Medtronics Aortic Stent Grafts: Australia Expansion
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Medtronics Aortic Stent Grafts: Australia Expansion”
Top of Form
The format for this project will be a presentation being delivered to a board of directors or upper management team for expansion approval. Each project assignment should be submitted in Microsoft PowerPoint format. Your assignments should be set up with your slides as if you were giving a presentation and utilizing the speaker’s note section for your content. Your presentation should be proofread for spelling and grammar. Your presentation slides should be concise.
Expanding operations requires research and planning; this is especially true when dealing with crossing borders to other regions and countries. During this first project assignment, the focus is to conduct background research on your chosen company, the country, or region of expansion, and the product itself.
Medtronics-
Create a 5-7 slide presentation using the speaker’s notes section for your content and the slides for presentation purposes. Include the following information:
Your presentation should be proofread for spelling and grammar. Your presentation slides should be concise.
Medtronics Aortic Stent Grafts: Australia Expansion
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow |