Call us 24/7: + 1(925)399 0085

Get your paper done by an expert

No matter what kind of academic paper you need, it is simple and secure to hire an essay writer for a price you can afford at StudyAcer. Save more time for yourself.

WhatsApp + 1(925)399 0085
$ 10
free
  • bibliography
  • title page
  • revisions
per page
19 k happy customers
4.7 out of 5 satisfaction rate
27 writers active

Week 3 Assign

Case Study 1: Prioritizing Projects at D. D. Williamson (Chapter 2)

Due Week 3 and worth 240 points

Read the case titled: “Prioritizing Projects at D. D. Williamson” found in Chapter 2.

Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you:

PLEASE ADHERE TO THE RUBRIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AND THE DUE DATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

  1. Analyze the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.
  2. Suggest two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.
  3. Create a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.
  4. Project five (5) years ahead and speculate whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process. Justify your answer.
  5. Use at least four (4) quality (peer-reviewed) resources in this assignment.

Your assignment must:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

Points: 240

 

Case Study 1: Prioritizing Projects at D. D. Williamson (Chapter 2)

Criteria

Unacceptable

Below 70% F

Fair

70-79% C

Proficient

80-89% B

Exemplary

90-100% A

1. Analyze the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely critiqued the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.

Partially critiqued the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.

Satisfactorily critiqued the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.

Thoroughly critiqued the prioritizing process at D. D. Williamson.

2. Suggest two (2) recommendation to improve the prioritizing process.
Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely suggested two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.

Partially suggested two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.

Satisfactorily suggested two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.

Thoroughly suggested two (2) recommendations to improve the prioritizing process.

3. Create a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.

Weight: 20%

Did not submit or incompletely created a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.

Partially created a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.

Satisfactorily created a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.

Thoroughly created a scenario where the implemented process at D. D. Williamson would not work.

4. Project five (5) years ahead and speculate whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process. Justify your answer.

Weight: 25%

Did not submit or incompletely projected five (5) years ahead. Did not submit or incompletely speculated whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process.

Partially projected five (5) years ahead. Partially speculated whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process.

Satisfactorily projected five (5) years ahead. Satisfactorily speculated whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process.

Thoroughly projected five (5) years ahead. Thoroughly speculated whether or not D. D. Williamson will be using the same process.

5. Four (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

Our guarantees

Study Acers provides students with tutoring and help them save time, and excel in their courses. Students LOVE us!No matter what kind of essay paper you need, it is simple and secure to hire an essay writer for a price you can afford at StudyAcers. Save more time for yourself. Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more

Our Homework Writing Disciplines

With a highly diverse team in almost all academic fields including:


Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /home/acemfljg/public_html/wp-content/themes/essay-writing/footer.php on line 12