Submit your Final Case Study Analysis here. Be sure to review the “Expectations for Final Case Study Presentation” and “The Ten Commandments of Case Analysis” (Links to an external site.) as well as the Outline for Final Case Study Analysis (Links to an external site.).
McDonald’s for what you did for me last time
Review the rubric below.
Case Study Rubric
Case Study Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Analysis *KLO 1,3,4,,8
20 to >19.0 pts Distinguished
Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all issues identified and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s).
19 to >18.0 pts Proficient
Presents a thorough analysis of most issues identified and demonstrates an accomplished understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s).
18 to >17.0 pts Satisfactory
Presents a superficial analysis of some of the issues identified and demonstrates a somewhat acceptable understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s).
17 to >14.0 pts Emerging
Presents an incomplete analysis of the issues identified and demonstrates an inadequate understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s).
14 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory
Does not present an analysis of the issues identified or demonstrate an understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s).
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Evaluation *KLO 1,3,4
20 to >19.0 pts Distinguished
Makes appropriate and powerful connections between the issues identified and strategic concepts; Demonstrates complete command of business/strategic concepts. Supports analysis with strong arguments and evidence. Ethical issue is identified and evaluation includes recommendation which involves attention to improving business ethics.
19 to >18.0 pts Proficient
Makes appropriate connections between the issues identified and strategic concepts; Demonstrates good command of business/strategic concepts central to conducting a case analysis. Support for analysis is present. Ethical issue is identified and evaluation includes recommendation which involves attention to improving business ethics.
18 to >17.0 pts Satisfactory
Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between the issues and strategic concepts. Demonstrates limited command of business/strategic concepts central to conducting a case analysis. Identifies ethical issues related to the case.
17 to >14.0 pts Emerging
Makes little connection between the issues identified and strategic concepts
14 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory
Makes no connection between the issues identified and strategic concepts.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Recommendations *KLO 1,4,6,8
20 to >19.0 pts Distinguished
Presents detailed, specific, realistic, and appropriate recommendations clearly supported by business concepts and scholarly research. A profound strategic plan to effect a change initiative is presented.
19 to >18.0 pts Proficient
Presents specific, realistic or appropriate recommendations supported by business concepts and scholarly research. Strategic plan to effect a change initiative is presented.
18 to >17.0 pts Satisfactory
Presents realistic or appropriate recommendations supported by business concepts and scholarly research. Attempts to apply a strategic plan to effect change.
17 to >14.0 pts Emerging
Presents realistic or appropriate recommendations with little, if any, support.
14 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory
Does not present realistic or appropriate recommendations.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Research *KLO 1,8
20 to >19.0 pts Distinguished
Supplements case study with relevant and extensive research into the present situation of the company; clearly and thoroughly documents all sources of information.
19 to >18.0 pts Proficient
Supplements case study with relevant research into the present situation of the company; documents all sources of information.
18 to >17.0 pts Satisfactory
Supplements case study with limited research into the present situation of the company; provides limited documentation of sources consulted.
17 to >14.0 pts Emerging
Supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete research and documentation
14 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory
Does not supplement case study with research and documentation.
20 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Communication *KLO 1,3,4,8
20 to >19.0 pts Distinguished
Oral and written communication demonstrate a sophisticated clarity, conciseness, and correctness; includes thorough details and relevant data and information; extremely well-organized and follows format from syllabus; effective organization and development contribute to full comprehension of the case. Delivery is professional and effective.
19 to >18.0 pts Proficient
Oral and written communication are accomplished in terms of clarity and conciseness and contains only a few errors; includes sufficient details and relevant data and information; well-organized and follows format from syllabus. Delivery is professional and effective.
18 to >17.0 pts Satisfactory
Oral and written communication lack clarity or conciseness and contain numerous errors; give insufficient detail and relevant data and information; lacks organization. Attempts to follow format provided on syllabus.
17 to >14.0 pts Emerging
Oral and written communication are unfocused, rambling, or contains serious errors; lacks detail and relevant data and information; poorly organized. Does not follow format provided on syllabus.
14 to >0 pts Unsatisfactory
Oral and written communication are extremely unfocused, rambling, or contains major errors; lacks detail and relevant data and information; extremely disorganized. Does not follow format provided on syllabus.
20 pts
Total Points: 100
