Learning Outcome 1: Apply quality management tools, improve processes, and design systems
Element
(1) Tool Selection
Advanced (4)
Team uses a logical process
and thoroughly considers
alternatives to select an
appropriate tool or method
for the problem situation
The selected tool or
approach is the most
appropriate one for the
problem
Proficient (3)
Team selects a tool or
method using a logical
approach
Developing (2)
Team selects a tool or
method without using a
clear approach or
considering any alternatives
Unacceptable (1)
Team arbitrarily selects a
tool or approach
The selected tool or
approach is appropriate for
the problem; however, some
of the tool’s assumptions do
not hold
The selected tool or
approach is inappropriate
for the problem
(3) Tool Use
The tool or approach is used
appropriately, correctly, and
effectively
The tool or approach is used
in a reasonable manner with
few mistakes
(4) Findings Evaluation
The findings are thoroughly
evaluated in terms of
impact, feasibility and other
relevant criteria
The findings are evaluated
correctly using some
relevant criteria
The selected tool or
approach is relevant to the
problem; however, other
tools would have been a
more natural fit; many of
the selected tool’s
assumptions do not hold
Some steps of the tool or
approach are performed
incorrectly or
inappropriately
The findings are lightly or
incorrectly evaluated
(2) Fit
The tool or approach is used
inappropriately, incorrectly,
and ineffectively
The findings are not
evaluated or are evaluated
using inappropriate criteria
LO2: Manage the new product development process for a new product or service that addresses an opportunity or problem.
Element
(1) Problem Identification
(2) Idea Generation, Screening,
Evaluation, and Selection*
(3) Prototyping, modeling, testing,
and integrating feedback
(4) Analysis of the innovation’s
feasibility **
Advanced (4)
Clearly defined
opportunity/problem and
described the process of
discovery; did not assume
the source of the problem;
considered the opportunity
or problem from multiple
disciplines and perspectives;
analyzed the problem to
identify and understand the
root causes.
Generated a wide variety of
ideas and used a rational
process to screen, evaluate,
and select the most
promising ideas.
Proficient (3)
Defined the
opportunity/problem and
described the process of
discovery; did not assume
the source of the problem;
considered the opportunity
or problem from other
disciplines and perspectives;
analyzed the problem to
identify root causes
Developing (2)
Loosely defined the
opportunity/problem;
assumed the source of the
problem; considered the
opportunity or problem from
one or two disciplines and/or
one or two perspectives;
understood some root causes
of the problem
Unacceptable (1)
Opportunity/problem
definition is lacking or
unclear; did not consider it
from multiple disciplines or
perspectives; did not analyze
opportunity or problem
Provided some insight into
their process for generating,
screening and evaluation of
ideas
Did not address their process
but it was evident that they
did generate, screen and
evaluate ideas
Did not use process for
generating, screening and
evaluation of ideas
Used the most appropriate
prototypes or models,
systematically designed and
conducted useful tests, and
used the results to improve
the innovation.
Thoroughly and accurately
analyzed the innovation on
the most important
attributes.
Mostly effective use of
prototypes or models, and
appropriate feedback
mechanisms to improve the
innovation
Iterative design process was
not thorough enough to
make more than small
refinements to the
innovation
Design process was not
iterative
Addressed technical, market
and financial feasibility, but
could have used more depth
and support of analysis
Loosely addressed feasibility;
provides some analysis, but it
was lacking in breadth (e.g.,
only addresses market
aspect) and depth
Did not address the feasibility
of the innovation
* Screening could include general feasibility, cost, uniqueness/value proposition, and market potential. Evaluation could include strategy canvas
** Examples of analysis include cost/benefit analysis, target market definition and size, and technical feasibility
Learning Outcome 3: Ability to use quantitative and qualitative data analysis techniques
Element
(1) Qualitative Data
Analysis
(interviews, focus
groups, observation,
secondary data analysis)
Advanced (4)
Team uses most appropriate
technique(s) for gathering
qualitative data, describes
process used, constructs high
quality questions, provides
information about subjects,
clearly discusses findings and
their implications
Proficient (3)
Team uses an appropriate
technique for gathering
qualitative data, summarizes
process used, includes
questions used, provides
some information about
subjects, clearly summarizes
findings and their
implications.
Team properly evaluates
quantitative data, describes
process used to collect data,
shows evidence of properly
cleaning data before
analysis, information from
quantitative data using basic
statistical analysis to provide
recommendations to the
problem.
Developing (2)
Team collects qualitative
data, but provides few
details on the process, the
subjects, and the
mechanisms used. Simple
summary of findings with
little interpretation.
Unacceptable (1)
Team does not employ
qualitative data analysis
techniques when it would
be helpful to do so.
Team evaluates a limited
number of sources of
quantitative data and
synthesizes some
information from
quantitative data using
elementary statistical
analysis
Team does not employ
quantitative data analysis
techniques
(2) Quantitative Data
Analysis
Team properly employs
sophisticated analysis methods,
describes process used to
collect data, information about
the data (e.g., sources, number
of instances), properly cleans
data before analysis,
synthesizes results and draws
valid conclusions, and provides
recommendations for the
problem.
(3) Multi-Methods
Synthesis
Team synthesizes qualitative
and quantitative research
techniques to develop a more
detailed insight into the
problem; use of multi-methods
strengthens analysis
Team synthesizes most
qualitative and quantitative
research techniques; use of
multi-methods
complements analysis
Team synthesizes a few
qualitative and quantitative
research techniques;
unclear how use of multimethods benefits analysis
Team does not provide a
synthesis of qualitative and
quantitative analyses
(4) Methodology Choice
Appropriate choice of
methodology to evaluate the
problem; proper application of
methodology; discusses
methodological assumptions,
which conform to the context of
the problem
Methodology is adequate to
address the problem; mostly
appropriate application of
methodology; some
methodological assumptions
conform to the context of
the problem
Methodology is not
appropriate to address the
problem; methodological
assumptions do not conform
to the context of the
problem
No discussion of
methodology
Learning Outcome 4: Work in multidisciplinary teams to evaluate, analyze and recommend solutions to real-world problems provided by corporate
sponsors
Element
(1) Problem Identification
(2) Methodology
(3) Analysis
(4) Recommendations
Advanced (4)
The team fully considers
client needs in identifying a
significant organizational
problem
The team properly identifies
and applies the most
appropriate methodology to
address the problem or
opportunity
The team performs thorough
research to gather data and
information, uses several
appropriate techniques to
analyze the evidence in an
objective way
Proficient (3)
The team considers most
client needs in identifying
and a somewhat significant
organizational problem
The team identifies and
applies a usable
methodology to address the
problem or opportunity
The team evaluates
proposed solutions and
prioritizes and precisely
defines and justifies feasible
and desirable
recommendations that are
actionable by a client
The team prioritizes and
generally defines and
justifies mostly feasible and
desirable recommendations
that may be actionable by a
client
The team analyzes the
evidence in an objective
way; analysis could be more
in-depth
Developing (2)
The team considers some
client needs in identifying an
organizational problem with
limited significance
The team addresses some
aspects of the problem or
opportunity, however, the
methodology is not fully
appropriate for this project
The team analyzes a limited
amount of data; insufficient
use of either quantitative or
qualitative data; analysis is
somewhat objective
Unacceptable (1)
The team does not consider
client needs; identified
problem is not significant to
organization
The methodology applied is
not appropriate to address
the problem or opportunity
The team loosely defines
somewhat feasible
recommendations that may
be actionable by a client
The provides weak
recommendations that are
unlikely to be actionable by a
client
Analysis is unclear or
subjective
Learning Outcome 5: Work in multi-disciplinary teams with an understanding of different roles and how to negotiate conflict in these situations
Element
(1) Role
identification and
delegation
Advanced (4)
Team clearly defines their
roles; these roles are
interdependent but not
overlapping or redundant;
team members are
accountable for thecompletion
of all team tasks
Proficient (3)
Team mostly defines roles;
roles have some
interdependence but some
overlap and redundancies;
team members are
accountable for the
completion of tasks within
their individual roles
Developing (2)
Team defines some of their
roles; roles are not
interdependent and overlap
and redundancies are present;
team members are somewhat
accountable for the
completion of tasks within
their individual roles
Unacceptable (1)
Team does not define
