BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
210 points
Group Case Study Assignment
For this assignment, you will apply what you’ve learned about communication to a “real-life” leadership
case study. This project’s challenge is examining leadership communication issues and how they overlap
in a complex organizational context. This assignment allows your group to apply class concepts
incorporate scholarly research and/or comparable real-world examples into your analysis.
Project Overview:
Team formation: You will form teams of five people in class. We are looking for no more than 10 teams.
A team or two might have 4 or 6 people if enrollment in the class changes, but most teams will have five
members. One person per team notifies me by 11:59 p.m., Tues., 2/22 of team members’ names. If you
cannot form a team, email me by 11:59 p.m., Tues., 2/22 and I will add you to a team. I will also assign
each team a team number.
Your group of 4 or 5 people is a team of communication consultants hired by a company to advise on a
problem/situation (i.e., your assigned case). Using your understanding of leadership and communication
research, your team will write a professional recommendation report and deliver a professional
presentation to the company’s board of directors.
Choice of case studies: All four case studies are posted in eLearning. Each team has a choice of two case
studies for the project. Here are the choices for each team.
Team #
Team 1
Team 2
Team 3
Team 4
Team 5
Team 6
Team 7
Team 8
Team 9
Team 10
#1 (Becker)
Choice #1
Choice #1
#2 (Fuller)
#3 (Jessica)
Choice #1
Choice #1
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #1
Choice #1
Choice #1
Choice #1
Choice #1
Choice #1
#4 (Randall)
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Choice #2
Of the two cases available for your team, discuss with your group which case you want to work on.
Have one person per team email me your top case choice by 11:59 p.m., Tues., 3/8.
I will email each team its assigned case by Wed., 3/9. I may need to switch your case if too many groups
ask to are present the same case. Case assignments are made on a first-come, first-served basis. No
more than three teams in class may present the same case.
Source Requirement:
You are required to cite at least 5 sources (peer-reviewed, scholarly articles and/or comparable corporate
examples from popular or scholarly sources) to support your claims in the report and presentation. You can
use the same sources in the report and presentation. Citing the textbook or class lectures does not count
toward your required sources but is permitted. Above-average projects (B+ and above) typically have at least
8 outside sources. A good standard for quality is to make sure each identified problem and suggested
solution has a source supporting it. We will review source citation in class.
1
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment


210 points
Report citations: A citation must be in APA Style and be cited in-text and in the reference page to meet
the source requirement. If the source is only in-text or in the reference page, it isn’t properly cited and is
considered missing. For less than 5 sources, it’s -3% off your report grade for each missing source.
Presentation citations: You must verbally cite your sources in the presentation as discussed in class. For
every missing source, it’s -3% off your presentation grade.
Project Deliverables:
1. A professional recommendation report including the four elements listed on p. 2. The report should
be 3-5 pages (11-12pt font, 1” margins), excluding cover page & references.
2. A 10-12 minute presentation to the company’s board that includes the four elements on p. 2 and
verbal citations. Do not read your report in your presentation. Think of how to engage the audience
while also remaining professional. A member must present to earn credit for the presentation.
a. Visual aid accompanying the presentation (submit to eLearning)
b. A 2-4 minute question and answer session after your presentation. This time is separate from
your presentation time. You must be prepared with possible questions or points to elaborate on
if the audience does not have questions.
3. There are three smaller activities related to the project: a check-in, peer review of presentations,
and group member evaluation. Those projects are detailed under “assignments” on eLearning.
Assignment
Team Check-in Materials
Case Study Presentation and Q&A; Visual Aid
Professional Recommendation Report
Peer Review of Other Presentations
Group Member Evaluation
Total Points
Points
20
100
70
10
10
210
Assignment Type
Group
Group
Group
Individual
Individual
Submission
eLearning dropbox
In-class; eLearning dropbox
eLearning dropbox
Qualtrics
eLearning dropbox
.
Elements of the report and presentation: In addition to a professional introduction and conclusion*,
both the report and presentation should meet the source citation requirements (detailed on page 1 of this
document) and contain these four elements:
1. A summary of the situation (This section should not contain analysis)
a. Briefly familiarize your audience with the relevant people, issues, and facts in the case.
b. The board probably knows bits and pieces, and some members might know more than others.
This section’s purpose is to ensure everyone has a grasp of the situation.
