BUSDISC.docx

RUBRIC POSTED BELOW AT THE END OF DOCUMENT

Components of a SWOT Analysis [WLOs: 1] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4]

Prior to beginning work on this discussion, complete the Week 1 Pre-Test, watch the Simulation Overview Video Part 1, and the video from your Chairman Stan Sloan after you have logged into the simulation. In 150 words or more, what information or detail is important to add to a SWOT analysis in general? How can a complete SWOT help a company succeed? These thoughts should be qualitative and generic – not discussing/providing specific applications of how you may have gleaned competitive advantage (e.g., listing the SWOT components applicable to Hisco).

What Makes a Good Business Strategy? [WLO: 4] [CLOs: 1, 2, 3, 4]

Prior to beginning work on this discussion forum, read Five Steps to a Strategic Plan, The Single Strategy You Need to Fuel Business Growth Right Now, and Aligning Brand Portfolio Strategy with Business Strategy. In 150 words or more, what are three or four components of a well-thought-out, achievable, and reasonable business strategy? What mistakes do companies make when developing their strategies? These thoughts should be qualitative and generic – not discussing/ providing specific applications of how you may have gleaned competitive advantage (e.g., describing your business strategy).

Key Learnings in Your Annual Operating Review [WLOs: 5] [CLOs: 1, 2]

Prior to beginning work in this discussion thread, read pages 51 through 80 of Understanding Corporate Annual Reports, Voluntary disclosures in corporate annual reports – More than meets the eye, and Integrated Performance Report. This is the time to share in discussion format your critical learnings and any details from your AOR. These thoughts should be qualitative, quantitative, generic, and specific. The learnings should be related to your AOR and what you can put to work in the short- and long-term in the real world. Please use 150 words or more.

Book

Stanko, B., & Zeller, T. L (2003). [PDF file]. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.

Articles

Aileron. (2011, October 25). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/aileron/2011/10/25/five-steps-to-a-strategic-plan/#3199e5254645

Biery, M. E. (2013, September 1).  Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/sageworks/2013/09/01/how-healthy-is-your-business-using-industry-data-to-check-the-temperature/#26ca43e1704a

Biery, M. E. (2013, December 22).  Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/sageworks/2013/12/22/understanding-financial-statements/#72daac5822b0

Bujaki, M., & McConomy, B. (2010, May). . CMA Management, 84(3), 14-16.

Fotsch, B., & Case, J. (2017, September 5). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/fotschcase/2017/09/05/six-tips-for-planning-a-great-2018/

Holtzman, Y., Gorkhover, G., & Ganz, M. (2015, January 12). . Retrieved from https://www.mddionline.com/us-medical-device-industry-strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-and-threats

Maresova, P., Penhaker, M., Selamat, A., & Kuca, K. (2015). . Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, 11, 1505-1514. doi:10.2147/TCRM.S88574

Mathur, A. (2016, April 20). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/aparnamathur/2016/04/20/why-70-of-companies-paid-zero-in-corporate-taxes-they-had-zero-profits/#7a02689c56e3

Medtronic. (2016). . Retrieved from http://www.medtronic.com/content/dam/medtronic-com/us-en/corporate/documents/17267.MED.Sustainability.Report_4_FINAL%20NOV%208.pdf

Mosca, L. (2017, October 18). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/louismosca/2017/10/18/business-planning-for-2018/#6f5b12f6692d

Pal, N. (2015, April 9). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2015/04/09/why-financial-dashboards-matter-and-five-pointers-to-get-you-started/#4f6e2f5f2520

Paunovic, G. (2017, December 6). . Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesagencycouncil/2017/12/06/the-single-strategy-you-need-to-fuel-business-growth-right-now/#35b9fdd42c59

Sampson, L. (2015, March 13). . Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/oracle/2015/03/13/how-corporate-finance-is-changing-with-the-times/#1aaa9ab639d1

Savickas, Mark L. (2003, September). . Career Development Quarterly, 52(1), 4-7. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2003.tb00621.x

Uggla, H. (2015). . IUP Journal of Brand Management, 12(3), 7-17. Retrieved from http://www.iupindia.in/Brand_Management.asp

Multimedia

TriCorporation. (n.d.). Preparing your financial commitments: Guide to developing a budget as the leader of HISCO [Video file]. Retrieved from https://qa.trisimulation.com/Simulation

Supplemental Materials

Cadrain, S. (2020). [Presentation slides]. Canvas@UAGC. https://login.uagc.edu

Cadrain, S. (2020). [Presentation slides]. Canvas@UAGC. https://login.uagc.edu

Discussion Rubric – 2 points

Discussion Rubric – 2 points

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeGeneral Content/Subject Knowledge

0.6 Pts

Distinguished – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates in-depth knowledge of the discussion topic.

0.53 Pts

Proficient – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates knowledge of the discussion topic.

0.46 Pts

Basic – Addresses all aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates basic knowledge of the discussion topic.

0.38 Pts

Below Expectations – Addresses all or most aspects of the prompt in accordance with the parameters of the discussion and demonstrates limited knowledge of the discussion topic.

0 Pts

Non-Performance – There is no initial discussion post, or the post does not address the discussion prompt at all.

0.6 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCritical Thinking

0.6 Pts

Distinguished – Comprehensively explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates all of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.

0.53 Pts

Proficient – Explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates most of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.

0.46 Pts

Basic – Explores the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provides relevant evidence and information that demonstrates some of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, and use of information, and logic.

0.38 Pts

Below Expectations – Attempts to explore the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provide relevant evidence and information, but demonstrates few of the following as applicable to the discussion prompt: clarity, relevance, depth, breadth, use of information resources, and logic.

0 Pts

Non-Performance – There is no attempt to explore the ideas, thoughts, and elements of the topic and provide relevant evidence and information in either the original post or subsequent response posts within the discussion, or no post is present.

0.6 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeEngagement/ Participation

0.6 Pts

Distinguished – Contributes to classroom conversations with at least the minimum number of replies, all of which were thoughtful, relevant, and contributed meaningfully to the conversation. Fully engages in the conversation with appropriate topic-based responses.

0.53 Pts

Proficient – Contributes to classroom conversations with the minimum number of replies that are somewhat thoughtful, relevant, and contributed meaningfully to the conversation. Attempts to fully engage in the conversation with appropriate topic-based responses.

0.46 Pts

Basic – Contributes to the classroom conversations with the minimum number of replies. Attempts to fully engage in the conversation, but the responses are not relevant or fully aligned with the discussion topic.

0.38 Pts

Below Expectations – Attempts to contribute to the classroom conversations with fewer than the minimum number of replies; however, the replies are not thoughtful and relevant, or they do not contribute meaningfully to the conversation.

0 Pts

Non-Performance – There is no contribution to the discussion.

0.6 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeWritten Communication

0.2 Pts

Distinguished – Displays clear control of syntax and mechanics. The organization of the work shows appropriate transitions and flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.

0.18 Pts

Proficient – Displays control of syntax and mechanics. The organization of the work shows transitions and/or flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains only a few errors and is mostly easy to understand.

0.15 Pts

Basic – Displays basic control of syntax and mechanics. The work is not organized with appropriate transitions and flow between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains several errors, making it difficult to fully understand.

0.13 Pts

Below Expectations – Displays limited control of syntax or mechanics. The work does not include any transitions and does not flow easily between sentences and paragraphs. Written work contains major errors.

0 Pts

Non-Performance – Fails to display control of syntax or mechanics, within the original post and/or responses. Organization is also not present.

0.2 pts

Related posts

June 22, 2022

HW

Read more