roles and is not
accountable
(2) Coordination
of tasks
Tasks are well documented and
clear interfaces are used for
the successful transfer of
information between team
members
Tasks are generally well
documented and reasonably
clear interfaces are used to
transfer information between
team members
Tasks are documented,
however, documentation
could be more clear;
information transfer
between team members is
poorly structured
Tasks are not documented;
information transfer has no
coordination
(3) Conflict
Resolution
Team is able to identify and
address conflict in a timely
manner; team develops
appropriate methods to
resolve conflict
Team is able to identify and
address conflict, however
conflict remains unresolved
Team is able to identify
conflict but is unable to
appropriately address or
resolve the conflict
Team has conflict but is
unable to identify,
address, or resolve the
conflict
(4) Coherence
around common
mission
Clear and consistent definition of
a common mission orobjective by
all team members; commitment
by team members to help
accomplish this shared goal
Mostly clear definition of
team’s mission with
consistency from most team
members; commitment by
most team members to
accomplish this shared goal
Vague definition of team’s
mission with inconsistent
views amongst team
members; varying levels of
commitment to mission
within team
Team does not have a
common mission or
objective
Learning Outcome 6: Communicate ideas effectively in professional environments through oral presentations.
Element
(1) Organization
Advanced (4)
Proficient (3)
Developing (2)
Unacceptable (1)
Purpose and central point of
presentation were obvious.
Presentation included an informative
and creative introduction, a body
with a logical flow of information,
effective transitions, and a
conclusion that summarized the
central point. There was a very
effective use of time; direction and
focus of the presentation was very
easy to follow.
Secured audience attention and
maintained interest throughout the
presentation; content, language use,
and language level were appropriate
and interesting for the audience.
Demonstrated excellent energy
levels and enthusiasm.
Speaker was well prepared and
extremely knowledgeable on the
topic; speaker used a variety of
appropriate sources; all citations
were attributed accurately and
correctly; all supporting material was
relevant and accurate.
Content clearly referred to
information and/or analyses that
were relevant to the central point
and was well adapted to the
audience.
Purpose and central point of
presentation were implied.
Presentation included an introduction,
body and conclusion; but the
introduction was not informative, the
body did not flow logically and the
conclusion did not summarize; the
speaker provided few transitions
connecting the presentation parts.
There was an ineffective use of time;
direction and focus of the presentation
was difficult to follow.
Did not secure audience attention and
generated little interest; content,
language use, or language level was not
consistently appropriate and
interesting for the audience. Exhibited
low energy and enthusiasm.
Purpose and central point of
presentation were not evident or
implied. Presentation had no sense of
organization, continuity, or direction;
transitions did not connect parts of
the presentation. Presentation was
not adapted to the allotted time;
direction and focus of the
presentation was impossible to follow.
(2) Audience
Engagement and
Professionalism *
Purpose and central point of
presentation were evident.
Presentation was generally well
organized; included an informative
introduction, a body with a logical flow
of information, and a conclusion that
summarized the central message; some
transitions were not effective in
connecting parts of the presentation.
There was a reasonably effective use of
time; direction and focus of the
presentation was fairly easy to follow.
Secured and mostly retained audience
attention throughout the presentation;
content, language use, and language
level were acceptable but could have
been more appropriate and interesting
for the audience. Exhibited reasonable
levels of energy and enthusiasm.
Speaker was prepared and
knowledgeable on the topic; speaker
used appropriate sources; citations
were mostly attributed correctly;
supporting material was relevant and
accurate.
Speaker demonstrated some
preparation and knowledge on the
topic; speaker used mostly appropriate
sources; some citations were attributed
correctly; supporting material was
somewhat relevant and generally
accurate.
Content referred to information and/or
analysis that are mostly relevant to the
central point, but was not adapted to
the audience.
Speaker was not prepared, and was
not knowledgeable on the topic;
sources were inappropriate,
inaccurately attributed or missing;
supporting material was irrelevant,
inaccurate, or nonexistent.
