MGT3059 Week 2 Project Rubric Course: MGT3059-Operations Management SU01

Buy ready-to-submit essays. No Plagiarism Guarantee

Note: Every paper is crafted by human writers to ensure authenticity and originality.

MGT3059 Week 2 Project Rubric Course: MGT3059-Operations Management SU01

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion Score

Identified

inefficiencies in

the way that

human

resources are

utilized in a

business at

which you have

worked in the

past or with

which you are

familiar.

/ 5Did not identify inefficiencies in the

way that human

resources are

utilized.

Described human

resource utilization

in a way that

indicated that the

current practices

were as efficient as

possible.

Described human

resource

utilizations that are

not clearly

inefficient.

Identified

inefficiencies in the

way that human

resources are

utilized in a

business at which

you have worked in

the past or with

which you are

familiar.

Provided insightful

observations as to

why human

resources are not

being utilized

efficiently.

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-6) 6 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (7) 7 points

Proficient (B Range) (8) 8 points

Exemplary (A Range) (9-10) 10 points

Criterion Score

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-6) 6 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (7) 7 points

Proficient (B Range) (8) 8 points

Exemplary (A Range) (9-10) 10 points

Criterion Score

Proposed

solutions to

eliminate

inefficiency in

terms of the use

of human

resources.

/ 10Did not suggest solutions that

might eliminate the

inefficiencies.

Proposed solutions

that would actually

decrease efficiency.

Proposed solutions

that did not appear

to be directly

related to the

inefficiency under

discussion.

Proposed solutions

that might

eliminate the

inefficiency in

terms of the use of

human resources.

Offered thoughtful

solutions to the

inefficiency

problem in human

resource

deployment.

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion Score

Defined

changes to job

designs that

might be

needed to

implement the

proposed

solutions.

/ 5Did not suggest job design changes that

might be needed.

Described changes

to job designs that

would make it less

likely to be able to

improve efficiency.

Described changes

to job design that

are not clearly

related to proposed

solutions.

Defined changes to

job designs that

might be needed to

implement the

proposed solutions.

Provided clever and

convincing

proposals to

change job designs.

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion Score

Identified

changes to

work

measurement

that might be

needed to

implement the

proposed

solutions.

/ 5Did not define changes to work

measurement that

might be needed.

Identified work

measurement

changes that would

lessen the ability to

implement the

proposed solutions.

Suggested changes

to work

measurement that

would not have an

impact on the

success of the

proposed solutions.

Identified changes

to work

measurement that

might be needed to

implement the

proposed solutions.

Offered changes to

work measurement,

including a clear

rationale for each

such change.

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-6) 6 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (7) 7 points

Proficient (B Range) (8) 8 points

Exemplary (A Range) (9-10) 10 points

Criterion Score

Explained if and

why changes to

compensation

might be

needed to

implement the

proposed

solutions.

/ 10Did not discuss changes in

compensation.

Provided irrational

explanations as to

why compensation

changes might be

needed.

Did not offer a

clear rationale as to

whether or not

changes to

compensation

might be justified.

Explained if and

why changes to

compensation

might be needed to

implement the

proposed solutions.

Offered insightful

analysis as to why

compensation

changes might be

needed.

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion ScoreCriteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion Score

Communication:

Use of tone,

word choice,

audience,

transitions, and

progression of

ideas.

/ 5

Mechanics: Use

of grammar,

sentence

structure, and

spelling.

/ 5

Submission

contained no

discernible overall

intent in author’s

selection of ideas.

Submission

contained random

presentation of

ideas, which

prevented

understanding the

majority of author’s

overall intent.

Ideas presented in

a way that forced

the reader to make

repeated inferences

in order to identify

and follow the

author’s overall

intent.

The reader could

follow the author’s

overall intent as

stated.

The writer’s overall

argument and

language were clear

and tightly focused,

leaving the reader

with no room for

confusion about

author’s intent.

Errors in basic

writing conventions

were sufficiently

numerous to

prevent reader

comprehension.

Errors in basic

writing conventions

were sufficiently

numerous to

prevent reader

comprehension of

majority of the

work.

Errors in basic

writing conventions

interfered with, but

did not prevent,

reader

comprehension.

The reader noticed

a few errors in

basic writing

conventions but

these few errors

did not interfere

with reader

comprehension.

Test was basically

error free, so that a

reader would have

to purposely search

to find any errors

that may be

present.

Total / 50

Criteria No Submission 0 points

Emerging (F through D Range) (1-2) 2 points

Satisfactory (C Range) (3) 3 points

Proficient (B Range) (4) 4 points

Exemplary (A Range) (5) 5 points

Criterion Score

Academic/APA/

PPT Formatting

Use of citations,

references, and

structural

formatting

including title

page, running

head, page

numbers,

headings, title

slides, graphics,

data, notes

section, (as

appropriate),

introduction,

and conclusion.

/ 5No attempt at Academic/APA/PP

T formatting in

presentation.

Academic/APA/PP

T format

attempted, but

errors were

significant,

preventing

comprehension of

message.

Academic/APA/PP

T format attempted

but errors were

distracting.

Used

Academic/APA/PP

T format

accurately. Errors

noticeable but

minor.

Used

Academic/APA/PP

T format

proficiently. Work

basically error free.

Overall Score

No Submission 0 points minimum

Emerging (F through D Range) 1 point minimum

Satisfactory (C Range) 35 points minimum

Proficient (B Range) 40 points minimum

Exemplary (A Range) 45 points minimum