| Week 4, Paper 1 | Week 6, Paper 2 |
SK is 
You are Visitor
#
since 1/4/1998.
(LE
FastCounter
UST 625/725 
Paper 2
Present a structured report that could be used as a case study for a strategic planning class. Reflect on product and process: what worked, what would you do differently if you could do it over? Include substantive issues as well as group dynamics issues in your critique of the process. Dwell on the plan component you were responsible for.
| CONTENT |
-
- Title, Viking Number (no name!!!)
- Introduction (brief): topic, short description of the case essence, layout of the paper (road map), your main conclusions.
- Content:
-
- describe briefly plan, highlighting your contribution to it;
- evaluate the ways and extent to which your plan serves the client;
- speculate on different possible alternatives that would have worked better, and what would have had to be different (client, site or process).
- describe briefly plan, highlighting your contribution to it;
- Conclusions:
-
- sum up your analysis (w/out repeating paragraphs of preceding sections);
- derive from this case some strategic thinking insights with general validity.
- sum up your analysis (w/out repeating paragraphs of preceding sections);
- Suggestions
-
- label the statements that are not incontrovertible facts as your beliefs, & provide your reasoning for them in terms of facts & your values;
- break your report into titled sections & subsections (listed in the Introduction) to help the reader identify the overall logic of your paper as well as what to expect in the following paragraphs (read section and subsection titles to check that they make sense as a group & support your arguments).
- be concise; proof-read for typos and for completeness and correctness of sentences; have a friend or a writing lab advisor read your report and comment on its logic, form and interest.
- label the statements that are not incontrovertible facts as your beliefs, & provide your reasoning for them in terms of facts & your values;
- Title, Viking Number (no name!!!)
| GRADING |
-
- Form: use of the proposed analytical structure, conciseness, clarity;
- Content: logic and completeness of arguments, presence of reasons for the answers, coverage of issues required, ability to derive general insights from the specific case, contribution beyond insights offered in the case.
- Form: use of the proposed analytical structure, conciseness, clarity;
| Week | 4 | 6 | |
| FORM |
-
- Be concise and bring in information only when needed to support one of your arguments.
- Use conflict management concepts discussed in class wherever possible.
- Break paper into titled sections by topic. Do not retell the story at every step except when needed for argumentation.
- Write up to 6 typed pages (1 inch margins, double-spaced).
- Proof-read for typos and for completeness of sentences.
- Be concise and bring in information only when needed to support one of your arguments.
| GRADING |
-
- Form: use of the proposed analytical structure, conciseness, clarity, attention to the difference between facts, beliefs, values and attribution to any sources used;
- Content: logic and completeness of arguments, coverage of issues required, ability to derive general insights about two-party conflicts from your specific case, contribution beyond insights offered in the case.
- Form: use of the proposed analytical structure, conciseness, clarity, attention to the difference between facts, beliefs, values and attribution to any sources used;
| Week | 4 | 6 | |
(.)