MNG81001 Management Communication Assessment 2: Evaluation/Comparison Memo (25%) Format: Memo format Audience: Your Boss Length: 2-3 pages Due Date: Friday, 7 April by 9:00 am Writing Task As discerning individuals, we frequently engage in an evaluative process. For example, before we make any major purchase, be it a house, a car, or a computer, we evaluate/compare if this purchase makes the most sense based on our own perceptions of value for money. Another example of how we engage in the evaluation/comparison process has to deal with the employment process; is one candidate better suited than the other? Why or why not? For this assignment, you will engage in a thorough evaluation/comparison and write an internal document (memo) based on your findings. Your boss, the Food and Beverage Manager for the XYZ restaurant, is quite concerned as business has dropped off since a similar restaurant opened nearby. In order to investigate if this new restaurant is a real threat, you have been asked to dine at the establishment and write a restaurant evaluation. The aim of the evaluation is to identify if this competitor is a threat or not to your business. The purpose of this assignment is to teach you the skills of writing an effective evaluation/comparison; the activity of writing a restaurant critique is just one means to achieve this aim. We could have just as easily asked you to evaluate the user-friendliness of a website, the merits of one automobile’s safety features over another, or the best lap top computer for the money; hopefully, this activity will be a bit more fun while meeting our objectives. There are five steps that you need to complete for this assignment: Whenever you are asked to evaluate something, the first step is to identify appropriate criteria (note: criteria is plural; criterion is singular). Your selected criteria will be the standard by which the specific features of the restaurant you review will be evaluated. As such, your selected criteria needs to reflect the desired standard; for example, Friendly Service; Good Value for Money, Warm Ambiance, etc. If you look at the example below, you can see that the writer has identified categories for his evaluation; but he has not established criteria as there is no standard of judgment. Please note that the following example is what you SHOULD NOT do: 1. The Sole Proprietor 118 Highland Street Melbourne Atmosphere: Nautical 8 Variety 8 Quality 8 Service 9 Portions 8 Overall 9 TOTAL 50 Great Review: When I first came to Melbourne, the Sole, as it's commonly known, was a bit out of my price range and not quite the right hangout for me. Now I'm a little older and have a little disposable income... it's a great spot for late night drinks and a good snack. On the night of 4 Feb 2017, a friend and I came for a nice sit down dinner. Which is not to say that the bar area is not thoroughly enjoyable - meals can be enjoyed at the bar, and selections from their raw and sushi bar can be ordered after 10 p.m. The young professional crowd in Melbourne can "sea and be seen" there, as the current ad campaign goes, and the famous "Sole Bowl" is a great specialty drink. For dinner I ordered the Shogun sushi platter and the Sole sushi combo platter with a side of spinach and garlic (very yummy for $28). The fish was very high quality, and all the food was superb. Great drinks, great atmosphere, decent prices - it's no wonder the place is always packed! There was only one dark spot in the evening. The staff has very, very responsive service, which stumbled slightly by making my friend and I wait far too long before ordering. The wait staff (both waiters) and the manager were very apologetic, as it was a very busy night, but they more than made up for any inconvenience with a complimentary dessert. The Sole earns its top spot in the ratings. 2. You will need to visit the selected restaurant at least once but preferably twice for the same meal (breakfast, lunch, or dinner). While there, take notes about the strengths and weaknesses of the operation based on your selected criteria. Each student in your tutorial will need to select a different restaurant to avoid duplication, but you can certainly join one another for the meals! 3. Based on your evaluation, you will need to inform your boss if this competitor is a threat or not. Based on the relevant criteria, how does this establishment compare to yours using the same criteria? Your conclusion will form the thesis for your evaluation. Please note that your task is to evaluate, not make recommendations. 4. You will need to draft a memo of your evaluation. Referring again to the restaurant review example on the previous page, please note the heavy reliance on description; while you want to provide specific examples, your boss does not need to have every minor nuance about the restaurant described in detail. The style that you want to use will focus on being clear and concise, not flowery or overly-descriptive. 5. Assessment #3 is due by 9:00 am on Friday, 7 April and will be marked on the basis of the attached marking guide. PRIOS Purpose: the purpose for this document is to evaluate if the selected restaurant either meets or does not meet the stated criteria Readers: your boss Information: based on primary information gathered from dining at restaurant Organization: direct order approach (start with you most significant criterion, etc.) Style: Formal. Be sure to proofread carefully to ensure that there are no sentence-level errors such as spelling mistakes, wrong word choice, incorrect punctuation, etc. Channel choice: Written document Document design: Memo format Timing/length: Due Friday, 7 April by 9:00 am/2-3 pages Assessment #2 Marking Guide Overall Purpose of Document (20 points) Does this document achieve its primary purpose? Is this document informative and persuasive? Has the writer adequately addressed all reader concerns? Has the writer adequately developed his/her thesis? Does the document follow the conventions of an effective memo with regard to format considerations? Audience Considerations (20 points) Does this document take into account the needs of the audience? Does this document provide adequate information for the reader? Does the writer thoroughly address any potential questions from the reader? Organizational Structure (20 points) Does the writer use a direct order approach? Is there a clear introduction, body, and conclusion? Does the introduction include a clear purpose, thesis, and preview? Are there clear organizational signposts including internal headings? Does the writer reiterate the thesis and preview in the conclusion? Does the conclusion include a polite closure? Paragraph Level Issues (20 points) Does each paragraph start with a clear and persuasive topic sentence based on a specific criterion? Does the writer support his/her assertions with specific and relevant examples? Sentence Level Issues (20 points) Are there grammatical or spelling errors that distract the reader and affect the writer’s credibility? Is the language used correct, concise, and precise? Is the language appropriate based on the expertise of the reader? Final Mark out of 100 points