Skullcandy business strategy

BA 405 Written Case Presentation Evaluation Rubric Case_________________________________________________________________ Team Presenters: Task Below Expectations Meets Expectations Above Expectations Issues/Problem Definition Vague and limited understanding of the central issues of the case. Failed to define the appropriate key issues/problems raised in the case. Issues are not linked to organizational mission, internal and external analyses. Reasonable understanding of the central issues of the case. Reasonable articulation of the issues and problems raised in the case. Issues are somewhat linked to organizational mission, internal and external analyses. Sound understanding of all the central issues of the case. A clear statement and articulation of the central issues. Issues are explicitly and clearly linked to organizational mission, internal and external analyses. (0-6 points) (7-8 points) (9-10 points) Failed to successfully apply appropriate analytic tools to analyze the internal environment. Reasonable application of some analytic tools to analyze the internal environment. Sound application of appropriate tools to analyze the internal environment. In-depth use of selective quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; sound supporting logic. Reasonable financial and statistical analysis. Comprehensive and in-depth use of appropriate quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; sound and persuasive logic. In-depth financial and statistical analysis. (10% of total) Internal analysis: Application of Concepts and Integration of Case data (20% of total) Limited use of quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; limited use of supporting logic; limited financial and statistical analysis. (12-17 points) (0-11 points) External analysis: Application of Concepts and Integration of Case Data (20% of total) Failed to successfully apply appropriate analytic tools to analyze the external environment. Limited use of quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; limited use of supporting logic; limited financial and statistical analysis. (0-11 points) (18-20 points) Reasonable application of some analytic tools to analyze the external environment. Sound application of appropriate tools to analyze the external environment. In-depth use of selective quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; sound supporting logic. Reasonable financial and statistical analysis. Comprehensive and in-depth use of appropriate quantitative and qualitative case data to support analyses; sound and persuasive logic. In-depth financial and statistical analysis. (12-17 points) (18-20 points) Points Task Below Expectations Meets Expectations Above Expectations Formulation of Strategic Recommendations Recommendations are vague. Do not relate to the issues or build on the internal and external analysis. Course of action is somewhat linked to the issues. Somewhat builds on the analysis. Course of action is directly linked to the issues. Clearly builds on the analyses. Recommendations do not take an organizational perspective. Considers functional areas in isolation. Some evidence of taking an organizational perspective. Some connection to strategy and integration across a couple of functional areas. Demonstrates clear evidence of an organizational perspective. Integrates across multiple functional areas. Limited explanation of the criteria used to choose the recommendations. No priority of recommendation action items or rationale provided. Criteria used to choose the recommendations not explicit. Priority of recommendation action items provided, but limited rationale provided. (0-21 points) (22-26 points) Significant errors in word usage, sentence structure (run-ons, fragments), spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. Errors undermine credibility of content and readability. (10-11 points) Relatively free of errors in word usage, sentence structure (run-ons, fragments), spelling, punctuation, and capitalization. Mechanics do not detract from credibility of the content. (12-17 points) (30% of total) Mechanics Total Comments: Criteria used to choose course of action clearly articulated. Priority and rationale of recommendation action items provided. (27-30 points) No errors in word usage, sentence structure (run-ons, fragments), spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.