Site icon Doc Sity

ERAU The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act CIO and IT4IT PLG1 Case Study

admin one

ERAU The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act CIO and IT4IT PLG1 Case Study

Question Description

Here is the first assignment:

Review

Assignment

Choose from one of the topics and write a brief summary of the blog or article you chose. Once you have had an opportunity to analyze and summarize recent compliance and data strategies from within these blogs and/or articles, you will need to determine how you will address your compliance section within your IT Management Plan. Below are a few questions that you will need to address in this section. Without actually answering each question, write your compliance section for your IT Management Plan for the second section of this paper. You will also include this in your final IT Management Plan submission.

In a separate section, address how you might incorporate data analysis into your compliance section within your own IT Strategic Management Plan.

  1. Which information systems within different business functional areas (Accounting, Finance, HR, etc.) would you use for data analysis in compliance procedures?
  2. Who would manage the policies and procedures?
  3. How often would you revisit compliance policies? Who are the stakeholders involved?
  4. Either from the text or the following resource, explain the value chain model you would use in your IT strategy and how it relates to compliance procedures.

Guidelines

  • 2-3 Pages, not including the Title Page and References. (No abstract is required.)
  • The body portion of the paper should have two titled sections:
  1. Summary – of the blog or article you chose.
  2. Compliance Strategy – address the four questions.

Rubric

MGMT 422 4.3 Case Study Rubric

MGMT 422 4.3 Case Study Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIdentification and Analysis of the Main Issues/Problem
25.0 pts

(Excellent – A) Identifies and understands all of the main issues in the case study. Insightful and thorough analysis of all the issues.

 23.0 pts

(Above-Average – B) Identifies and understands most of the main issues in the case study. Thorough analysis of most of the issues.

 21.0 pts

(Average – C) Identifies and understands some of the issues in the case study. Superficial analysis of some of the issues in the case.

 19.0 pts

(Near-Failing – D) Identifies and understands few of the issues in case study. Incomplete analysis of the issues.

 17.0 pts

(Failing – F) Identifies and understands very little of the issues in case study. No analysis of the issues.

25.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnswers to Case Study Questions
20.0 pts

(Excellent – A) Answers to case study questions are clear throughout. Connection with class and study material goes well beyond the obvious connections among ideas; demonstrates insight and original thinking.

 18.0 pts

(Above-Average – B) Answers to case study questions present some irrelevant information on topic etc., but very little; treatment goes beyond obvious connections with class and study material.

 16.0 pts

(Average – C) Answers to case study questions are vague in places; some irrelevant or distracting information.

 14.0 pts

(Near-Failing – D) Answers to case study questions are unclear and/or confusing. Treatment is very superficial; paper may be well written but says nothing.

 12.0 pts

(Failing – F) Does not address the case study questions. Treatment is very superficial and says very little.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeComments on effective solutions/strategies
20.0 pts

(Excellent – A) Well documented, reasoned, and pedagogically appropriate comments on solutions, or proposals for solutions, to all issues in the case study.

 18.0 pts

(Above-Average – B) Appropriate, well thought out comments about solutions, or proposals for solutions, to most of the issues in the case study.

 16.0 pts

(Average – C) Superficial and/or inappropriate solutions to some of the issues in the case study.

 14.0 pts

(Near-Failing – D) Little or no action suggested, and/or inappropriate solutions to all of the issues in the case study.

 12.0 pts

(Failing – F) Provided no feasible solutions or strategies to the issues in the case study.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLinks to Course Readings and Additional Research
20.0 pts

(Excellent – A) Excellent research into the issues with clearly documented links to class (and/or outside) readings.

 18.0 pts

(Above-Average – B) Good research and documented links to the material read.

 16.0 pts

(Average – C) Limited research and documented links to any readings.

 14.0 pts

(Near-Failing – D) Incomplete research and links to any readings.

 12.0 pts

(Failing – F) Provided no references or support of analysis.

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStyle and Mechanics
15.0 pts

(Excellent – A) Chooses words for their precise meaning and uses an appropriate level of specificity. Sentence style fits audience and purpose. Sentences clearly structured and carefully focused. Almost entirely free of spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.

 12.0 pts

(Above-Average – B) Generally uses words accurately and effectively, but may be too general. Sentences generally clear, structured, and focused, though some may be awkward or ineffective. May contain a few errors, which may annoy the reader but not impede understanding.

 10.0 pts

(Average – C) Uses relatively vague and general words, may use some inappropriate language. Sentence’s structure generally correct, but sentences may be wordy, unfocused, repetitive, or confusing. Usually contains several mechanical errors, which may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede the overall understanding.

 8.0 pts

(Near-Failing – D) Tends to being vague and abstract, or very personal and specific. Usually contains several awkward or ungrammatical sentences; sentence structure is simple or monotonous. Usually contains either many mechanical errors or a few important errors that block the reader’s understanding and ability to see connections between thoughts.

 6.0 pts

(Failing – F) Misuse of words throughout. Awkward sentences throughout. Difficult to attach a thought process. Poorly punctuated, misspelled words, grammatically abusive.

15.0 pts

Total Points: 100.0

PreviousNext

Have a similar assignment? "Place an order for your assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."

Exit mobile version