| Criteria<\/th>\r\n | Inadequate (40%)<\/th>\r\n | Minimal (60%)<\/th>\r\n | Adequate (80%)<\/th>\r\n | Exemplary (100%)<\/th>\r\n | Total Points<\/th>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/thead>\r\n | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organization and format<\/th>\r\n | 2 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting lacks logical organization. It may show some coherence but ideas lack unity. Serious errors and generally is an unorganized format and information.<\/td>\r\n| 3 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting is coherent and logically organized, using a format suitable for the material presented. Some points may be contextually misplaced and\/or stray from the topic. Transitions may be evident but not used throughout the essay. Organization and format used may detract from understanding the material presented.<\/td>\r\n | 4 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting is coherent and logically organized, using a format suitable for the material presented. Transitions between ideas and paragraphs create coherence. Overall unity of ideas is supported by the format and organization of the material presented.<\/td>\r\n | 5 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting shows high degree of attention to details and presentation of points. Format used enhances understanding of material presented. Unity clearly leads the reader to the writer\u2019s conclusion and the format and information could be used independently.<\/td>\r\n | 5 pts<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n | Content<\/th>\r\n | 8 pts<\/strong>\r\nSome but not all required questions are addressed. Content and\/or terminology is not properly used or referenced. Little or no original thought is present in the writing. Concepts presented are merely restated from the source, or ideas presented do not follow the logic and reasoning presented throughout the writing.<\/td>\r\n | 12 pts<\/strong>\r\nAll required questions are addressed but may not be addressed with thoughtful consideration and\/or may not reflect proper use of content terminology or additional original thought. Additional concepts may not be present and\/or may not be properly cited sources.<\/td>\r\n | 16 pts<\/strong>\r\nAll required questions are addressed with thoughtful consideration reflecting both proper use of content terminology and additional original thought. Some additional concepts may be presented from other properly cited sources, or originated by the author following logic and reasoning they\u2019ve clearly presented throughout the writing.<\/td>\r\n | 20 pts<\/strong>\r\nAll required questions are addressed with thoughtful in-depth consideration reflecting both proper use of content terminology and additional original thought. Additional concepts are clearly presented from properly cited sources, or originated by the author following logic and reasoning they\u2019ve clearly presented throughout the writing.<\/td>\r\n | 20 pts<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n | Development\u2014Critical Thinking<\/th>\r\n | 8 pts<\/strong>\r\nShows some thinking and reasoning but most ideas are underdeveloped, unoriginal, and\/or do not address the questions asked. Conclusions drawn may be unsupported, illogical or merely the author\u2019s opinion with no supporting evidence presented.<\/td>\r\n | 12 pts<\/strong>\r\nContent indicates thinking and reasoning applied with original thought on a few ideas, but may repeat information provided and\/ or does not address all of the questions asked. The author presents no original ideas, or ideas do not follow clear logic and reasoning. The evidence presented may not support conclusions drawn.<\/td>\r\n | 16 pts<\/strong>\r\nContent indicates original thinking, cohesive conclusions, and developed ideas with sufficient and firm evidence. Clearly addresses all of the questions or requirements asked. The evidence presented supports conclusions drawn.<\/td>\r\n | 20 pts<\/strong>\r\nContent indicates synthesis of ideas, in-depth analysis and evidence beyond the questions or requirements asked. Original thought supports the topic, and is clearly a well-constructed response to the questions asked. The evidence presented makes a compelling case for any conclusions drawn.<\/td>\r\n | 20 pts<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n | Grammar, Mechanics, Style<\/th>\r\n | 2 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting contains many spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors, making it difficult for the reader to follow ideas clearly. There may be sentence fragments and run-ons. The style of writing, tone, and use of rhetorical devices disrupts the content. Additional information may be presented but in an unsuitable style, detracting from its understanding.<\/td>\r\n | 3 pts<\/strong>\r\nSome spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors are present, interrupting the reader from following the ideas presented clearly. There may be sentence fragments and run-ons. The style of writing, tone, and use of rhetorical devices may detract from the content. Additional information may be presented, but in a style of writing that does not support understanding of the content.<\/td>\r\n | 4 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting is free of most spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors, allowing the reader to follow ideas clearly. There are no sentence fragments and run-ons. The style of writing, tone, and use of rhetorical devices enhance the content. Additional information is presented in a cohesive style that supports understanding of the content.<\/td>\r\n | 5 pts<\/strong>\r\nWriting is free of all spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors and written in a style that enhances the reader\u2019s ability to follow ideas clearly. There are no sentence fragments and run-ons. The style of writing, tone, and use of rhetorical devices enhance the content. Additional information is presented to encourage and enhance understanding of the content.<\/td>\r\n | 5 pts<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n | <\/td>\r\n | <\/td>\r\n | <\/td>\r\n | <\/td>\r\n | Total:<\/td>\r\n | 50 pts<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>","rendered":" | Scenario<\/h2>\nIf you\u2019ve ever had a performance appraisal where the person conducting it really cared about the process, you know first hand the motivational impact. Unfortunately, that\u2019s rarely the case. Appraisals are generally poorly researched and written, leaving the employee feeling unappreciated and demotivated. Given the business and human resource management implications, the ability to provide effective feedback\u2014recognition and developmental\u2014is an essential management competence and a critical HR and organizational priority.<\/p>\n Your Task<\/h2>\nThe firm\u2019s Employee Engagement principal was particularly impressed with your Onboarding presentation and has requested your assignment to a second project with significant engagement implications: reimagining the Performance Appraisal process. Specifically, the principal has asked you to review the appraisal best practices and techniques discussed in Module 9 and conduct additional research as necessary to develop a 2\u20133 page outline for a performance appraisal training program that incorporates that learning and addresses issues\u2014i.e., cognitive bias.<\/p>\n Your outline should reflect an understanding of Kim Scott\u2019s Radical Candor, Lenny Rachitsky\u2019s Performance Management System, and the agile methodology Peter Cappelli and Anna Tavis discuss in The Harvard Business Review article \u201cThe Performance Management Revolution<\/a>.\u201d\u00a0Since you will be synthesizing existing material, be sure to give credit where credit is due and cite sources appropriately.<\/p>\n
|