Need help to edit based on professor recommendations ?
Project 3: Culture, Climate, and Ethical Decisions feedback:
Patrick, this project demonstrates a broad understanding of the key concepts of organizational culture, climate, and ethics; though, it was incomplete (e.g., did not include presentation/PPT speaker notes) and was not sufficiently responsive to the project’s requirements/competencies. The rubric contains an assessment of each competency as well as comments. Rubric comments are also noted below. Some of the shortfalls identified, were the same ones noted in Project 2.
As noted in the rubric feedback, the updated submission needs to include the memo and presentation/PPT with speaker notes. There is no requirement to narrate the updated presentation as you’ve very nicely demonstrated this skill.
This course provides the opportunity to update your submission to demonstrate your competency grasp. As noted by the syllabus, this must be done within the 2-week project submission window (i.e., by Wednesday, 4 March). I encourage you to update and resubmit this project within the next week. The syllabus addresses the project resubmission process.
As noted in the course syllabus, and course announcements, successful completion of this course requires earning a grade of at least meets standards in each and every project and doing this requires earning a grade of at least meets standards on every project competency.
I look forward to seeing your updated submission.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
1.3: Provide sufficient, correctly cited support that substantiates the writer’s ideas.:
References in memo are incomplete for 2-sources.
Attribution is not appropriately used; you are attributing to the authors, Schwab’s operation. Course material and general business literature should be used in defining/describing concepts. Research discussing/assessing Schwab should be used to identify/describe Schwab’s operation vis a vis the project concepts.
In-text citation process had errors in both presentation and memo.
In updating this project, greater accuracy is needed in appropriately citing and referencing relevant material in developing discussion/analysis. The UMGC Effective Writing Center is a free resource I encourage you to reach-out to for support of this key MBA competency.
1.6: Follow conventions of Standard Written English.:
Presentation clearly narrated!
Presentation did not include required speaker notes.
Memo exceeded 3-page double-spaced page limit (not including reference page). The memo is to be briefly highlight the project’s key points.
Presentation and memo design would have benefitted from greater adherence to Project 3 “description of final deliverable” posted in Step 1.
Presentation template excellent!
In power point, encourage greater use of shorter phrases/bullets in charts. Charts should highlight key points that are then expanded upon in narration/speaker notes.
In updating this project –
– I urge attentiveness to editing and proofreading to achieve a logical flow of ideas that address the project requirements, as summarized in the Project 3 “description of final deliverable”, posted in Step 1.
– Specified project requirements need to be provided
— A brief, no more than 3-double spaced page memo that summarizes the project’s key points.
— The presentation/PPT needs to include speaker notes/script. You’ve successfully demonstrated your skill in narrating a presentation; therefore, your updated submission does not need to be narrated.
Recommend reaching-out the UMGC Effective Writing Center for support in accomplishing this competency. Effective writing is a critical MBA program competency.
2.1: Identify and clearly explain the issue, question, or problem under critical consideration.:
Presentation narration and memo did a good job of defining/describing key terms (culture, climate, and ethics) though these definitions/descriptions were not provided in PPT. The definitions/descriptions would have been stronger if connected with the research from which you derived them (i.e., how do you know? What’s the basis of your knowledge?).
Tighter conformance with the project deliverable description would have provided great opportunity to explain key project issues and questions under consideration (e.g., difference between organizational culture and climate) as well as logically sequence the project.
In updating this project, recommend tighter conformance with the project deliverable description in Step 1 to ensure relevant issues are addressed and discussed/assessed in a logical manner.
2.2: Locate and access sufficient information to investigate the issue or problem.:
Project would have been stronger by leveraging course material, as well as more fully connecting with referenced sources, as well as organizational sources in developing discussion/analysis. For example, when you say Schwab is an employer of choice, how do you know – what is the basis for this conclusion?
In updating this project, there needs to be evidence of greater and proper use of appropriate research, including the research you identified, course materials, and sources connected your organization. It is appropriate to re-use relevant sources from your Situation Audit for this project. The UMGC Librarians are an excellent source to reach-out to for assistance in finding relevant quality sources.
2.3: Evaluate the information in a logical and organized manner to determine its value and relevance to the problem.:
Tighter adherence to the project deliverable description would have facilitated a greater logical flow, given the project’s requirements.
In updating this project, as noted in competency 2.1, recommend tighter conformance to the project deliverable description in facilitating development of a responsive and logical submission.
2.4: Consider and analyze information in context to the issue or problem.:
Intro of presentation narration provided context of problem, though this was not evident in charts.
The memo’s introduction did not clearly set forth either the project or memo’s purpose.
In updating this project, recommend a short brief introduction in both deliverables that sets for the reason for the project and key points that will be discussed.
2.5: Develop well-reasoned ideas, conclusions or decisions, checking them against relevant criteria and benchmarks.:
The project’s recommendation is essentially to maintain the status quo. This is not substantiated by research that demonstrates points you try to make, such as the organization having low retention rate and being an employer of choice (i.e., what sources substantiate these conclusions? How does Schwab compare with its competitors?).
The closing comment about “inner review” needs to be more fully developed and connected with research (i.e., bench-marked). Could it be you are trying to recommend periodic climate reviews? Or, are you trying to recommend some type of periodic ethics training?
In updating this project, the conclusion needs to be logically derived from the earlier analysis and supported by research as discussed above.
5.1: Develop constructive resolutions for ethical dilemmas based on application of ethical theories, principles and models.:
This competency not addressed.
In updating this project, I recommend reviewing the business ethics course material in Step 2, that explores these issues and then explicitly connecting with that material (i.e., attributing) and apply to Schwab.
9.3: Apply the principles of employment law for ethical practices and risk mitigation.:
This competency was not addressed. Was this intended to be focus of chart 6?
In updating this project, in addition to reviewing the ethics course material, I recommend conducting additional research to develop your response to this competency. A potential line of analysis could be built regarding the regulatory environment in which Schwab operates.