Assignment ID Number AFFGEHU83939HD Type of Document Essay Writing Format APA/MLA/Harvard Academic Level Masters/University References/Sources 4 References Number of Pages 10 Pages Quality Level 100% Spacing Double
1. Assignment 1: Prioritizing Projects at D. D. Williamson (Case Study from Chapter 2)
Due Week 3 and worth 240 points
Read the case titled: Prioritizing Projects at D. D. Williamson found in Chapter 2.
Write a six to eight (6-8) page paper in which you:
1. Analyze the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.
2. Suggest two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.
3. Create a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.
4. Project five (5) years ahead and speculate whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process. Justify your answer.
5. Use at least four (4) quality (peer-reviewed) resources in this assignment.
Your assignment must:
· Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
· Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the students name, the professors name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:
· Assess organizational strategies that contribute to effective project management of human resources.
· Use technology and information resources to research issues in managing human resource projects.
· Write clearly and concisely about managing human resource projects using proper writing mechanics.
Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills. Click here to access the rubric for this assignment.
Criteria 0 – 1 Points 2 – 3 Point 4 – 5 Points Total Professional communication Unprofessional communication; many errors; no APA Minor grammar, spelling, and APA errors Postings are professional and in standard written English with APA Complete addressing of assessment criteria Criteria not fully addressed Minimal response to criteria; minor aspects missing All criteria are fully addressed Evidence of critical thinking or extending information Critical thinking or extending information not evident Obvious responses to questions; little thought evident Posts demonstrate critical thinking with evidence base from research or experience Course connections. No connections provided Minimal connections provided to readings/activities Clear connections to readings/activities Submitted an overview / summary of the case selected for analysis. Also identified those procedural steps to be analyzed. Did not provide an adequate overview or summary of the selected case or failed to identify those steps to be analyzed. Provides an adequate overview or summary of the selected case and steps to be analyzed though may not be clear or complete. Case overview is clearly presented including all appropriate investigative steps to be analyzed. TOTAL /25