As the innovation consultant for your selected business, your first project is to assist the organization in improving its performance by analyzing its challenges and successes. Guiding your team, you must either generate a new product, service, or process, or update an existing product, service, or process as a resolution to the organization’s current challenge.
Preparation
Perform a SWOT analysis for your selected business and use it to:
- Determine the need for change in your selected business.
- Identify 1 challenge within the business that you will address as part of your business plan.
Assessment Deliverable
Write a 525- to 700-word report for the department manager in which you:
- Include the SWOT analysis you conducted and your completed SWOT table.
- Analyze the current challenge you will address as part of your business plan.
- Justify how you determined the current challenge you will address as part of your business plan.
- Propose a solution (e.g., the introduction of a new or updated process, product, or service) for your business’s challenge. Note: This proposed solution will be used throughout the course assessments.
- Justify the implications of your recommended solution to enhance organizational outcomes.
- Incorporate at least three properly cited sources with in-text citations from peer-reviewed Journal Articles (you will likely need more than three) in addition to any other non peer-reviewed references in accordance with Announcements #2, #4 and #6.
- Review the Find or Create a SWOT Analysis page and Business Source Complete database from the University Library for guidance on working with SWOT analyses.
Remember that title and reference pages do not count toward word minimums.
Cite sources to support your summative assessment.
Format citations and references according to APA guidelines.
TIP 1: BEFORE STARTING THIS ASSIGNMENT, REVIEW THE GRADING CRITERIA IN THE RUBRIC PAYING PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE PERCENTAGE OF THE GRADE FOR EACH SECTION.
TIP 2: For any claims that you make in your deliverable that are not common knowledge, make sure you properly cite where that statement/information came from. This is how all APA assignments should be done. This is what makes your documents academically credible; shows that your statements are supported by research (not uninformed opinions); and demonstrate an appropriate amount of rigor. So, the likelihood is that you will need more than three references.
TIP 3: Make sure to use in-text citations FOR EVERY REFERENCE to link your references to the statements you are citing.
I want to highlight some frequent mistakes I generally see in my classes as soon as possible to set everyone up for success for this course.
- All aspects of any briefing/paper must be in APA.
- This includes Title Page, Opening para, Body (with section headings), conclusion and reference page.
- Consistent margins/fonts/etc., proper in-text citations, and a properly formatted reference page.
- All briefings/papers must have at least three PEER-REVIEWED sources from an ACADEMIC JOURNAL.
- Using peer-reviewed sources enhances academic credibility by ensuring that the information presented has undergone rigorous evaluation by experts in the field. Peer review involves subjecting scholarly work to scrutiny by other professionals with relevant expertise before it is published. This process helps to maintain high standards of quality and reliability in academic literature by verifying the accuracy, validity, and significance of the research findings. As a result, citing peer-reviewed sources strengthens the credibility of academic arguments, demonstrating that the information has been vetted and endorsed by the scholarly community. This practice promotes trustworthiness and integrity in academic discourse, reinforcing the foundation of knowledge upon which further research and understanding are built.
- Body of the Paper/Briefing: For each assignment, you need to have a section heading/slide that directly corresponds/aligns to the bullet points in the assignment instructions. So, if the assignment has 5 bullet points to address, your paper/briefing should have 5 section headers/slides that match up with those assignment requirements (don't cut/paste the bullet points into the paper, turn them into a proper heading).
- Don't forget the intro para and a conclusion
- If you do this, the chance of getting a good grade is increased exponentially. It will keep you from leaving anything out
- Most important…answer/address the bullet points. DO NOT skimp on detail. Speaker notes should be a solid/robust paragraph or two. A few sentences will not be sufficient.
- Support your opinions with APA sources from the UoP Library, they have everything you need. Use proper in-text citations.
- Remember that title and reference pages do not count toward word minimums.
Class, here's a couple of things to get you started…
- Remember that books, newspapers, magazines, and general text on a web site are not peer-reviewed sources. Please be mindful of that for your discussion answers. I don't want you to lose points for that.
- When selecting a company for the week one assignment, remember that the company you select will be used for ALL remaining delivrables throughout the rest of the course.
- Before deciding on that company, make sure to review the rest of the assignments all the way through week 6 so you know now what you will be asked to do.
- MOST IMPORTANT: For all of your assignments, you MUST cite any uncommon facts in your work for it to be considered credible. Understand that when I read your work, my first couple questions will be "How do you know that?" or "according to who…?" So the minimum number of references will probably not be enough.
ENT/588 v4
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
ENT/588 Grading Rubrics Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Business Value Report ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 2 Wk 4 Summative Assessment: Communication Plan …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Business Development Elevator Speech Video ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 5
Grading Rubrics ENT/588 v4 Page 2 of 6
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Business Value Report
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
1. SWOT Analysis
Weight: 20%
Constructed a comprehensive SWOT analysis and included a SWOT table
Constructed an adequate SWOT analysis and included a SWOT table
Constructed a partial SWOT analysis and included a SWOT table
Little or no attempt to construct a SWOT table
2. Current Challenge
Weight: 25%
Fully analyzed the identified challenge that will be addressed in the business plan, including justifying how the challenge was determined
Sufficiently analyzed the identified challenge that will be addressed in the business plan, including justifying how the challenge was determined
Partially analyzed the identified challenge that will be addressed in the business plan, including justifying how the challenge was determined
Little to no attempt to analyze the identified challenge and/or justifying how the challenge was determined
3. Proposed Solution
Weight: 20%
Proposed an insightful solution for the identified challenge
Proposed a sufficient solution for the identified challenge
Proposed an insufficient solution for the identified challenge
Little to no attempt to propose a solution for the identified challenge
4. Solution Justification
Weight: 30%
Clearly justified the implications of the recommended solution to enhance organizational outcomes
Adequately justified the implications of the recommended solution to enhance organizational outcomes
Vaguely justified the implications of the recommended solution to enhance organizational outcomes
Little or no attempt to justify the implications of recommended solution to enhance organizational outcomes
5. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Make Judgements, Draw Conclusions
Weight: 5%
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was sound; identified and recommended the best solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was mostly sound; identified and recommended an acceptable solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was partially sound; identified and recommended a less favorable solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was not sound or was illogical; identified and recommended an impractical solution or did not recommend a solution
Grading Rubrics ENT/588 v4 Page 3 of 6
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 4 Summative Assessment: Communication Plan
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
1. Solution Discussion
Weight: 25%
Thoroughly discussed the reason for change, while introducing the solution (e.g., new process, product, or service), including how the solution addresses the needs of the business
Sufficiently discussed the reason for change, while introducing the solution (e.g., new process, product, or service), including how the solution addresses the needs of the business
Somewhat discussed the reason for change, while introducing the solution (e.g., new process, product, or service), including how the solution addresses the needs of the business
Vaguely discussed, or did not discuss, the reason for change, while introducing the solution (e.g., new process, product, or service), including how the solution addresses the needs of the business
2. Engagement Strategy
Weight: 25%
Clearly explained how employees will be engaged in the decision-making process for the new process, product, or service, and proposed a strategy for ongoing engagement with staff and leaders
Adequately explained how employees will be engaged in the decision-making process for the new process, product, or service, and proposed a strategy for ongoing engagement with staff and leaders
Somewhat explained how employees will be engaged in the decision-making process for the new process, product, or service, and proposed a strategy for ongoing engagement with staff and leaders
