes of selected strategies to determine their success and impact on the achievement of an organization’s vision and mission
Required Elements to include in Strategic Dissection:
- Identify strategies
- Discuss strategies used at the corporate, business and function levels using the concepts learned in the course.
- Demonstrate critical thinking in the assessment.
Required Formatting of Paper:
- This report should be double spaced, 12-point font, and two to three pages in length excluding the title page and reference page;
- Title page with your name, the course name, the date, and instructor’s name;
- This paper should be written in the third person. No script should contain the words œI or we;
- Include references with at least one reference other than the textbook;
- Use APA formatting for in-text citations and reference page. You are expected to paraphrase and not use quotes. Deductions will be taken when quotes are used and found to be unnecessary;
- Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.
Click here to have a similar A+ quality paper done for you by one of our writers .
Grading Rubric for Strategic Dissection (10%)
|
Outstanding |
Superior |
Good |
Substandard |
Failure |
|
|
|
|
3.50 |
2.98 |
2.63 |
2.28 |
1.93 |
|
|
Critical thinking/reasoning |
demonstrates a high degree of critical thinking, is consistent in accurately interpreting questions & material; provides solid assumptions, reasoning & claims; thorough analysis & evaluation with sound conclusions |
shows good critical thinking; accurately interprets most questions & material; usually identifies relevant arguments/reasoning/claims; offers good analysis & evaluation with fairly sound conclusions |
shows occasional critical thinking; questions & material is at times accurately interpreted; arguments/reasoning/claims are occasionally explained; offers fair analysis & evaluation with a conclusion |
shows little critical thinking, misinterprets questions or material; ignores or superficially evaluates; justifies little and seldom explains reasoning; draws unwarranted conclusions |
lacks critical thinking consistently offers biased interpretations; ignores or superficially evaluates; argues using poor reasoning, and/or unwarranted claims |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
3.50 |
2.98 |
2.63 |
2.28 |
1.93 |
|
|
|
Application of concepts/development |
arguments or positions are well-supported with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implication and extensions of the material and concepts |
arguments or positions are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate student’s understanding of the material and concepts |
arguments are more often based on opinion or unclear views than on position grounded in the readings of material or external sources of material |
arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; student may resort to ad hominem attacks on the author instead of making meaningful application of the material |
a meaningful attempt to explain or support ideas does not exist |
|
|
1.50 |
1.28 |
1.13 |
0.98 |
0.83 |
|
|
|
Attention to instructions |
demonstrated full understanding of requirements responded to each aspect of assignment |
demonstrated understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment |
demonstrated some understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment |
failed to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment |
did not demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements |
|
|
|
1.00 |
0.85 |
0.75 |
0.65 |
0.55 |
|
|
Clarity, including grammar |
writing is clear and easy to follow; grammar and spelling are all correct; formatting gives a professional look and adds to readability |
most ideas are presented clearly; occasional spelling and/or grammar issues |
wordy; some points require rereading to understand fully; more than an occasional spelling and/or grammar |
unclear and difficult to understand; frequent spelling and grammar issues |
largely incomprehensible writing/poorly written in terms of mechanics and structure |
|
|
0.50 |
0.43 |
0.38
|
