Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

I’m working on a writing multi-part question and need guidance to help me learn.

1) Does Biver’s story serve as a model of effective leadership or serve as cautionary tale?

2) Has the case challenged your assumptions about leadership and change and/or how to inspire others to adopt a vison?

3) Do you possess any qualities and/or behaviors that allow you to see the world differently than those around you? If not, do you wish you did? Why or why not? What qualities or behaviors do you believe would allow you to see the world differently than those around you?

4) Are you passionate about your work? Why or why not? If someone were to ask you how can they find their passion, what would you tell them?

Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

I’m working on a writing question and need guidance to help me learn.

Instructions: Although I will not assign a number of words or paragraphs, your responses should be thorough and specific. You should consider multiple perspectives and evaluate strengths and weaknesses.

In your responses, please do not restate the facts of the case. Keep in mind that I am familiar with the case, and you need only to mention facts that are relevant to (and support) your analysis or recommendation as you need them. Rather, use the information in the case to illustrate your statements, to defend your arguments, or to make salient points.

You must avoid being descriptive; instead, you must be analytical. You are obliged to offer analysis and evidence to back up your conclusions. Do not rely on unsupported opinions, over-generalizations, and platitudes as a substitute for tight, logical argument backed up with facts and figures.

Please write in a formal manner suitable for scholarly work, rather than a letter to a friend.

Do not use any direct quotes or bullet points.

In general, your paper should be double-spaced, 12 point, Times New Roman font, 1-inch margins, with no grammar or spelling errors.

Format: State the question followed by your response.

1) Does Biver’s story serve as a model of effective leadership or serve as cautionary tale?

2) Has the case challenged your assumptions about leadership and change and/or how to inspire others to adopt a vison?

3) Do you possess any qualities and/or behaviors that allow you to see the world differently than those around you? If not, do you wish you did? Why or why not? What qualities or behaviors do you believe would allow you to see the world differently than those around you?

4) Are you passionate about your work? Why or why not? If someone were to ask you how can they find their passion, what would you tell them?

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.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

Jean Claude Biver Case Analysis Discussion

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!