You are to prepare a written analysis of a case about an organization that you choose. You will be expected to carefully analyze the case (organization) using the models from class (with the exception of a SWOT analysis) and develop sound conclusions and recommendations. You should demonstrate through the analysis your ability to apply the concepts from the class to a real business situation. I am most interested in your application of critical thinking skills, the preparation of sound recommendations, and the support of those recommendations with compelling data. Additional guidelines will be available on the course website. The analysis should be no longer than eight pages, double spaced, 12-point font, 1-inch margins. You may add a cover page and additional pages for graphs, charts, tables, figures, or references. The paper will be worth 20 points. The paper will be graded on content (i.e., concepts from the book and other sources); analysis (critically examining the strategy); and grammar/organization. Content is worth 8 points, analysis is worth 8 points, and grammar/organization is worth 4 points. I have also attached a powerpoint that can assist with your paper. Clear explanation of key issues / elaborate on the strategic choices of the firm: • The problems, scope, and seriousness were clearly identified in the discussions. • There was a well-focused diagnosis of strategic issues and key problems that demonstrated a good grasp of the company’s present situation and issues. • Provided information only to further analyze the situation; did not merely duplicate information already found in the case. 5 to >4.69 pts Exceeds Standard Shows superior knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation. Effective Introduction/elaboration that outlines major points. Uses at least one model from the book (value chain, Porters, Strategic Canvas, etc.) and uses 12 to 15 concepts from the book. 4.69 to >3.81 pts At Standard Shows adequate knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation Introduction/elaboration adequate. Briefly describes at least one model from the book (value chain, Porters, Strategic Canvas, etc.) and uses 10 to 12 concepts from the book. 3.81 to >2.87 pts Approaching Standard Shows some understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation. Introduction/elaboration inadequate. Mentions one model from the book (value chain, Porters, Strategic Canvas, etc.) and uses 7 to 10 concepts from the book. 2.87 to >0 pts Below Standard Shows little understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation. Introduction/elaboration missing or poorly constructed, Does not effectively describe a model from the book (value chain, Porters, Strategic Canvas, etc.) and uses 7 or fewer concepts from the book. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Valid arguments; analysis of the case/questions with relevant supportive detail: • Logically organized, key points, key arguments, and important criteria for evaluating business strategies were easily identified • Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis were identified and clearly analyzed and supported. 10 to >9.38 pts Exceeds Standard Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis was clearly identified, analyzed, and supported. Analyzes the firm or industry with 12 to 15 concepts from the book (in detail). 9.38 to >7.62 pts At Standard Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis was partially identified, analyzed, and supported. Analyzes the firm or industry with 10 to 12 concepts from the book (with some detail). 7.62 to >5.74 pts Approaching Standard Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis was not clearly identified, analyzed, and supported. Analyzes the firm or industry with 7 to 10 concepts from the book (with limited detail). 5.74 to >0 pts Below Standard Critical issues and key problems that supported the Case Analysis was poorly identified, analyzed, and supported. Analyzes the firm or industry with fewer than concepts from the book (with insufficient detail). 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Conclusions and recommendations are congruent with strategic analysis: • Specific recommendations and/or plans of action provided. • Specific data or facts were referred to when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions. • Recommendations and conclusions were presented and supported in a literate and effective manner. 10 to >9.38 pts Exceeds Standard Effective recommendations, solutions, and/or plans of action were provided. Specific data or facts were referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions. Provides more than 4 strategic recommendations with supporting logic. 9.38 to >7.62 pts At Standard Effective recommendations and/or plans of action were partially provided. Specific data or facts were occasionally referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions. Provides 3 strategic recommendations with some supporting logic. 7.62 to >5.74 pts Approaching Standard Effective recommendations and/or plans of action inadequate. Specific data or facts were not referred when necessary to support the analysis and conclusions. Provides 2 strategic recommendations with minimal supporting logic. 5.74 to >0 pts Below Standard Effective recommendations and/or plans of action not provided. Specific data or facts necessary to support the analysis and conclusions was not provided. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Proper organization, professional writing, and logical flow of analysis; compliance with formatting guidelines provided: • Logically organized, key points, key arguments, and important criteria for evaluating the business logic easily identified. • Key points were supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. • Proper grammar, spelling, punctuation, 3rd person objective view, professional writing, and syntax. Followed the required formatting if applicable. 5 to >4.69 pts Exceeds Standard Key points were clearly identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Excellent grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax 4.69 to >3.81 pts At Standard Key points were partially identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Adequate grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax 3.81 to >2.87 pts Approaching Standard Key points were not identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax needs improvement 2.87 to >0 pts Below Standard Key points were poorly identified and supported with a well thought out rationale based on applying specific concepts or analytical frameworks to the data provided in the case. Grammar, spelling, punctuation, professional writing, and syntax needs significant improvement