(3) Credibility
(4) Effective use
of content**
Content referred to information and/or
analysis that are mostly relevant to the
central point, and was somewhat
adapted to the audience.
Did not secure attention or interest of
audience; content, language use and
language level were not appropriate
or interesting for audience. Lacked
energy and enthusiasm.
Content did not refer to information
or analysis in ways that are relevant to
the central point or adapted to the
audience.
* Professional presentations include speaking articulately and in a conversational tone; effectively varying voice levels, rate, pitch & tone; correct pronunciation, and few vocal fillers.
** Content includes lines of reasoning, explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities
Learning Outcome 7: Communicate ideas effectively in writing.
Element
Advanced (4)
Proficient (3)
Developing (2)
Unacceptable (1)
(1) Objective and Tone Articulated the intended
objective of the document
and targeted the appropriate
audience
Clearly articulated the
objective of the document.
Provided content that strongly
supports the objective.
Tailored the content, structure
and language to the intended
audience.
Articulated the objective of the
document. Provided content that
supports the objective, but could
be stronger. Somewhat tailored
the content, structure and
language to the intended
audience.
Stated the objective of the
document, but not clearly.
Provided some content that
supports the objective, but needs
additional, stronger evidence.
Attempted to tailor the content,
structure and language to the
intended audience.
Did not indicate the
objective of the document.
Provided content, but it did
not supports the objective.
Did not attempt to tailor
the content, structure and
language to the intended
audience.
(2) Conventions of
Professional Writing Followed the conventions for
professional writing, including
format, organization and style
(tone, voice, sentence
complexity); also
demonstrated proper use of
syntax and mechanics.
Sources were properly cited.
Writing was organized and
formatted in a professional
manner; tone of language was
professional. Writing flowed
smoothly, was structurally
correct, was not wordy, and
contained no grammar,
spelling or punctuation errors.
Sources were properly cited.
Writing was mostly organized and
formatted in a professional
manner; tone of language was
professional, although jargon was
sometimes used. Writing mostly
flowed smoothly, was structurally
correct, was not wordy, and
contained few grammar, spelling
or punctuation errors. Sources
were mostly properly cited.
Writing was organized and
formatted, but not in a
professional manner; tone of
language was not quite
professional. Writing contained
some structural problems, and
may be wordy. Writing also
contained grammar, spelling or
punctuation errors. Sources were
cited, but not properly.
Writing was not wellorganized nor wellformatted. Tended to be
wordy, with many
grammar, spelling or
punctuation errors.
Sources were not cited.
(3) Argument and evidenceIdentified a problem or
opportunity. Presented a
clear, logical, persuasive
solution in response to the
problem/opportunity.
Supported ideas and
recommendations with
concrete, relevant and
accurate evidence from
credible sources.
Clearly and persuasively
articulated the proposed
solution to the problem or
opportunity. Presented logical,
persuasive reasons based on
relevant and accurate evidence
and analysis to support this
solution.
Articulated the proposed solution
to the problem or opportunity.
Presented logical reasons based
on some evidence and analysis to
support this solution, although
additional information would have
helped.
Presented the proposed solution
at a high level. Provided
supporting evidence and/or
analysis for the solution, but they
were neither persuasive nor
clearly explained and fully
developed.
Attempted to present the
proposed solution to the
problem/opportunity, but it
was difficult to understand.
Provided no or little
supporting evidence or
analysis.
(4) Perspectives –Considered
different viewpoints;
anticipated and responded to
arguments that various
stakeholders would likely
make about the major
recommendation, supporting
reasons, and evidence.
Anticipated questions or
objections about the solution
that stakeholders would likely
want to see addressed.
Addressed those questions in a
clear, convincing way through
logical reasoning and analysis
of additional evidence.
Anticipated the most important
questions or objections that
stakeholders would likely pose,
although some related concerns
were not be addressed.
Attempted to address these
questions in a clear, convincing
way, but did not succeed in all of
these attempts.
Mentioned different viewpoints
but did not explain them in a
clear, fair way. Made superficial
attempts to address these other
perspectives.
