Location strategy- as this factor was influencing the sales of Toyota Company due to which it used global, local location and regional strategies. i like you submission. in addition to this, do these too:. I only see any betterment to what was issued to me earlier. Therefore, I have taken some extra time to comment. Please go through my comments. "by way of" "Toyota Company" "Company Toyota" "This Factor: " These above all are key elements of this essay.

I appreciate the effort you put into my assignm,ent. Just make sure to do things this way. - Are you paraphrasing some documents using some software? some part of the assignment language gonna need that. - Are you paraphrasing in in such a way way such that Turnitin software gives a low %? - Has any thinking and effort from the perspective of an assignment put into it? - Can you please read through and make necessary language corrections which is in line the English? - also do the Citations and Reference in the Manage Source menu of the document? Being a process or manufacturing design, in this process is sequenced as per the types of undertaken process These factors can be analyzed by considering the specified product or serviced produced in a specified industry. Various factors affect the selection of process design the Toyota Company applies in the manufacturing activities of its vehicles (Mithas et al., ). It is process design which falls between the continuous process design and batch process design. In this case, Toyota Company has to hold on to the environmentally and economically friendly vehicles current chosen by its customers.

Critical analysis based on evidence Standard of critical analysis – showing questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought Excellent standard of critical analysis – excellence in questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought A very good standard of critical analysis. Sources are questioned appropriately, and a very good understanding of bias, showing independence of thought Critical analysis with some questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought. Analysis evident but uncritical. Sources are not always questioned, with limited independence of thought. Little or no analysis. No valid analysis. Structure of argument, leading to conclusion Well structured, compelling and persuasive argument that leads to a valuable contribution to the field of study, paving the way for future work. Argument has excellent structure and persuasiveness, leading to very significant insights and relevant future work. Well-structured and persuasive argument Insightful conclusion draws together key issues and possible future work. Structured and fairly convincing argument leads to conclusion that summarises key issues.

Literature Comprehensive literature review. Evaluation and synthesis of source material to produce an outstanding contribution. Excellent independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce an excellent contribution. Very good independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce a very good contribution. Good secondary research to extend taught materials. Evidence of evaluation of sources, with some deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Limited secondary research to extend taught materials. Limited evaluation of sources, deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Little or no extension of taught materials. Poor choice and synthesis of materials. Poor use of taught materials. No synthesis.

Understanding of subject matter Outstanding with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Excellent with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Excellent expression of ideas. Very good with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Good with some awareness of relevance of issues. Ideas are expressed, with some limitation. Basic with limited awareness of relevance of issues. Limited expression of ideas. Poor with little awareness of relevance of issues Little or no understanding of subject matter is demonstrated.

Criterion / Mark range 90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 0-39 Overall level (indicative – not for grading) Standard comparable to journal publication Standard comparable to conference paper publication Distinctive work for Masters level Merit work for Masters level Acceptable for Masters Below Masters pass standard Significantly below Masters pass standard Scope Outstanding clarity of focus, includes what is important, and excludes irrelevant issues. Excellent clarity of focus, boundaries set with no significant omissions or unnecessary issues. Clear focus. Very good setting of boundaries, includes most of what is relevant. Clear scope and focus, with some omissions or unnecessary issues. Scope evident and satisfactory but with some omissions and unnecessary issues. Poorly scoped, with significant omissions and unnecessary issues. Little or no scope or focus evident.

The assignment must be submitted as a single file only, in Word format, via RKC’s OnlineCampus. Please remember that marks for the assignment will also be awarded in relation to presentation and structure, and aspects such as use of examples, figures, tables, illustrations and statistics that indicate evidence of wider/independent reading (particularly from peer-reviewed/refereed sources).Please see at the end of this document the school’s Marking Criteria for your level of study.

This assignment represents 50% of your overall module mark. The word count is 3,000 words (+/- 10%). You will also need to take the following into account when completing your assignment: • Quality of executive summary (does it give a brief complete summary of your paper for an executive to read?) • Establishment of relevant theory (e.g. what do we mean by lean manufacturing and process management?) • Allocation of credit and sources used (have I included references and citations to the material I have used?) • Clarity of argument • Overall report presentation including spelling and grammar • Adherence to nominated word limit • Word processed (letter size 12, times new roman, 1.5 space), fully referenced (Harvard Referencing System).