Page 1 of 2 Introduction to Management: Assignment 1 Case Study – Marking Rubric Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction 1. Case Analysis: Analyses the case identifying the key issues and/or problems. Identifies problems using evidence from the case plus theories and concepts Too brief; inability to identify issues raised by the question; may show superficial treatment; insufficient knowledge or understanding of the topic; much irrelevant material Borderline and limited understanding of key issues and problems in the case study; some gaps in addressing key issues and problems; largely descriptive and lacks analysis. Limited use of theories and concepts. Sufficient understanding of the case; some evidence of analysis of issues and problems in the case. Competent use of theories and concepts to support the analysis. Very good understanding of the case; analysis and some linking of issues and problems. Very good use of theories and concepts to support the analysis. Comprehensive and critical understanding of key issues; high level of critical analysis of the problems /issues in the case. Excellent use of theories and concepts to support the analysis. 2. Linking theory and practice to the solution:  Develops a solution to the issues or problems. Justifies the solution with evidence, management theory, approaches, concepts and/or models. Unclear solution and does not link to the issues and problems that were identified; structure is disjointed, lacks logical flow and cohesion; mostly description or listing of facts from the case study Some lack of clarity in solutions and does not link to the issues and problems that were identified, structure lacks logical flow, and is disjointed in places; reliant on restating major themes from the case. Some attempt at justifying the proposed solution. Clearly developed solution/s that are well linked; some drift from logical flow; utilises a variety of credible sources to justify the proposed solution drawing on some scholarly sources. Well-developed solution/s that are well linked; logically constructed; generally coherent and cohesive justification of the proposed solution, drawing on a range of evidence and scholarly sources Well organised, logically formulated solution/s that are well linked; sustained coherence and cohesion in the justification of the proposed solution drawing on a range of evidence and scholarly sources. 3. Recommends specific strategies to accomplish the proposed solution Actions to achieve the proposed solution do not relate to the priority issue; Does not discuss expected outcomes. Actions to achieve the proposed solution somewhat relate to the priority issue. Some discussion of expected outcomes. Actions to achieve the proposed solution relate to the priority issue. Good discussion of expected outcomes. Actions to achieve the proposed solution strongly relate to the priority issue. Very good discussion of expected outcomes. Actions to achieve the proposed solution strongly relate to the priority issue; Excellent discussion of expected outcomes. . 4. Referencing Harvard Referencing style; including in-text referencing and an alphabetised reference list. Does not meet minimum referencing guidelines; absence of, or extremely poor and inconsistent use of required referencing intext and in reference list Appropriate, though perhaps inconsistent, application of referencing guidelines both in-text and in reference list Appropriate and consistent use of referencing guidelines; some errors in-text or in reference list Appropriate and consistent use of referencing guidelines; minor errors only High level of consistency and appropriate use of all referencing guidelinesPage 2 of 2 5. Professional level of presentation, case study structure with subheadings; appropriate academic level of writing Poorly presented; does not follow case study structure; many errors in spelling, grammar and vocabulary; unclear expression; many overly short paragraphs, bullet points and lists. You are encouraged to use the university services to improve your academic writing and referencing skills. Presentation requires some improvements, mostly follows case study structure, some errors in spelling, grammar and vocabulary; some errors in expression; some overly short paragraphs and/or bullet points and lists. Presentation of an adequate academic standard with minor errors only; follows case study structure; generally clearly expressed logically constructed paragraphs with some evidence of critical analysis. Presentation is of good academic standard; follows case study structure; clear and fluent academic writing skills; logical flow of sentences and paragraphs with critical analysis evident. Presentation is of a high academic and professional standard; follows case study structure; clear, fluent writing skills; as a whole, carefully crafted, cohesive, convincing and critical analysis of the case. .