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
|