1
GUIDELINES FOR FINAL CASES
STYLE GUIDE
Overall document length: 3000 – 5000 words (excluding bibliography)
DOCUMENT STRUCTURE
– Cover page
– Table of Contents
– Main Body: Case Analysis
– Conclusion
– Bibliography
DOCUMENT STYLE
– Font: Arial or Times New Roman
– Text size 12 pt
– Layout Align left (flush-left ragged-right)/Do not use “Justify”
– Line spacing 1.5l
– Hyphenation Off: do not hyphenate
– Page numbers Bottom right
– References Reference Footnotes only. No endnotes. Students should follow the Harvard referencing
style.
– Numbering Consecutive throughout the document, beginning with 1 on the introductory page. Pages
prior to the introduction must appear in roman numerals Font Arial or Times New Roman
– Footnote size 10pt
– Location Bottom left of each page
– Language use/spelling style Students are free to use either U.K. or USA English, but they must be
consistent. A spelling and grammar check can help students. Marks will be deducted when ‘red
and/or green lines’ appear in the digital copy.
DEADLINES
DEFENCE DETAILS
– 8-10 minutes per case
– 5 minutes Q&A
– Context
– Conclusion
– 5- 10 slide – Visual (avoid too much text)
– Defence (online or on campus)
2
FINANCIAL CASE RUBRICS: CRITICAL THINKING
Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially Proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)
Problem
Identification
The student failed to correctly
identify the issue(s); analysis was
incorrect or too superficial to be of
use; information was misinterpreted
The student correctly identified the
issue(s) but analysis was weak. An
absence of context – the work is
basically descriptive with little
analysis.
The student correctly identified the
case (issues), taking into account
obvious environmental/contextual
drivers. There is evidence of analysis
but it lacks depth.
The student correctly identified the
issue(s), taking into account a variety
of environmental and contextual
drivers. Key case information has
been identified and analyzed.
The business issue has been correctly
identified, with a competent and
comprehensive explanation of the
financial problem and its
considerations. Impact on company
operations and financial situation has
been correctly identified. Thorough
analysis of the issue is presented.
Information
Gathering
Information was taken at face value
with no questioning of its relevance
or value. Gaps in the information
were not identified or were incorrect.
An information gap was identified
and the student found additional
information to fill it. However, this
was limited in scope. Weak criteria
for the selection of necessary
information.
The student correctly identified at
least one information gap and found
relevant information, but which was
limited in scope. Some evidence of
sound criteria for selecting
information but not consistent
throughout. Needs expansion
Relevant information gaps were
identified and additional relevant
information was found to fill them. At
least two different types of sources
were used. The student
demonstrates coherent criteria for
selecting information but needs
greater depth.
Thestudent showed skill in gathering
information and analyzing it for the
purposes of filling the information
gaps identified. Comprehensive and
relevant
Conclusions The student formed a conclusion, but
it was not reasonable. It was either
unjustified, incorrect or unrelated to
the case in hand.
The conclusion was reasonable but
lacked depth and would not be a
basis for suitable financial strategy
development
The student reached conclusions but
they were limited and provided
minimal direction for decision-making
and solutions.
The student evaluated, analyzed and
synthesized to create a conclusion(s)
which support decisions and
solutions.
The student evaluated, analyzed,
synthesized all information provided
to create a perceptive set of
conclusions to support the decisions
and solutions
Solutions The student attempte,
unsuccessfully, to solve problems.
The student used problem solving
techniques to make decisions about
simpler issues but disregarded more
complex issues. Implications of the
decision were not considered.
Alternatives were not offered.
The student used financial techniques
to make appropriate decisions about
simpler issues. The solution has
limited benefit but does show
understanding of implications of the
decision. Alternatives were
mentioned but not explored.
The student used financial techniques
to make appropriate decisions about
complex issues. Relevant questions
were asked and answered. A realistic
solution was chosen. Alternatives
were identified, explored and ruled
out
The student used problem solving
techniques to make thoughful,
justified decisions about difficult and
conflicting issues. A realistic solution
was chosen which would provide
maximum benefit to the company.
Alternative solutions were explored
and ruled out.
