Nutristar Case Study Assignment | ORDER # | 100105 | | | | PAPER TYPE | ESSAY | | | | WRITING LEVEL | UNDERGRADUATE | | | | WRITING STYLE | APA | | | | # OF SOURCES | 4 | | | | NUMBER OF PAGES & WORD COUNT | 7 ≈ 1925 WORDS |
For this assignment, read the case study, “Nutristar” starting on page 342 of your textbook. Once you have read and reviewed the case scenario, respond to the following questions with thorough explanations and well-supported rationale. Create a program evaluation and review technique (PERT), Gantt, or critical path method (CPM) network diagram for this project. Which path do you expect to be the critical path, and what is its expected completion time?
What are the process resource allocations and your recommended monitoring processes?
How might the project manager at Nutristar incorporate simulation analysis into his or her risk analysis process?
Your response should be a minimum of seven pages in length and follow APA style. References should include your textbook and a minimum of three additional credible source. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations in APA style. Please ensure that you do your own work. Will submit to TurnitIn. | Category | Unacceptable (0-1) | Needs Improvement (2-3) | Good (4) | Excellent (5) | Total Possible Points | | | | | | | | Organization (x3) | There is no apparent organization to the answers. They shows some coherence but ideas lack unity. | There is some level of organization though digressions, ambiguities, irrelevance are too many. Transition evident but not used throughout the paper. | Answers are coherent and logically organized with transitions used between ideas and paragraphs to create coherence. Overall unity of ideas is present. | Answers show high degree of attention to logic and reasoning of points. Unity clearly leads the reader to the conclusion and stirs thought regarding the topic. | 15 | | Content (x3) | Answers lack evidence of critical thinking. Writer uses superficial, simplistic, or irrelevant reasons and unjustifiable claims. Makes illogical, inconsistent inference. | Answers are primarily opinion without valid support. Little critical thinking is evident. Follows existing evidence to obtain conclusions. | Ideas are logical and reasoned, but demonstrate lesser degree of originality. Follows evidence and reason lead to obtain justifiable, logical conclusion. | Writer develops logical and reasoned independent ideas that go beyond predictable outcomes or the conclusions of researched materials. Follows where evidence and reason lead in order to obtain defensible, thoughtful, logical conclusions or solutions. | 15 | | Grammar & Mechanics(x2) | Sentences are unclear and many grammatical errors in structure make answers virtually unreadable. Spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and vocabulary usage contain major flaws that impede readability. | Most spelling, punctuation, and grammar correct allowing reader to progress through the answers. Some errors remain. | Answers have few spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors allowing reader to follow ideas clearly. Very few fragments or run-ons. | Answers are free of distracting spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors; absent of fragments, comma splices, and run-ons. | 5 |
|