2. Identification of the leadership and communication problem(s) and analysis of the reason for the
problem(s)…The “what” and the “why”
a. For instance: What are the key leadership and professional communication issues inherent in this
case? Are they occurring at multiple levels in the organization? Why are they occurring?
b. Explain and cite important leadership communication concepts as you introduce them.
Remember, the board might not know all the terms you are using (you are the communication
experts here). Each time you introduce a key course concept, be sure to:
i. explicitly define the term (in your own words, avoid quoting),
ii. cite your sources in APA Style, and
iii. relate the concept back to the case through explanation
c. After introducing the problems, provide an insightful and thorough analysis of why the problems
are occurring. Similar to identifying the problems, make sure to support your claims.
d. If applicable, it might be helpful to identify what is working in the organization related to the
problem(s)…if anything.
3. Potential ways to address the identified problems.
2
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
210 points
a. For each strategy to address the problem,
i. Propose specific and realistic solution(s) or changes needed
ii. Explain why the strategy should be considered
iii. Support the strategy with solid evidence, such as: concepts form class, outside scholarly
research, and/or examples of similar solutions implemented by other organizations. Don’t
forget to cite your sources!
b. Note: Not all of these strategies have to be adopted (that’s what the recommendation section is
for). This strategies section lays out options for your client and discusses pros/cons. You can
suggest multiple ways of addressing an issue if you have time.
c. Below are sample questions to consider:
i. Are solutions feasible? How much time/cost involved?
ii. Will the strategies work? For instance: Have these solutions worked before in other instances
at similar companies? Are they grounded in research principles? Etc.
iii. Who will implement them?
iv. Are some ways to address the problems related?
v. Are some more viable short v. long-term?
vi. What are some expected impacts of these proposed strategies?
vii. Which solution(s) is/are most effective?
4. Recommendations & action plan (how to implement proposed ways of addressing the problems):
a. Of the proposed strategies, what should be implemented? Should changes occur at multiple
levels of the organization? How will it solve the identified problems?
b. What should be done and who should do it? This is where you give detail about what to do.
c. Identify hurdles and potential unintended consequences to your recommendations/plan
*The introduction should gain attention, have a clear thesis, and preview main points. The conclusion
should summarize main points, reiterate thesis, and end with a call to action.
3
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
210 points
Workplace-Based Grading Rubric: This rubric emphasizes audience and overall standards. This rubric should serve as an overall guide for expectations. For this
course, the +/- system will also be used. For example, an A- may have one minor edit.
Overall Objective/ Criteria
Excellent (A)
The client is impressed and
approves the work without
any changes. You exceeded
their expectations; they will
absolutely rehire you for
future consulting.
Poor (D)
The client is troubled by the
poor quality. Revisions are
essential. They’re shocked
you thought this was
appropriate for clients. They
have wasted their time and
ask your company for
consultants or a refund.
Incomplete (F)
The client considers poor
quality, missing sections,
and/or your sloppiness as a
sign that you need to be
replaced. You showed a
basic misunderstanding of
the job & leadership
communication. They fire
you and actively deter
others from hiring you.
Background (10%)
Professionally & briefly
reviews case. Identifies the
Mostly professional situation
Fairly professional. Identifies
case’s relevant people,
review. Identifies of the case’s
some of the key people,
issues, & facts. Paraphrases
key people, issues, and facts.
issues, and facts. Multiple
most information to enhance Very few errors. Could condense errors. Audience would like
flow. No noticeable errors. a little. Reader has a mostly clear
clearer understanding of
Reader has a clear
understanding of situation.
situation.
understanding of situation.
Poor/unprofessional situation
review. Poor explanation of
and/or missing key people,
issues, and facts. Significant
errors. Audience does not
have a good understanding of
situation.
Inadequate situation review.
Inadequate explanation of
and/or missing key people,
issues, and facts. Audience is
incredibly confused.
Identification and
Analysis of Issues
(20%)
Identifies & understands all
main issues in the case.
Excellent definition, citation,
& explanation of key
concepts. Insightful,
thorough, & well-supported
analysis of all issues.
Meets expectations. Identifies
and understands most of the
main issues in the case study.
Defined, cited, and explained
key concepts well. Thorough
and well-supported analysis of
most of the issues.
Identifies & understands
some issues in the case
study. Need more work in
clearly defining, citing, and
explaining concepts in depth.
Superficial and somewhatcited analysis of some issues.
Identifies & understands only
a few issues. Missing concept
definitions, citations, and
explanations. Incomplete issue
analysis; needs more support
for analysis. Major errors;
needs more detail.