3
CASE RUBRICS: CRITICAL THINKING SCORE GUIDE
Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially Proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)
Problem
Identification
The student failed to correctly
identify the issue(s); analysis was
incorrect or too superficial to be
of use; information was
misinterpreted
The student correctly identified the
issue(s) but analysis was weak. An
absence of context – the work is
basically descriptive with little
analysis.
The student correctly identified the
case (issues), taking into account
obvious environmental/contextual
drivers. There is evidence of analysis
but it lacks depth.
The student correctly identified the
issue(s), taking into account a variety
of environmental and contextual
drivers. Key case information has
been identified and analyzed.
The business issue has been correctly
identified, with a competent and
comprehensive explanation of key
driving forces and considerations.
Impact on company operations has
been correctly identified. Thorough
analysis of the issue is presented.
Information
Gathering
Information was taken at face
value with no questioning of its
relevance or value. Gaps in the
information were not identified
or were incorrect.
An information gap was identified
and the student found additional
information to fill it. However, this
was limited in scope. Weak criteria
for the selection of necessary
information.
The student correctly identified at
least one information gap and found
relevant information, but which was
limited in scope. Some evidence of
sound criteria for selecting
information but not consistent
throughout. Needs expansion
Relevant information gaps were
identified and additional relevant
information was found to fill them. At
least two different types of sources
were used. The student
demonstrates coherent criteria for
selecting information but needs
greater depth.
The student showed skill in gathering
information and analyzing it for the
purposes of filling the information
gaps identified. Comprehensive and
relevant
Conclusions The student formed a conclusion,
but it was not reasonable. It was
either unjustified, incorrect or
unrelated to the case in hand.
The conclusion was reasonable but
lacked depth and would not be a
basis for suitable strategy
development
The student reached conclusions but
they were limited and provided
minimal direction for decision-making
and solutions.
The student evaluated, analyzed and
synthesized to create a conclusion(s)
which support decisions and
solutions.
The student evaluated, analyzed,
synthesized all information provided
to create a perceptive set of
conclusions to support the decisions
and solutions
Solutions The student attempte,
unsuccessfully, to solve problems.
The student used problem solving
techniques to make decisions about
simpler issues but disregarded more
complex issues. Implications of the
decision were not considered.
Alternatives were not offered.
The student used problem-solving
techniques to make appropriate
decisions about simpler issues. The
solution has limited benefit but does
show understanding of implications
of the decision. Alternatives were
mentioned but not explored.
The student used problem solving
techniques to make appropriate
decisions about complex issues.
Relevant questions were asked and
answered. A realistic solution was
chosen. Alternatives were identified,
explored and ruled out
The student used problem solving
techniques to make thoughtful,
justified decisions about difficult and
conflicting issues. A realistic solution
was chosen which would provide
maximum benefit to the company.
Alternative solutions were explored
and ruled out.
4
PRESENTATION GRADING
Element Unacceptable (F) Borderline (D) Partially proficient (C) Proficient (B) Accomplished (A)
Visuals Visuals are poorly designed,
containing only words and are
used as notes. More than 5
spelling mistakes. Relevance is not
clear
Visuals are fairly mundane and not
always relevant to the presentation
development. Fewer than 5 spelling
mistakes
Visuals are well designed. Generally,
support the argument, but some are
irrelevant or unclear
Professionally designed but there are
too many (some irrelevant) or are
missing. Support the development of
the presentation
Professionally designed. Attractive,
relevant and add to understanding.
Support the development of the
presentation
Content The content is a simple repetition
of written work with no
amendments to language or style.
The development is confusing and
does not justify conclusions
The content is generally clear but
there are gaps in the development
or information which is not relevant
is given too much importance
The content is clear showing
knowledge of the area. Improvements
would help to justify conclusions
Competent development of content
showing in-depth knowledge of subject
area.
The content is clear, well developed
and interesting. Conclusions are clearly
justified. Appropriate language style
and shows thorough, in-depth
understanding of the subject area
Questions and
answers
The candidate was unprepared
and unable to answer pertinent
questions
The candidate attempted to answer
the questions but not always
appropriately
The candidate was able to answer the
questions, but did not expand on
question areas
The candidate was well prepared to
answer questions and showed in-depth
knowledge of the subject area.
Expanded on answers
The candidate showed in-depth
knowledge, was well-prepared for the
questions and expanded answers in-
depth showing ownership of the subject
area.
