Structure (6.0) Organisation, report structure, flow, adherence to KBS referencing guidelines and writing style Sketchy executive summary. Did not follow the KBS referencing guidelines and report writing conventions sufficiently. Need to improve grammar, spelling, and the flow of the report. Followed KBS referencing guidelines to some extent. Appropriate executive summary but need to improve. There is disconnect between some sections. Appropriate flow and followed report writing conventions to some extent. Reasonably good writing style. Followed KBS referencing guidelines well. Followed report writing conventions sufficiently. The structure and the flow are good. Adequate focus on spelling, grammar, and the writing style. The report structure and the flow are very good. The different sections of the report connect logically. Followed KBS referencing guidelines well. Good writing style; grammar, spelling and academically oriented writing. Maintained a very good flow; the sections in the report connect logically and seamlessly. Very good executive summary. Followed KBS referencing guidelines well.

Recommendations (6.0) Comprehensive, strategic and in line with the stakeholder model Recommendations are missing or incomplete Recommendations are very general in nature – there is a disconnect between the analysis, categorisation and the recommendations. Either few or long list without sufficient justification. The recommendations are broadly in line with the stakeholder analysis and categorisation. Sufficient justification for the recommendations and integrated the generic strategy options sufficiently. Some research evident. Recommendations are in line with the stakeholder analysis and stakeholder categorisation. The recommendations flow from the generic strategy option analysis. Need to justify further. Engaged literature when justifying the recommendations. Comprehensive recommendations that cover the chosen stakeholders well. The recommendations are entirely in line with the analysis and categorisation. The recommendations are emerging from the generic strategy options and provided a good justification. Engaged literature well to justify.

Comprehensive analysis of generic strategy options in the context of the case study company. Very good justification for stakeholder categorisation and supported the arguments with scholarly views. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. into the analysis very well.

Category identification and generic strategy programs (8.0) Critical analysis and engagement of generic strategy programs The insufficient justification for stakeholder categorisation. Lack of discussion about generic strategy programs. A basic justification for stakeholder categorisation. The categorisation is in line with the analysis to some extent. A basic indication of the generic strategy programs; insufficient integration with the case study company. Provided enough justification for stakeholder categorisation. The categorisation is in line with the analysis. Engaged literature to some extent to strengthen the arguments. Discussed and integrated the generic strategy programs to the case study company. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. into the analysis to some extent. Provided sound justification for stakeholder categorisation. Good analysis of generic strategy options in the context of the case study company and engaged literature and scholarly views to strengthen the arguments. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. into the analysis.

Stakeholder Analysis (8.0) Critical analysis and engagement of concepts Insufficient coverage of key concepts associated with stakeholder analysis. The analysis is superficial or non- existent. A basic analysis of stakeholders. Engaged some of the concepts associated with stakeholder analysis but the analysis lacks depth and detail. Integration of stakeholder analysis related concepts to some extent. Sufficient analysis. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. to some extent. Covered most of the concepts associated with stakeholder analysis. Provided strong justification and engaged scholarly views and arguments to enhance the depth of the review. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. into the analysis. Provided a comprehensive analysis of stakeholders while engaging all the concepts associated with stakeholder analysis. Engaged literature and scholarly views to strengthen the arguments and justifications. Integrated journal articles, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, etc. into the analysis. Very well.

Criteria Below 50% Pass 50% - 64% Credit 65%-74% Distinction 75% - 84% High Distinction above 85% Introduction and the stakeholder view (7.0) Analytical rather than descriptive Basic introduction to the company. Insufficient capturing of trends and challenges. Lacks analysis. The stakeholder view is incomplete. Basic introduction to the company. Covered trends and challenges but basic analysis/ glossed over. Basic stakeholder view framework. Overall, descriptive than analytical. Covered all the necessary points sufficiently. A certain degree of analysis visible. Captured and analysed the vision, mission, trends, and challenges adequately. Good stakeholder diagram and description. Some research evident. Covered all the necessary points well. Good analysis; went beyond descriptions. Integrated literature and concepts well. Good review of vision, mission, trends, and challenges. Complete stakeholder diagram. Presented a holistic introduction. Very good analysis of the vision, mission, trends, and challenges. Very good coverage of stakeholders; comprehensive yet concise descriptions. Presented the stakeholder diagram very well.

Hi There, I need help with the assignment of management subject. I have attached assignment details and in addition I have attached lecture slides to look in detail. For assignment Please refer MARKING RUBRIC attached in the assignment criteria and please focus on HD criteria. And also, make sure about plagiarism because from my institute other students also give you to make assignment due to that last time I suffered with that problem and I failed in subject. so please tack care of it.