Group Applied Project: Final Project
Instructions:
An ideal paper length is a maximum of 12 pages (12pts, Times New Roman, Double Spaced), excluding the cover page and the reference list. You don’t need to write up to 12 pages – it’s fine as long as your paper covers the content sufficiently.
Do not plagiarize. The plagiarism auto-check software can detect any plagiarized sentences. Check this instruction about how to avoid plagiarism
Tips:
Think of your audience as someone who fairly knows HRM. Thus, you do not need to explain the history or detailed definitions of HRM in your intro.
When writing the background information about the company, keep it simple.
Clearly state your scope of the project in the intro.
Explain how you collected information/data (e.g., interview with a manager, online search).
Write your analysis on the company’s HRM practices and your suggestion for improvement. This part is the key highlight of this assignment.
If possible, provide empirical evidence or articles that can support your arguments.
Summarize your findings. Was there anything this company is doing well and should keep it? Was there anything this company should consider fixing/replacing? What is your recommendation?
If possible, conclude the paper by explaining how your analysis can benefit this company.
Include the reference list at the end of the paper.
The two extenstions are information about the company that is used for this essay.
Rubrics:
Criteria
Weak
Adequate
Excellent
Maximum Points
Introduction
Not clearly stated the major focus of the writing; Not explained the target company at all.
Well described but minor corrections needed
Clearly state the major focus of the writing; Sufficiently (but not overly) explain the target company.
1
Analysis (e.g., interview, online search, survey)
Not clearly explained the analysis approach
Well described but minor corrections needed
Clearly explained the analysis approach
2
Finding
Not clearly or not sufficiently stated the findings. (e.g., things that the company is doing well and things that need to be improved)
Well described but minor corrections needed
Clearly and sufficiently stated the findings (e.g., things that the company is doing well and things that need to be improved)
3
Suggested Recommendations
Contained little or no insight or guidance. Not clearly or not sufficiently stated the suggested recommendations. Not discussed the expected effectiveness and practicality of the recommendations.
Contained some actionable, somewhat coordinated strategies that will have some positive impact if implemented. Addresses a few HR issues.
Contained a complete or near-complete set of integrated, actionable strategies that will have a great positive impact if implemented. Addresses most or all relevant HR issues. Discussed the expected effectiveness and practicality of the recommendations.
3
Overall clarity of writing / Deliverability of the formal proposal / Citations
The proposal is poorly organized and difficult to read – does not flow logically from one part to another. There are several spelling and/or grammatical errors; Writing lacks clarity and conciseness; Technical terms may not be defined or are poorly defined; Citations were not included
The proposal is generally well organized and most of the argument is easy to follow. There are only a few minor spelling or grammatical errors; Writing is mostly clear but may lack conciseness; Few terms are not clearly defined; Citations were included but some were not accurate.
The proposal is coherently organized, and the logic is easy to follow. There are no spelling or grammatical errors; Writing is clear and concise and persuasive; Terminology is clearly defined. All citations were included correctly.
1