A-technologically-driven-company-Justification-Report-2-1-help

by

Assignment 2.1: Justification Report – Part 1 

(NO PLAGIARISM)

In Assignments 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, you will develop a formal, researched justification report that culminates in a recommendation to implement a particular product, service, or program in your place of employment in phases. This recommended product, service, or program should resolve a problem that you identify in your workplace and should be directed to your employer (even if you do not actually plan to share it with your employer).

Assignment 2.1 has two parts. First, you will develop a block business letter requesting subject approval for your report topic. The letter should be properly formatted per the guidelines below and should be addressed to your professor (you may use your local campus address for the purposes of this assignment) (3/4’s page to 1 page long). Additionally, you will develop an annotated bibliography (1-2 pages long) detailing potential sources for use in your report.

See the Week 3 tab in Blackboard for examples of block letter format and the annotated bibliography expected for this assignment.

The block letter must:

·  Be properly formatted including sender’s address, date, recipient’s address, greeting, 3-4 body paragraphs, and salutation.

·  Highlight the intention of the report (what problem will be discussed and what potential alternatives will be used to address the problem).

·  Discuss five criteria to be used to compare the alternatives listed above.

Your annotated bibliography must:

·  Be formatted with an accurate APA reference entry to be followed by a short 2-3 line summary of why the source may be relevant in the final report.

·  Should cover a minimum of 2-4 quality sources.

Your assignment must:

  • Be typed, single spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA as required.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, your name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

·  Support ideas or claims in body paragraphs with clear details, examples, and explanations.

·  Organize ideas logically by using transitional words, phrases, and sentences.

·  Use sentence variety and effective word choice in written communication.

·  Apply writing process strategies to develop formal business reports and / or proposals.

  • Use technology and information resources to research issues related to selected topics.
  • Write clearly and concisely using proper writing mechanics.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.

Chosen topic:

The topic for my justification report is “A technologically driven company”. The criteria to be used here is the good performance criteria. This is because these criteria will help me interpret how various activities are being conducted in the company; are they fast or slow. Slow activities will signify no technological application as fast activities will help me see the essence of technology in the company. Secondly, this criterion will also help me draw a conclusion as to whether indeed the company is technologically driven. This is because fast activities will mean good performance and slow activities low/poor performance by the company.


I attached a justification report sample below.

Points: 150

Assignment 2.1: Justification Report – Part 1

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations

60-69% D

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Proper block letter format (addresses, spacing, greeting, design, salutation).

Weight: 15%

Did not follow guidelines for format, spacing, and/or design (3 or more major format errors).

Multiple issues with format elements, spacing, and/or design (2 major format errors; multiple minor errors).

General format and spacing presented in submission correct (1 major format error; multiple minor errors).

Format mostly followed proper guidelines (no more than 4 minor errors).

Format followed proper guidelines as detailed (no more than 2 minor errors).

2. Provide appropriate content described in assignment details (problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).

Weight: 15%

Did not follow guidelines for content (3 or more major errors).

Multiple issues with content elements (2 missing or underdeveloped elements; multiple minor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).

General content properly presented (1 missing or underdeveloped element; multiple minor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).

Content mostly followed proper guidelines (no more than 4 minor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).

Content followed proper guidelines detailed (no more than 2 minor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).

3. Professional style in presentation of information (appropriate word choice, design, tone). 

Weight: 5%

Did not present information in appropriate style (3 or more major errors).

Multiple issues with professional style (2 major errors).

General professional style in presentation of information (1 major error; multiple minor errors).

Professional style in presentation of information mostly effective (3-4 minor errors).

Professional style in presentation of information excellent (0-2 minor errors).

4. Appropriate format for Annotated Bibliography per posted example (including accurate APA entries, design, spacing).

Weight: 25%

Did not follow proper format (3 or more major errors).

Multiple issues with appropriate format for Annotated Bibliography per posted example (2 major errors).

General format correct for Annotated Bibliography (1 major error; multiple minor errors).

Appropriate format mostly followed for Annotated Bibliography per posted example (3-4 minor errors).

Appropriate format for Annotated Bibliography followed proper guidelines as detailed (no more than 2 minor errors).

5. Short descriptions provided (1-3 lines) for each source discussing potential relevance to assignment.

Weight: 15%

Did not include short descriptions for each source presented.

Descriptions provided insufficient in terms of detail/clarity in discussing potential relevance to assignment (missing 1 or more descriptions).

Descriptions provided generally relevant but needed more detail/clarity in discussing potential relevance to assignment (no missing descriptions).

Descriptions all present and at least one has minor content issues.

All descriptions presented and no minor content issues.

6. Included 2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (quality, topic, relevance).

Weight: 5%

Did not provide sources as required.

Missing minimum 1 source or at least 1 source not relevant for assignment.

Included 2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (2 major problems with quality, topic, or relevance).

Included 2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (1 major problem / 3 minor errors with quality, topic, or relevance).

All sources presented were high quality, relevant, and topical (less than 2 minor errors).

7. Writing clarity, mechanics, proper grammar/spelling/sentence development.

Weight: 20%

More than 8 errors present.

7-8 errors present.

5-6 errors present.

3-4 errors present.

0-2 errors present.