Attachment # 00011316 - Rubrics_BUS_660_Week_8_Data_Analysis_Case_Study.xlsx
Rubrics_BUS_660_Week_8_Data_Analysis_Case_Study.xlsx (13.35 KB)
Raw Preview of Attachment:
(refer to the detailed question and attachment below)
Sources are not documented.Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.Total Weightage 100% 1 Unsatisfactory 0.00%2 less than satisfactory 74.00%3 Satisfactory 79.00%4 Good 87.00% 5 Excellent 100.00%Forecasting Case Study: New Business Planning 5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.All format elements are correctFormat 10.0%5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)8.0 % Argument Logic and ConstructionStatement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.7.0 % Thesis Development and PurposePaper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.Organizationi & Effectiveness 20.0%Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.20.0 % Rationale The rationale is incomprehensible or omitted.The rationale ineffectively justifies the recommendations for the best course of action with weak support.The rationale broadly justifies the recommendations for the best course of action with relevant support.The rationale clearly justifies the recommendations for the best course of action with logical support.The rationale directly justifies the recommendations for the best course of action with compelling support.20.0 % Recommendations for the Best Course of Action The recommendations for the best course of action are incomprehensible or omitted.The recommendations for the best course of action are irrelevant or illogical.The recommendations for the best course of action are understandable and reasonable.The recommendations for the best course of action are clear and sound.The recommendations for the best course of action are thorough and thoughtful.20.0 % Explanation of the Simulation Model The explanation of the simulation model is incomprehensible or omitted.The explanation of the simulation model is irrelevant or illogical.The explanation of the simulation model is understandable and adequate.The explanation of the simulation model is clear and logical.The explanation of the simulation model is substantial and thoughtful.10.0 % Simulation ModelThe simulation model is highly inaccurate, unable to be understood in its format, or omitted.The simulation model is incomplete or unreasonable for the task.The simulation model is reasonable for the task.The simulation model is appropriate for the task.The simulation model is clear and purposefully chosen for the task.Content 70%
BUS660 assignment week 8

BUS660 assignment week 8

Question # 00625512 Posted By: tmedina11 Updated on: 12/07/2017 10:52 PM Due on: 12/09/2017
Subject Business Topic General Business Tutorials:
Question
Dot Image

Review "Simulation Case Study: Phoenix Boutique Hotel Group" for this topic's case study, in which you provide guidance to Phoenix Boutique Hotel Group (PBHG) founder Bree Bristowe.

In addition to creating a simulation model, prepare a 500-750-word recommendation for Bristowe's best course of action. Explain your model and the rationale for your recommendations.

Use an Excel spreadsheet file for the calculations and explanations. Cells should contain the formulas (i.e., if a formula was used to calculate the entry in that cell). Students are highly encouraged to use the "Simulation Case Study: Phoenix Boutique Hotel Group Template" Excel resource to complete this assignment.

Mac users can use StatPlus:mac LE, free of charge, from AnalystSoft.

Prepare the assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

BUS-660-RS-T8SimulationCaseStudyPhoenixBoutiqueHotelGroupTemplate.xlsx BUS-660-RS-T8SimulationCaseStudyPhoenixBoutiqueHotelGroup.docx
Dot Image
Attachments
BUS-660-RS-T8SimulationCaseStudyPhoenixBoutiqueHotelGroup.docx (52.08 KB)
BUS-660-RS-T8SimulationCaseStudyPhoenixBoutiqueHotelGroupTemplate.xlsx (26.18 KB)
Rubrics_BUS_660_Week_8_Data_Analysis_Case_Study.xlsx (13.35 KB)
Tutorials for this Question
  1. neil2103
    Tutorial # 00624197 Posted By: neil2103 Posted on: 12/07/2017 11:02 PM
    Puchased By: 3
    Tutorial Preview
    The solution of BUS660 assignment week 8...
      Get the Solution
    Attachments
    Recommendation_from_the_simulation_(3).docx (16.43 KB)
    work_(1).xlsx (25.95 KB)
Whatsapp Lisa