|
Points: 150
|
Assignment 4: Negotiating a Contract with the Navy
|
|
Criteria
|
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
|
Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D
|
Fair
70-79% C
|
Proficient
80-89% B
|
Exemplary
90-100% A
|
|
1. Determine two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Provide a rationale for your response.
Weight: 35%
|
Did not submit or incompletely determined two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Did not provide or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
|
Insufficiently determined two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.
|
Partially determined two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Partially provided a rationale for your response.
|
Satisfactorily determined two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
|
Thoroughly determined two (2) potential profit objectives that you will consider for accepting a less than normal profit margin if you win the contract. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response.
|
|
2. Determine two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Provide a rationale for your response. Weight: 40%
|
Did not submit or incompletely determined two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Did not provide or incompletely provided a rationale for your response.
|
Insufficiently determined two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Insufficiently provided a rationale for your response.
|
Partially determined two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Partly provided a rationale for your response.
|
Satisfactorily determined two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Satisfactorily provided a rationale for your response.
|
Thoroughly determined two to three (2-3) negotiation strategies or tactics that you feel would be effective for winning the contract. Thoroughly provided a rationale for your response.
|
|
3. 3 references
Weight: 5%
|
No references provided
|
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
|
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
|
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
|
Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices.
|
|
4. Writing mechanics, grammar, and formatting
Weight: 5%
|
Serious and persistent errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
|
Numerous errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
|
Partially free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
|
Mostly free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
|
Error free or almost error free grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting.
|
|
5. Appropriate use of APA in-text citations and reference section
Weight: 5%
|
Lack of in-text citations and / or lack of reference section.
|
In-text citations and references are given, but not in APA format.
|
In-text citations and references are provided, but they are only partially formatted correctly in APA style.
|
Most in-text citations and references are provided, and they are generally formatted correctly in APA style.
|
In-text citations and references are error free or almost error free and consistently formatted correctly in APA style.
|
|
6. Information literacy / integration of sources
Weight: 5%
|
Serious errors in the integration of sources, such as intentional or accidental plagiarism, or failure to use in-text citations.
|
Sources are rarely integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing.
|
Sources are partially integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing.
|
Sources are mostly integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing.
|
Sources are consistently integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing.
|
|
7. Clarity and coherence of writing
Weight: 5%
|
Information is confusing to the reader and fails to include reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
|
Information is somewhat confusing with not enough reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
|
Information is partially clear with minimal reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
|
Information is mostly clear and generally supported with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
|
Information is provided in a clear, coherent, and consistent manner with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas.
|