Made no attempt to
anticipate or engage other
perspectives.
Learning Outcome 8: Manage projects and people using effective project management tools
Element
(1) Parsing Complex Tasks
Advanced (4)
The team fully understands a
complex task, divides it into
appropriate subtasks, orders
the subtasks logically, and
correctly identifies
dependencies
(2) Project Definition
The team precisely defines
the project scope and
develops clear definitions of
project success
The team allocates its
resources optimally and
identifies and thoroughly
learns all of the skills that it
needs but does not have
The team anticipates all
project risks, develops
effective risk mitigation
plans, and successfully
implements their strategy
(3) Project Resource
Allocation
(4) Risk Management
Proficient (3)
The team understands most
elements of a complex task,
divides it into appropriate
subtasks, orders most of the
subtasks logically, and
correctly identifies most of
the dependencies
The team generally defines
the project scope and
develops appropriate
definitions of project success
The team allocates its
resources efficiently and
identifies and learns most of
the skills that it needs but
does not have
The team anticipates most
of the project risks, develops
appropriate risk mitigation
plans, and implements most
of their strategy
Developing (2)
The team fully understands
some components of a
complex task, divides it into
some subtasks, orders some
of the subtasks logically, and
identifies some
dependencies
The team defines some of
the project scope and
develops vague definitions
of project success
The team allocates its
resources inefficiently and
identifies and attempts to
learn some of the skills that
it needs but does not have
The team anticipates some
of the project risks, develops
some risk mitigation plans,
successfully implements
some of their strategy
Unacceptable (1)
The team demonstrates
minimal understanding of a
complex task and does not
develop appropriate
subtasks
The team does not define
the project scope and does
not develop definitions of
project success
The team allocates its
resources ineffectively and
does not attempt to learn
any of the skills that it needs
but does not have
The team does not
anticipate project risks and
does not develop risk
mitigation plans
Learning Outcome 9: Use business etiquette skills to network and communicate in diverse professional settings and behave in a professional and ethical
manner
Element
(1) Listening
Advanced (4)
Listens to verbal and visual
communication to fully
understand a message and
reflect the message back to
the speaker with 100%
agreement
Proficient (3)
Listens to verbal and visual
communication to mostly
comprehend a message; is
able to reflect the message
back to the speaker with
general agreement
(2) Communication
Verbal and non-verbal
communication skills in oneon-one, group, and
professional settings
demonstrate respect for an
audience and convey
content so that the audience
may fully understand the
message
Verbal and non-verbal
communication skills in oneon-one, group, and
professional settings mostly
demonstrate respect for an
audience; content is
conveyed so that the
audience understands the
main points of the message
(3) Attire
Personal appearance is
appropriate for the setting
and demonstrates care and
respect for others
Personal appearance is
mostly appropriate for the
setting and demonstrates
respect for others
(4) Ethics
Ability to fully recognize
ethical issues; clear
understanding of one’s
personal ethics and values;
clear ability to act on ethical
principles
Ability to recognize most
ethical issues; general
understanding of one’s
personal ethics and values;
ability to act on ethical
principles in most situations
Developing (2)
Listens to verbal and visual
communication to
comprehend some elements
of a message; attempts to
reflect the message back to
the speaker with some
difficulty
Verbal and non-verbal
communication skills in oneon-one, group, and
professional settings
demonstrate some respect
for an audience; content is
conveyed so that the
audience understands some
of the main points of the
message
Personal appearance is
somewhat appropriate for
the setting and
demonstrates consideration
of others
Ability to recognize some,
but not all, ethical issues;
some understanding of one’s
personal ethics and values;
ability to act on ethical
principles in some situations
Unacceptable (1)
Does not listen to verbal or
visual communication to
sufficiently understand most
messages; does not attempt
to reflect messages back to
speaker
Verbal and non-verbal
communication skills in oneon-one, group, and
professional settings do not
demonstrate respect for an
audience and do not convey
content so that the audience
may understand the
message
Personal appearance is
inappropriate for the setting
Unable to recognize most
ethical issues; limited
understanding of one’s
personal ethics and values;
unable to act on ethical
principles in most situations