Continuing to use the SHRM case study presented in the classroom

Continuing to use the SHRM case study presented in the classroom, students will present a second power point presentation that builds on the information from the first presentation and applies some of the additional material assigned in the class. Students have already conducted a SWOT Analysis of the current situation provided in the case study and will use the information from the SWOT, propose at least three recommends for changing the existing HR Domains, describe if the recommendations add value to the areas of people, performance, information and/or workflow, and describe ways to institutionalize best practices in the recommended areas. Since HR departments communicate their Who, What and Why for their initiatives through a So That Statement, students will design an effective So That Statement for the HR function.  The presentation ends with a summary or the conclusions for the paper and a Reference Page including at least two scholarly references. (in text citations are to be provided in the content of the presentation).

1. Title Slide
2. Introduction and Purpose for the Presentation
3. Summary of SWOT Analysis (that you presented in the first presentation)
4. Proposed Recommendations (at least three)
5. Identify if the recommendations add value to the areas of people, performance, information, and workflow, and description of  how to identify ways to institutionalize best practices in these areas
6. Recommended HR So That Statement
7. Justification for the Recommendations
8. Summary or Conclusions
9. Reference Page

Due Date 

Nov 27, 2016 11:59 PM

Hide Rubrics

Rubric Name: Assignment 2 Rubric (Power Point Presentation) 20%

Recommendations are thorough, relevant and insightful, exceeding the expectations of the assignment. Each identification is made accurately, is through in description and ways to institutionalize best practices exceeds the expectations of the assignment.

Recommendations are generally thorough, relevant and insightful. Each identification is made accurately, is through in description and ways to institutionalize best practices meets the expectations of the assignment.

Some but not all the recommendations are  thorough, relevant and/or insightful.  Each identification is not made accurately, is not totally through in description and ways to institutionalize best practices meet some but not all the expectations of the assignment.

Recommendations are not thorough, relevant or insightful. Does not meet the expectations of the assignment.

Does not meet the minimum requirements of the assignment or not submitted. 

HR So That Statement is clear, precise, links to the capabilities of the organization and includes Who, What and Why of the HR function. All elements of SWOT are thorough, insightful and demonstrates excellent knowledge.

HR So That Statement is generally clear, precise, links to the capabilities of the organization and includes Who, What and Why of the HR function. All elements of the SWOT are thorough, insightful and demonstrates good knowledge.

HR So That Statement is somewhat clear, precise, links to the capabilities of the organization and includes some or all of the Who, What and Why of the HR function. Some but not all of the elements of the SWOT are thorough, insightful and demonstrates good knowledge.

HR So That Statement is not clear or precise and/or does not link to the capabilities of the organization. Includes some but not all the  Who, What and Why of the HR function. Not all elements of the SWOT are thorough, insightful but demonstrates some knowledge.

Does not meet the minimum requirements of the assignment or not submitted. 

Justifications are supported with very clear logic, relevant academic references are used and justifications are very convincing

Justifications are supported with somewhat clear logic, academic references were included and justifications were mostly convincing.

Some but not all the justifications are supported with clear logic; academic references were included and justifications were mostly convincing.

Justifications are somewhat supported with logic, but academic references were not included and recommendations and justifications were not convincing.

Does not meet the minimum requirements of the assignment or not submitted. 

Writes in an error free manner, includes all the required elements, writing is clear, logical, flows well and is convincing. Citations and references are provided in accurate APA format. 

Generally writes in an error free manner, includes all the required elements, writing is mostly clear, logical, flows well and is convincing. Citations and references are provided in accurate APA format.

Meets some but not all the expectations for writing in an error free manner; meets some but not all the required elements, some writing is not clear, logical, and/or does not flow well and not totally convincing. Citations and references are not all provided in accurate APA format.

Does not always write in an error free manner, does not  includes all the required elements, writing is not completely  clear, logical, and does not always flows well and is not convincing. Citations and references are not provided in accurate APA format.

Does not meet the minimum requirements of the assignment or not submitted. 

18.1 to 20 Points

16.1 to 18 Points

14.1 to 16 Points

8 to 14 Points