Advanced Strategy Case Assignment – City University

The purpose of a case analysis assignment is to provide students with an opportunity to apply concepts from the class to real-world situations. The case analysis should be brief and concise, approximately six to eight pages, double spaced, plus a title page and a reference page. Please be sure to incorporate theories or concepts from class or other readings and reference them appropriately.

Advanced Strategy Case Assignment – City University

After uploading your assignment to this Blackboard Assignment check the box next to Plagiarism Tools to add your paper to the Global Reference Database. Adding your paper to the Global Reference Database will project your intellectual property from future plagiarism at CityU and other institution that use SafeAssign by insuring that you are given credit for original work.

ORDER THIS PAPER

Advanced Strategy Case Assignment
Advanced Strategy Case Assignment

Also, you are submitting your paper to SafeAssign (plagiarism prevention tool) to make sure you have properly attributed your sources. You have two attempts to submit your paper. You can review your first submission, make corrections and then submit for final grading by your instructor.

  • By submitting this paper, you agree: (1) that you are submitting your paper to be used and stored as part of the SafeAssign™ services in accordance with the Blackboard Privacy Policy; (2) that your institution may use your paper in accordance with your institution’s policies; and (3) that your use of SafeAssign will be without recourse against Blackboard Inc. and its affiliates.
Below Standard Approaching Standard At Standard Exceeds Standard
Clear explanation of key strategic issues
Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 27.496 (13.748%)
Shows no understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. Executive summary missing.
Points Range: 27.5 (13.75%) – 34.496 (17.248%)
Shows some understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. Executive summary missing.
Points Range: 34.5 (17.25%) – 37.496 (18.748%)
Shows adequate knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. Executive summary not effective.
Points Range: 37.5 (18.75%) – 40 (20.00%)
Shows superior knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. Effective Executive Summary.
Valid arguments; accurate financial data with relevant supportive detail
Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 27.496 (13.748%)
Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were not identified, analyzed, or supported.
Points Range: 27.5 (13.75%) – 34.496 (17.248%)
Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were not clearly identified, analyzed, and supported.
Points Range: 34.5 (17.25%) – 37.496 (18.748%)
Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were partially identified, analyzed, and supported.
Points Range: 37.5 (18.75%) – 40 (20.00%)
Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were clearly identified, analyzed, and supported.
Appropriate analysis, evaluation, synthesis for the specific industry identified
Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 27.496 (13.748%)
Analysis of key change drivers and the underlying issues were not identified.
Points Range: 27.5 (13.75%) – 34.496 (17.248%)
Analysis of key change drivers and the underlying issues were partially identified.
Points Range: 34.5 (17.25%) – 37.496 (18.748%)
Analysis of key change drivers and the underlying issues were identified clearly.
Points Range: 37.5 (18.75%) – 40 (20.00%)
Analysis of key change drivers and the underlying issues were identified in an exemplary manner.
Conclusions and recommendations are congruent with strategic analysis
Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 27.496 (13.748%)
Effective recommendations and/or plans of action not provided.
Points Range: 27.5 (13.75%) – 34.496 (17.248%)
Effective recommendations and/or plans of action were partially provided. Specific data or facts were not referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions.
Points Range: 34.5 (17.25%) – 37.496 (18.748%)
Effective recommendations and/or plans of action were clearly provided. Specific data or facts were occasionally referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions.
Points Range: 37.5 (18.75%) – 40 (20.00%)
Effective recommendations, solutions, and/or plans of action were provided in an exemplary manner. Specific data or facts were referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions.
Proper organization, professional writing, and logical flow of analysis. APA format
Points Range: 0 (0.00%) – 27.496 (13.748%)
Key points were not identified and stated. No rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax need improvement.
Points Range: 27.5 (13.75%) – 34.496 (17.248%)
Key points were not identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax need improvement.
Points Range: 34.5 (17.25%) – 37.496 (18.748%)
Key points were partially identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Adequate grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax.
Points Range: 37.5 (18.75%) – 40 (20.00%)
Key points were clearly identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Excellent grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax.