Question details

Assignment 3: Applying the P-O-L-C (Week 8) 2
$ 20.00

Assignment 3:  Applying the P-O-L-C (Week 8)

Purpose: 

The third assignment, a consultancy report, provides students with the ability to demonstrate that they have mastered the course content and can apply theories, concepts and ideas learned throughout the course to a situation that emulates a real world situation.  Students will read the case study that focuses on the four functions of management:  planning, organizing, leading and controlling (P-O-L-C) and respond to the required elements of the assignment. 

Writing reports in business is commonplace so writing a consultancy report provides students the opportunity to demonstrate a skill that employers are looking for from an employee. 

Outcome Met by Completing This Assignment:

  •                   integrate management theories and principles into management practices
  •                   employ effective planning processes to develop strategies, goals, and objectives in order to enhance performance and sustainability 
  •                   organize human, physical, and financial resources for the effective and efficient attainment of organizational goals
  •                   demonstrate leadership skills by communicating a shared vision, motivating and empowering others, and creating a culture of ethical decision-making and innovation 
  •                   develop measures and assess outcomes against plans and standards to improve organizational effectiveness 
  •                   identify the essential characteristics of decision making and indicate the range and types of decisions a manager makes

Instructions:

You have been hired as a consultant to help Mike Davis and his family to solve the problems with his business both day-to-day and over the long term (strategically).  You will create a consultancy report that covers the four functions of management.  In creating the consultancy report, you must also demonstrate how the four functions of management are interrelated showing how issues in one function impact other functions. 

In speaking with Mike, Ethan and Daisy, you already know the following about the business owners: 

  1.      failed to develop or share a mission statement;
  2.      failed to determine the best way to organize resources, including personnel;
  3.      underestimates the importance of recruitment, job design and descriptions, and training;
  4.      assumed that motivation will occur naturally;
  5.      fails to define standards and other measurable outcomes;
  6.      ignored negative information;
  7.      delayed actions to improve organizational outcomes.

Be succinct in your writing but persuasive so that the recommendations will have positive outcomes for the business. 

Students are not using buzz-word and are not defining terms using a dictionary.  Students are expected to present the material in a professional manner describing and explaining to the owners.  As a consultant, you should be secure in your presentation to Mike, Ethan and Daisy.  Avoid telling the owners that they should do this or must do that but write in an action-oriented manner.  Students are expected to make connections between the facts of the case study and concepts, theories, and ideas presented in the course material.

Step 1:  Review “How to Analyze a Case Study” under Week 3 Content.

Step 2:  Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document.  This consultancy plan should be presented in a professional manner using single space, double-spaced between paragraphs.  The final product will be between 6-8 pages in length excluding the title page, diagrams and reference page.

Step 3:  Title page with your name, the course name, the date, and the instructor’s name.

Step 4:  Since students are probably not familiar with writing a consultancy report, the following resources have been provided to assist in writing the report. 

Outline for Consultancy Report

Step 5:  In writing a case study, the writing is in the third person.  What this means is that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing).  If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link:  http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person

Step 6:  In writing this assignment, students are expected to support the reasoning using in-text citations and a reference list.  If any material is used from a source, it must be cited and referenced.  A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa.  View the sample APA paper under Week 1 content.

Step 7:  In writing this assignment, students are expected to paraphrase and not use direct quotes.  Learn to paraphrase by reviewing this link:  https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html

Step 8:  In writing this assignment, students may use external resources but the majority of resources will come from the course readings with a wide array of readings used.  

Step 9:  Review the grading rubric for the assignment. 

Step 10:  Read critically and analyze the case study provided under Week 8 content.   Notate the key points in the case study. 

Step 11:  Create an executive summary.   Although a report must be complete when presenting to a client, the expectation is that there is an executive summary so that the client can read quickly the main features of the report.  The executive summary should be written in a way that makes the client want to read more so it must have enough information to see the potential behind the recommendations without having to read the entire report. 

So you aren’t sure how to write the executive summary.  Check out this resource to help you write the summary:

How to Write an Executive Summary:  http://articles.bplans.com/writing-an-executive-summary/

Step 12:  Respond to the required elements of the assignment.  Be clear and concise in the writing and make sure the questions are comprehensively answered.

  • In creating the consultancy report, students will first assess the business and identify specific areas of strengths and weaknesses of the business as it relates to the components of the P-O-L-C. In completing this section, do not create a heading for each element of the P-O-L-C but write from the perspective of the consultant discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the business;
  • Select a management model (class hierarchy, democratic hierarchy, collaborative management or collective management) and explain why the selected model is most appropriate for Outdoor Adventure Paintball Park;
  • Develop roles and responsibility of the owners and employees (Be creative in completing this task);  Discuss why these positions are necessary to the business;
  • Discuss communication and the flow of decision making in relation to the management model;
  • Make specific recommendations for improving the management of Outdoor Adventure Paintball Park. Cover all aspects of the P-O-L-C.  This area of the paper specifically addresses the areas of strengths and weaknesses identified above and puts in place a plan for the short and long –term success of the business;
  • Create a balanced scorecard that will help Outdoor Adventure Paintball Park align its business activities to the vision and strategy of the organization, improves communication and monitors performance against goals;
  • Students are expected to show what they have learned in the course by applying theories and concepts. Be sure to support your reasoning.

Step 13:  Using the grading rubric as a comparison, read through the paper to ensure all required elements are presented.

Step 14: Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing. 

  • Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a first measure;
  • Have someone who has excellent English skills to proof the paper;
  • Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC).  The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement. 

Step 15:  Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.

Due Date

 

May 8, 2016 11:59 PM

https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/img/0/Shared.Main.actHide.png?v=10.5.7.1791-164Hide Rubrics

Rubric Name: Assignment #3

 
           

Criteria

Outstanding

Superior

Good

Substandard

Failure

Content: Strengths as They Relate to POLC

1.75 points
 

Business is assessed - strengths of business as related to POLC are identified and explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Business is assessed - strengths of business as related to POLC are identified and explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Business is assessed - strengths of business as related to POLC are identified and explained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Business is assessed - strengths of business as related to POLC  could be more completely identified or there are significant omissions in the analysis.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Business is assessed - strengths of business as related to POLC are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Weaknesses as They Relate to POLC

1.75 points
 

Business is assessed - weaknesses of business as related to POLC are identified and explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Business is assessed - weaknesses of business as related to POLC are identified and explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Business is assessed - weaknesses of business as related to POLC are identified and explained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Business is assessed - weaknesses of business as related to POLC  could be more completely identified or there are significant omissions in the analysis.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Business is assessed - weaknesses of business as related to POLC are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Management Model/Explains Why it is Most Appropriate

1.75 points
 

Management model selected and why it is most appropriately explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Management model selected and why it is most appropriately explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Management model selected and why it is most appropriately  explained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Management model selected but why it is most appropriately not explained.  Key points missing.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Management model selected and why it is most appropriately  are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Roles and Responsibilities

1.75 points
 

Roles and responsibilities of owners and employees are identified and explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Roles and responsibilities of owners and employees are identified and explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Roles and responsibilities of owners and employees are identified and explained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Roles and responsibilities of owners and employees could be more completely identified or there are significant omissions in the analysis/  Roles or responsibilities discussed but not both/Key points missing.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Roles and responsibilities of owners and employees are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Communication/Decision Making

1.75 points
 

Communication and decision making are explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Communication and decision making are explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Communication and decision making areexplained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Communication and decision making could be more completely explained or there are significant omissions in the analysis/  Roles or responsibilities discussed but not both/Key points missing.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Communication and decision making are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Recommendations for Improving Management

1.75 points
 

Recommendations for improving management are identified and explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information and are and are directly related to the weaknesses identified in the paper.

(1.575 - 1.75) 

1.4875 points
 

Recommendations for improving management are identified and explained accurately but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information/are directly related to the weaknesses identified in the paper.

(1.575 - 1.75) 

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Recommendations for improving management are identified and explained but needs more clarification on some aspects or are not directly related to the weaknesses identified in the paper. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Recommendations for improving management could be more completely identified or there are significant omissions in the analysis/recommendations to not relate to the weaknesses.  

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Recommendations are not discussed.

(0 - 1.049)

Content: Balanced Scorecard

1.75 points
 

Balanced scorecard is correctly created and explained clearly, accurately and comprehensively delivering all relevant information.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Balanced scorecard is created somewhat correctly and explained but could be more comprehensive or clearer with more relevant information.

(1.4 - 1.575)

1.3125 points
 

Balanced scorecard is created with some correct elements and somewhat explained but needs more clarification on some aspects. 

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Balanced scorecard is attempted but not correctly depicted or not explained.  Key elements of a balanced scorecard are missing.

(1.05 - 1.224)

0 points
 

Balanced scorecard not created or explained.

(0 - 1.049)

Critical Thinking/Reasoning

7 points
 

Concepts and ideas are fully developed. Thinking is consistent in accurately interpreting questions and material/provides solid assumptions, reasoning and evaluation with sound conclusions. Reader can easily follow the author's logic and reasoning.

(6.3 - 7)

5.95 points
 

Concepts and ideas are developed. Thinking is mostly consistent in accurately interpreting questions and material/ provides good assumptions, reasoning and evaluation with sound conclusions. Reader can easily follow the author's logic and reasoning. 

(5.6 - 6.29 )

5.25 points
 

Concepts and ideas are mostly developed but may need clarification on some aspects of thinking, reasoning or evaluation.   Conclusions are drawn.  Reader follows the author’s logic but occasionally there are areas that are unclear.

(4.9 - 5.59)

4.55 points
 

Concepts and ideas are not cohesive.   Misinterprets questions or material; ignores or superficially evaluates, justifies little and seldom explains reasoning; draws unwarranted conclusions.  At times, the reader must attempt to determine the author's train of thought.  

  (4.2 - 4.89)

0 points
 

Concepts and ideas are not fully developed or presented in a cohesive manner. Misinterprets questions or material.

(0 – 4.19)

Application of Resources

7 points
 

Arguments or positions are well-supported with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.

(6.3 - 7)

5.95 points
 

Arguments or positions are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.

(5.6 - 6.29)

5.25 points
 

Arguments are more often based on opinion or unclear views than on position grounded in the readings of material or external sources of material.

(4.9 - 5.59)

4.55 points
 

Arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in resources; May resort to ad hominem attacks on the author instead of making meaningful application of the material.

(4.2 - 4.89)   

0 points
 

Arguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas.  Does not provide facts presented in case study.

(0 – 4.19)

Attention to Instructions

3.5 points
 

demonstrated full understanding of requirements responded to each aspect of assignment

(3.15 - 3.5)

2.975 points
 

demonstrated understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment

(2.8 - 3.149)

2.625 points
 

demonstrated some understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment

(2.45 - 2.79)

2.275 points
 

failed to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment

(2.1 - 2.449)

0 points
 

did not demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements

(0 – 2.09)

Writing Mechanics

3.5 points
 

Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.  No errors found.  No jargon used.

(3.15 - 3.5)

2.975 points
 

Adheres to standard usage of mechanics:  conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.  One to three errors found.

(2.8 - 3.149)

2.625 points
 

Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics:  conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.  Four to 10 errors found.

(2.45 - 2.79)

2.275 points
 

Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics:  conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.  More than 10 errors found.

(2.1 - 2.449)

0 points
 

Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics:  conventions of written English largely incomprehensible and errors are too plentiful to count.

(0 – 2.09)

APA Style (6th ed.)

1.75 points
 

No APA style errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper.  Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.

(1.575 - 1.75)

1.4875 points
 

Attempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted.

(1.4 - 1.574)

1.3125 points
 

Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted; inconsistencies in citation usage are noted throughout document.

(1.225 - 1.39)

1.1375 points
 

Attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.

(1.05 – 1.224)

0 points
 

No attempt at APA style.

(0 – 1.049)

Overall Score

Outstanding
31.5 or more

Good
28 or more

Substandard
24.5 or more

Superior
21 or more

Failure
0 or more

           

 

Available solutions