Component

Fail (<4)

D (4-4.99)

C (5-5.99)

B (6-6.99)

A (7-10)

Weight

Vision, Values and Direction.  

o Provides an overview of the company’s vision, values and sustainability/CSR stance and its overall strategy and evaluates the extent to which these have adequately driven the firm’s decision making

Reveals little knowledge of the purpose of these elements

Provides some description of the purpose of these elements and relates to company

Is able to articulate the purpose of these elements and provides linkage to company experience

Provides an evaluation of the purpose of these elements relative to decision making; examines issues of alignment or change

Evaluates and synthesizes purpose of these elements and alignment to, or changes in, company’s decision-making and strategy

20%

Industry Analysis.  

o Analyses industry structure using appropriate theoretical tools drawn from prior learning including insight into the basis of competition between the firms

o Uses Airline data to support assertions

Reveals little knowledge or evidence of these analyses

Has some evidence of these analyses but has severe weaknesses:

- missing

- listed without any explanation

- lack of theoretical framework

Has not covered all analyses, has made logical errors, or could have developed or explained analyses more coherently

Has covered all analyses but one or more is not fully developed or consistent

Excellent - all components covered; applies appropriate theory; makes full use of Airline data

10%

Analysis of Capabilities.  

o Analyses company's internal capabilities as they relate to implementing chosen strategy (examines source of capabilities encompassing functional areas of HR, Marketing, Operations; Finance and Accounting)

o Uses Airline data to support assertions

Reveals little knowledge or evidence of these analyses

Has some evidence of these analyses but has severe weaknesses:

- missing

- listed without any explanation

- lack of theoretical framework

Has not covered all analyses, has made logical errors, or could have developed or explained analyses more coherently

Has covered all analyses but one or more is not fully developed

Excellent - all components covered; applies appropriate theory; makes full use of Airline data

20%

Performance Results.  

o Describes main firm performance over time and relative to others (including but not limited to comparing actual performance with Balanced Scorecard targets outlined in Strategic Plan, etc)  

o Visual presentation of data (e.g. use of any diagrams, charts, tables etc) clearly illustrate points made

Little if any data provided on firm performance

Limited, incomplete discussion of firm performance.  Visual presentations of data are missing data or are flawed

Provides some discussion of performance relative to Balanced Scorecard.  Visual presentations of data illustrate most key points clearly

Analysis of performance reveals understanding of interdependencies between different indicators in the Balanced Scorecard.

Compares some actual performance to targeted objectives.  Visual presentations of data illustrate points clearly

Analysis of performance uses a wide range of indicators, revealing sophisticated understanding of the interdependencies between different indicators in the Balanced Scorecard. Has compared actual performance to targeted objectives.  Visual presentations of data effectively communicate key points

5%

Diagnosis of Performance

o Provides an overall assessment of the relative success of the company

o Offers clear explanations of why hit/missed main strategic objectives, (including any managerial team disagreements).  

o Examines rationale for change over time and evaluates the likely impacts of change on the company (including responses to or effects of critical incidents)

Shows little understanding of these components of the performance diagnosis; little evidence they have been considered

Has attempted to diagnose company performance but analysis is incomplete, assumptions missing, and analysis offers little insight; little use of theoretical perspectives drawn from across student prior learning; may tend to be descriptive

Has either not covered main components of the performance diagnosis or could have developed or explained analyses more coherently; some attempt to draw on theoretical perspectives from across student prior learning but limited application

Has covered main components of the performance diagnosis but one or more is not fully developed or consistent; is able to evaluate major issues through theoretical perspectives drawn from across student prior learning

Excellent – main components of performance diagnosis are covered.  Reveals sophisticated understanding and analysis of company’s performance; provides a synthesis in explanation, reflecting sophisticated use of theoretical perspectives drawn from across student prior learning

20%

Diagnosis of ONE Critical Incident

o Briefly describes the selected critical incident

o Evaluates decision-making leading to the selected course of action, the process applied to selection, dealing with disagreement within the team in relation to the critical incident and outcome

Shows little understanding of the critical incident or fails to address the critical incident requirement

Has identified one critical incident, but efforts to detail selection, decision-making, dealing with disagreement within the team offer limited insight

Has identified one critical incident but has not covered all the components satisfactorily or could have developed further and offered better explanation

Has covered all components, but one or more is not fully developed or is not consistent with the selected course of action. Reflection on outcome

Excellent – all components of the selected critical incident are addressed. Reveals a clear decision-making process, conflict resolution protocol and reflection on outcome of the decision outcome

20%

Future Plans

o Briefly outlines plans for next 4 quarters.  

o Describes the changes to firm's overall direction and policies and explains why

Shows little understanding of these components; little evidence they have been considered

Has attempted to outline future plans but plans are vague and not well considered

Has either not covered all components of the future plans or could have developed or explained future plans more coherently

Has covered all components of the future plans but one or more part is not fully developed or consistent

Excellent -all components of the future plans are covered. Reveals sophisticated understanding and analysis of what the company should do next to enhance performance

X 0.5 =

Achieves Standards of Professional Presentation

(Note: we are not judging you on your verbal use of English, only your overall organization of the presentation. We realize that for many students making a presentation can be daunting and therefore ask you to contact us during the module to discuss appropriate methods for making the presentation)

Performance in the following meets a professional level for business communication – up to two marks deduction for each area of weakness

Structure and Organization:

o Had a strong opening or introduction with ‘Signposts’, a clear flow and logical transitions, between the points made and between speakers

o All team members participated equally as a team

Communication with the Audience:

o The team handled questions well.

o Slides were generally clear, free from error and informative

o Overall, the team was able to communicate its message

Deduction given

(up to 10 marks):