Final

The cases are directly linked as documents above each question. Your responses should be no longer than three type-written pages, double-spaced, with 1 margins, using size 12 Times New Roman or 11 Arial font (any overage will be penalized to keep the playing field level in comparisons). I will expect in-line APA citation (in the body text; meaning authors surnames and years so that I can see what you are referencing as I read) referencing any articles from our class readings or articles not from the class, you will need to provide a reference section that identifies the full information for those articles cited as well (which will not qualify against your page total for the essay responses or be scored rigorously for proper APA style though significant deviation will result in a lesser score; this is largely for my information).

The topics of these essay questions covers the full range of course concepts and are very similar to the theme and style of the group case analyses produced for this class. Be aware that many of the analyses requested below may engage multiple concepts not directly aligned in class (and so a question about leadership may engage ideas regarding the use of groups or teams, a question about groups and teams may engage concepts from decision making or leadership). It is my hope that you will begin to see the whole of how these concepts interlock and can be used in tandem rather than isolating yourself to a specific vein of thinking because that is the way it was presented.

1. Discuss and analyze ALDIs practices in light of management theory and best practices, motivation, human resource management, and adjacent concepts. What has ALDI done well and what could be improved upon? Is ALDIs approach one that will continue to succeed or are there other approaches that could be implemented to improve future outcomes?

Exam Essay Rubric (1)

Exam Essay Rubric (1)

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Connections to Theoretical and Empirical Research

10 pts

Full Marks

Makes appropriate, insightful, and powerful connections between the issues and problems in the case and relevant theory and empirical data; effectively integrates multiple sources of knowledge with case information

5 pts

Average

Identifies and outlines connections between some of the issues and problems in the case and relevant theoretical and empirical research; the connections identified are adequately elucidated

0 pts

No Marks

Makes little or no connection between the issues and problems in the case and relevant theoretical and empirical research, or the connections identified are weak or inaccurate in many respects

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Analysis and Evaluation

10 pts

Full Marks

Presents a balanced, in-depth, and critical assessment of the facts of the case in light of relevant empirical and theoretical research; develops insightful and well-supported conclusions using reasoned, sound, and informed judgments

5 pts

Average

Provides an acceptable analysis of most of the issues and problems in the case; in most instances, analysis is adequately supported by theory and empirical data; appropriate conclusions are outlined and summarized

0 pts

No Marks

Simply repeats facts identified in the case and does not discuss the relevance of these facts; fails to draw conclusions, or conclusions are not justified or supported; does not present relevant research or data; shows no critical examination of case issues

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Action Plans

10 pts

Full Marks

Effectively weighs and assesses a variety of alternative actions that address the multiple issues central to the case; proposes detailed plans of action; action plans are realistic and contain thorough and well-reasoned justifications

5 pts

Average

Outlines and summarizes some alternative courses of action to deal with most of the issues and problems in the case; in most instances, proposed action plans are outlined, are feasible, and based on relatively sound theory and evidence

0 pts

No Marks

Has difficulty identifying alternatives and appropriate courses of action; few if any alternatives are presented, infeasible actions are proposed, action plans are not supported, or actions do not address the key issues and problems in the case

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Evaluation of Consequences

10 pts

Full Marks

Objectively and critically reflects upon alternative plans of action; effectively identifies, thoroughly discusses, and insightfully evaluates the implications and consequences resulting from the proposed action plans; identified consequences are tied to the key issues central to the case

5 pts

Average

Demonstrates acceptable analysis of the results of proposed action plans; adequately outlines and summarizes the implications and consequences resulting from alternative courses of action; with a few minor exceptions, identified consequences of action plans are related to key issues in the case

0 pts

No Marks

Displays limited awareness and/or understanding of the consequences of action plans; fails to identify implications and consequences of proposed action plans; identified outcomes do not follow from proposed action plans, or outcomes are not related to issues in the case

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Writing Mechanics

Communicates ideas clearly to the reader with proper spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and paragraph flow. Uses proper APA citations and references.

10 pts

Full Marks

Communicates ideas clearly to the reader with proper spelling, grammar, sentence structure, and paragraph flow. Uses proper APA citations and references. Stays within page limitation.

5 pts

Average

Demonstrates acceptable spelling, grammar, and sentence and paragraph structure. Makes only minor mistakes. Uses proper APA citations and references when required. Exceeds or undershoots the page limitation by half a page.

0 pts

No Marks

Poor spelling, grammar, punctuation, or sentence/paragraph structure. Makes mistakes that severely inhibit the readers ability to understand what the author is trying to communicate. Fails to properly cite references in APA style. Exceeds or undershoots the page limitation by a full page or more.

10 pts

Total Points: 50