Rubric for MFP: MBA 2019Item /criteriaForm C (60-70)Form B (71-85)Form A (86-100)Chapters 1/ 2: Background, and project and its significance clearly stated; problem well identified and described with data; organizational analysis provided; follows chapter structures; problem analysis done well; root cause analysis and other relevant tools eg. SWOTProblem description not clear; data not sufficient; not adequately supported by qualitative data; does not have very significant impact to the organization/unit; problem chosen is too generic; does not follow the chapter structure given; Ch 1 & 2 changes advised are ignored; problem analysis not adequate and tools not used correctly; cause and effect analysis needs much improvement; writes beyond suggested page limitsProblem description is fairly well described; data is sufficient but can be improved; somewhat supported by qualitative data; does have medium impact to the organization/unit; problem chosen is relevant to the organization; does follow to a greater extent the chapter structure given; Ch1 & 2 adhere to changes advised in problem analysis; but further improvements can be made in problem analysis, description; can further improve on cause and effect analysis; labeling and identifying root causes and not moving to 4th level.Manages the suggested page limitsProblem description is well described; data is well presented and supported by qualitative data; does have a high impact to the organization/unit; problem chosen is very relevant to the organization; does follow to the chapter structure given; Ch1 & 2 adhere to changes advised.Problem analysis is very well presented; cause and effect analysis labeling and identifying root causes and moving to 4th level; root causes identified are relevant and well identified.Manages the page limits given; very well stay focused to the structureChapter 3: Adequately addressees the theoretical background of the problem and supports the study framework with minimum of 12 journal papers (Ranked Journals ABDC); description of the techniques used givenLiterature survey done does not reflect well/not relevant with the main category labels identified in the root cause analysis; all categories identified in cause and effect analysis not addressed; 12 ranked journals not provided and can further improve; framework is not aligned with the category labels of cause and effect analysis; hardly any description of the techniques to be used; writes beyond suggested page limits; need to re-do the alignment, problem description and problem analysis and study frameworkLiterature survey done reflect fairly well/sometimes not relevant with the main category labels identified in the root cause analysis; contains some irrelevant literature; can further improve to address the categories identified in cause and effect analysis; 10-12 ranked journals provided; can further improve.Framework is aligned with the category labels but can improve in naming the labels; all category labels (in cause and effect) are not well linked with framework and can improve description of the techniques given but can improve.Manages the suggested page limitsLiterature survey done reflect well/ relevant with the main category labels identified in the root cause analysis; provides comprehensive literature in support of category labels identified and goes beyond the minimum 12 journals.Framework is well aligned with the category labels and needs no further improvements; description of the techniques given and needs no further improvements.Manages the page limits given; very well stay focused to the structureChapter 4: Project and project objectives well addressed; project comments are clearly shown and described; resource allocation given; budget provided; clear benefit-cost given as in the template and projected outputs and outcomes provided; project plan clearly presented; adheres to mandatory tablesEach Component in the framework has not got objectives; and are not adequately linked to solutions; outputs and outcomes are not aligned with the objectives; all solutions are not arrived from root causes; and are not linked with budget /procedure; appendices given are inadequate and unclear; project, project objectives, project components and objectives not aligned; benefit cost analysis is not correctly given but can improve; supported by more clear understanding of cost for solutions given; need revision; outputs at are not well linked with the project components objectives; how overall project output is met is not clear (linking with all 3 project components); outcomes not clear; need revision; does not adhere to mandatory tablesNeed to improve in the alignment; problem; problem analysis and study framework; each component in the framework has not got clear objectives and can further improve; and solutions provided can be improved by linking with root causes; inconsistent in listing solutions and giving solutions with references to appendices/budget; each item in solutions do not have a clear link to a realistic budget /procedure and can further improve.Project components, proposed solutions and budget mandatory table presented; solution development is fairly clear and some linked with a procedure /budget; can further improve to link with the procedure budget and to convince the management; benefit cost analysis given but can improve supported by more clear understanding of cost for solutions given.Outputs are inconsistently linked with the project components objectives, solutions and in some instances solutions not given clearly; how overall project output is met is adequate but can improve; outcomes are given but can improveThe alignment, problem, problem analysis and study framework is very well done; holistic nature of the problem and solutions and budget are well presented and is acceptable to a company; all category labels (in cause and effect) are well linked with framework and require no revision; each component in the framework has got clear objectives and is linked with the overall objective of the study.Project components, proposed solutions and budget mandatory table presented; consistent in listing solutions and giving solutions with references to appendices /budget which are very clear and implementable; solutions supported by invoices and are practical and acceptable to the company; project, project objectives, components, solutions are very well linked with outputs; benefit cost analysis given supported by clear understanding of cost for solutions given; where required NPV given; presented/discussed with the companyOutputs are consistently linked with the project components; objectives and well linked with solutions; outputs are met with the project objectives; outcomes are well articulated and linked with intangible benefits in benefit cost analysis; summary of solutions slide very well summarized the link with solutions and outputs and budget; well acceptable project to an organizationChapter 5: Link with literature a discussion; clear recommendations given acceptable to the company and provides a basis to resolve the problems faced by the company; provides management of the projectHardly presents viable recommendations in short term as well as long term; recommendations are not correctly done and have a discussion poorly linked with the literature; need revision; cannot present to an organizationDiscussion is done adequately linking with literature but can further improve; recommendations need revision to address the company commitment, resources, and budget; can further improve on short term recommendations.Management of project is adequate but can improve by selecting key solutions that results in addressing the problem; can present to an organization with improvementDiscussion is done very well linking with literature and presents research approachShort term implementation is well defined in terms of company commitment, resources, and budget in working out recommendationManagement of the project well defined and selected key solutions that results in addressing the problem; well linked with the budget and is supported with an implementable budget (supported with documents) and is convincing to any management; solution development is clear and is well linked with a procedure /budget; can present to an organization without further improvementProject Report: Chapter structure for MFP project; chapter introduction and conclusion references; all citations in text; executive summary; overall formatting; adherence to PIM guidelines; English editing etc.; appendices well defined with proceduresRequires revision in Table of Contents; structure of chapters; chapter introductions and summary; overall formatting; adherence to PIM guidelines, English editing need to be improved; errors in referencing; in-text citations inadequate appendices given and poor attempt in writing proceduresRequires few revisions in Table of Contents; structure of chapters, chapter introductions and summary; overall formatting, adherence to PIM guidelines, English editing need to be improved; some errors in referencing in-text citations; adequate appendices given but can further improve on procedures/process charts givenRequires no revision in Table of Contents; structure of chapters, chapter introductions and summary; overall formatting, adherence to PIM guidelines, English editing well completed; no errors in referencing, in-text citations; Appendices given are clear with well-defined; procedures/process charts given; procedures linked with QMS and budgets supported by invoicesDate: 30 November 2020
Hi there! Click one of our representatives below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.