Points: 150 | Case Study 3: The Commoditization of Starbucks |
Criteria | Unacceptable Below 70% F | Fair 70-79% C | Proficient 80-89% B | Exemplary 90-100% A |
1.
Explain the reasoning for Starbucks’ need for a change in strategic
direction in response to McDonald’s and then explain the process of the
changes. Weight: 20% | Did
not submit or incompletely explained t he reasoning for Starbucks’ need
for a change in strategic direction in response to McDonald’s; did not
submit or incompletely explained the process of the changes. | Partially
explained the reasoning for Starbucks’ need for a change in strategic
direction in response to McDonald’s; partially explained the process of
the changes. | Satisfactorily
explained t he reasoning for Starbucks’ need for a change in strategic
direction in response to McDonald’s; satisfactorily explained the
process of the changes. | Thoroughly
explained t he reasoning for Starbucks’ need for a change in strategic
direction in response to McDonald’s; thoroughly explained the process of the changes. |
2. Review the benefits of making this organizational change and why it was necessary. Weight: 20% | Did
not submit or incompletely reviewed the benefits of making this
organizational change; did not submit or incompletely stated why it was
necessary. | Partially reviewed the benefits of making this organizational change; partially stated why it was necessary.
| Satisfactorily reviewed the benefits of making this organizational change; satisfactorily stated why it was necessary.
| Thoroughly reviewed the benefits of making this organizational change; thoroughly stated why it was necessary.
|
3. Assess the risks of making such a structural change in an established company like Starbucks. Weight: 25% | Did not submit or incompletely assessed the risks of making such a structural change in an established company like Starbucks. | Partially assessed the risks of making such a structural change in an established company like Starbucks. | Satisfactorily assessed the risks of making such a structural change in an established company like Starbucks. | Thoroughly assessed the risks of making such a structural change in an established company like Starbucks. |
4.
Compare the financial data in the case study to the data on Yahoo
Finance’s Website. Conclude whether or not the change in organizational
structure has returned Starbucks to its former status. Weight: 20% | Did
not submit or incompletely compared the financial data in the case
study to the data on Yahoo Finance’s Website. Did not submit or
incompletely concluded whether or not the change in organizational
structure has returned Starbucks to its former status. | Partially
compared the financial data in the case study to the data on Yahoo
Finance’s Website. Partially concluded whether or not the change in
organizational structure has returned Starbucks to its former status. | Satisfactorily
compared the financial data in the case study to the data on Yahoo
Finance’s Website. Satisfactorily concluded whether or not the change in
organizational structure has returned Starbucks to its former status. | Thoroughly
compared the financial data in the case study to the data on Yahoo
Finance’s Website. Thoroughly concluded whether or not the change in
organizational structure has returned Starbucks to its former status. |
5. 4 References Weight: 5% | No references provided. | Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices. | Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. | Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. |
6. Clarity and writing mechanics Weight: 10% | More than 6 errors present | 5-6 errors present | 3-4 errors present | 0-2 errors present |