Vaguely explained, or did not explain, how employees will be engaged in the decision-making process for the new process, product, or service, and proposed a strategy for ongoing engagement with staff and leaders
3. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Proposal
Weight: 25%
Proposed opportunities with insightful rationale that demonstrate CSR
Proposed opportunities with competent rationale that demonstrate CSR
Proposed opportunities with insufficient rationale that demonstrate CSR
Proposed opportunities with obscure or no rationale that demonstrate CSR
4. Delivery
Weight: 20%
Expressed the proposed solution and its rationales to internal team in a respectful manner
Expressed the proposed solution and its rationales to internal team in a moderately respectful manner
Expressed the proposed solution and its rationales to internal team in a tolerant manner
Expressed the proposed solution and its rationales to internal team in a brash manner
Grading Rubrics ENT/588 v4 Page 4 of 6
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
5. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Define the Problem
Weight: 5%
Thoroughly defined the problem, provided supporting information for understanding
Moderately defined the problem, provided supporting information for understanding
Vaguely defined the problem, provided supporting information for understanding
Did not define or incorrectly defined the problem, did not provide sufficient supporting information for understanding
Grading Rubrics ENT/588 v4 Page 5 of 6
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Business Development Elevator Speech Video
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
1. Overview
Weight: 15%
Provided a thorough, yet concise, personal introduction and the challenge facing the business
Provided a detailed personal introduction and the challenge facing the business
Provided an incomplete personal introduction and the challenge facing the business
Provided a vague introduction or did not provide an introduction
2. Proposed Solution
Weight: 20%
Provided a clear overview of the proposed solution
Provided a somewhat clear overview of the proposed solution
Provided a disorganized overview of the proposed solution
Provided a confusing overview of the proposed solution, or did not present an overview of the proposed solution
3. Financial Outlook
Weight: 20%
Provided a complete, yet concise, financial outlook overview, including assets, liabilities, and benefits of investing, to demonstrate the business’s financial position
Provided a mostly complete financial outlook overview, including assets, liabilities, and benefits of investing, to demonstrate the business’s financial position
Provided an incomplete financial outlook overview, that may have included assets, liabilities, and benefits of investing, to demonstrate the business’s financial position
Provided a superficial financial outlook overview or did not include a financial outlook overview
4. Metrics
Weight: 20%
Clearly explained the measurable analytics and ways to evaluate the effectiveness of the solution
Sufficiently explained the measurable analytics and ways to evaluate the effectiveness of the solution
Somewhat explained the measurable analytics and ways to evaluate the effectiveness of the solution
Vaguely explained, or did not explain, the measurable analytics and ways to evaluate the effectiveness of the solution
Grading Rubrics ENT/588 v4 Page 6 of 6
Copyright 2023 by University of Phoenix. All rights reserved.
Criteria Exemplary 90–100% A- to A
Proficient 74-89% C to B+
Developing 60-73% D to C-
Needs Improvement 0-59%
F
5. Delivery: Voice Technique
Weight: 10%
Natural and confident delivery, with balanced vocal inflection and clearly articulated language that the audience can hear throughout the presentation
Generally effective delivery, but vocal inflection and pronunciation were partially inconsistent, or audio was partially distorted
Attempted delivery, but vocal inflection and pronunciation were inconsistent, distracting, or audio was mostly distorted
Unclear delivery or did not appear on-screen
6. Delivery: Nonverbal (Posture, poise, eye contact, gestures, body positioning, and movement)
Weight: 10%
Compelling presentation; speaker appeared polished and confident
Interesting presentation; speaker appeared comfortable
Understandable presentation; speaker appeared tentative
Lacking presentation; speaker appeared uncomfortable
7. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: Make Judgements, Draw Conclusions
Weight: 5%
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was sound; identified and recommended the best solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was mostly sound; identified and recommended an acceptable solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was partially sound; identified and recommended a less favorable solution
Judgement to arrive at a conclusion was not sound or was illogical; identified and recommended an impractical solution or did not recommend a solution
- ENT/588 Grading Rubrics
- Wk 2 Summative Assessment: Business Value Report
- Wk 4 Summative Assessment: Communication Plan
- Wk 6 Summative Assessment: Business Development Elevator Speech Video