solid understanding of decision-making process
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
solid understanding of decision-making process
MGT 312
Assignment 1
Deadline: 19/10/2019 @ 23:59
Course Name: Student’s Name: Course Code: Student’s ID Number: Semester: I CRN: Academic Year: 1440/1441 H For Instructor’s Use only
Instructor’s Name: Students’ Grade: Marks Obtained/Out of Level of Marks: High/Middle/Low Instructions – PLEASE READ THEM CAREFULLY
- The Assignment must be submitted on Blackboard (WORD format only) via allocated folder.
- Assignments submitted through email will not be accepted.
- Students are advised to make their work clear and well presented, marks may be reduced for poor presentation. This includes filling your information on the cover page.
- Students must mention question number clearly in their answer.
- Late submission will NOT be accepted.
- Avoid plagiarism, the work should be in your own words, copying from students or other resources without proper referencing will result in ZERO marks. No exceptions.
- All answered must be typed using Times New Roman (size 12, double-spaced) font. No pictures containing text will be accepted and will be considered plagiarism).
- Submissions without this cover page will NOT be accepted.
Course Learning Outcomes-Covered
- Demonstrate a solid understanding of decision making process for complex issues pertaining to business environment both internally and externally. (1.2)
- Apply and analyze various concepts of problem solving in diverse contexts and business situations. (1.5 & 2.2)
- Identify and analyze different perspectives on understanding problems for different situations. (3.1)
- Utilize different decision making tools to enhance problem solving and decision making approaches. (4.3)
- Identify ethical issues and dilemmas that businesses often face and employ ethical standards in all manners and circumstances. (1.4 & 3.3)
Critical Thinking Case studies:
Let us examine the problem faced by Mr. Talal, Regional Manager of Medico KSA pvt. ltd., Medico makes and distributes products from more than 15 international pharmaceutical and health care companies. Mr. Talal is responsible for managing existing clients and also to get new clients. He manages a number of sales representatives. Important customers have a dedicated sales representatives, while other sales representatives try to get new clients.
One day an important customer (Al-Shifa Hospital) called Mr. Talal and complained that Mr. Rashad (the sales representative) was ineffective and insisted he be removed, or else they would not give any business. Al-Shifa Hospital is a major customer and gives good business.
In an internal enquiry, Mr. Talal found that there was was personal differences between Mr. Rashad and the hospital superintendent. The track record of Mr. Rashad was good and he was liked within the company. Mr. Rashsad was star employee and one of the role model for other sales people.
Assignment Question(s): (Marks 05)
- Identify the problem. [and other sub problems]
- Main problem: ……………………………………..
- Other problems:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
- What could be the causes of problem?
- Cause of the problem- 5 Why Technique
- Why-1
- Why-2
- Why-3
- Why-4
- Why-5
- Develop a Cause and Effect Diagram
- Gather information: What information should the you gather that would be helpful to know before making a decision?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
….
- Consider the outcome. What would be the results of the decision?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e
- Make the decision. What should the Mr. Talal do?
- Evaluate the decision. Why do you think this is the best decision possible?
- Mr. Talal may face Ethical dilemma in finding solutions. What could be possible ethical issues in the above case.
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 solid understanding of decision-making process