Missing multiple issues.
Lacks definitions, citations,
and/or explanations of
concepts. No issue analysis;
lacks support. Fundamental
misunderstanding of
concepts.
Effective
strategies
(20%)
Provided unique or creative,
specific, and realistic
solutions with appropriate
justifications and well-cited
support to all issues in case.
Appropriate, well-thoughtout solutions to most of the
issues. Conclusions
supported with evidence.
Superficial and/or
inappropriate solutions to
some issues. More support/
justification needed.
Little or no action suggested,
and/or inappropriate solutions
to all of the issues. Lacking
support.
No action suggested, and/or
inappropriate solutions to all
of the issues in the case.
Missing support.
Recs &
Plan
(20%)
Case Study Reflection Report Rubric
Gives wise, detailed, realistic,
appropriate, & wellsupported
recommendations/plan.
Presents realistic/appropriate
recommendations & action
plan. Mostly supported.
Some recommendations
realistic or appropriate. Needs
more detail and support.
Few realistic/appropriate
solutions. Lacking detail and
support.
Does not provide realistic or
appropriate
recommendations or plan.
Does not use support.
Good (B)
The client approves the
document with minor editing.
Your work “gets the job done.”
They are satisfied and will
consider rehiring you in the
future.
Fair (C)
The client is dissatisfied and
has to spend time suggesting
revisions. They are confused
how you thought this report
was appropriate. In the
future, the client would hire
different consulting group.
4
Organization & Format
(15%)
210 points
Extremely well‐organized and
formatted. Strong audience
consideration. Engaging
introduction, clear thesis, &
excellent preview. Good
conclusion with review,
thesis, and call to action.
Clear headings, consistent
format. Aesthetically
pleasing, easy to follow, and
professional.
Document was well‐organized
and considered the audience.
Intro & conclusion sections
meet all criteria, and with few
exceptions, exceed
expectations. Format is
professional, pleasing, &
needs minor adjustments.
Basic formatting and some
organizational issues. Difficult
for audience to follow at
times. Intro/conclusion
incomplete, disorganized,
and/or have multiple errors.
Format could be more
professional and consistent.
Unprofessional. Needs more
audience consideration. The
intro/conclusion are of poor
quality, missing significant
portions, and are difficult to
understand. Formatting and
organization are inconsistent.
Troubling. The
intro/conclusion sections are
of poor quality of work,
missing sections, and/or
sloppy. Organization and
formatting show a
misunderstanding of
communication basics and
conventions.
Comm. Competence
(15%)
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
Sophisticated clarity,
conciseness, & correctness.
Paraphrases rather than
relying on direct quotes.*
Shows significant
consideration of the
audience. Cohesive voice
throughout.
Writing is clear and concise.
Good incorporation of
citations; mostly paraphrases
instead of directly quoting.
Mostly cohesive voice.
Writing is understandable but
needs editing and proofing.
Could improve incorporation
of outside information by
paraphrasing, instead of
directly quoting Some issues
with cohesive voice.
Writing lacks clarity or
conciseness and contains
numerous errors. Document is
legible but confusing due to
inconsistent voice. Plops in
direct quotes without
considering flow of document.
Writing is unfocused,
rambling, or contains serious
errors; no effort made to
have consistency of voice.
Outside information not
used and/or incorporated
well.
Additional Deductions: -3% for every missing citation not meeting the source count (sources must be cited in-text and in the references in APA Style); Over or under-length: -10%
for each 1 page (shorter/longer than the assignment’s page range); technical issues that should have been caught (e.g., file format or upload issues, citation issues related to
format; other major errors; etc.)
Important Note: If it is clear that a group member(s) disrupted the final upload or product development accidentally or on purpose, then that member may face an additional
deduction if the group project is accepted.
*This doesn’t mean that you cannot directly quote material, but you do so sparingly and reserve direct quotations for standout content to emphasize an important point.
5
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
210 points
Workplace-Based Grading Rubric: This table rubric emphasizes audience and overall standards. It should serve as an overall guide for expectations. For this
course, the +/- system will also be used. For example, an A- may have one minor edit.
Identification and
Analysis of Issues
(20%)
Background (5%)
Organization (10%)
Overall Objective/ Criteria
Case Study Presentation Rubric
Excellent (A)
The client is impressed and
approves the work without
any changes. You exceeded
their expectations; they will
absolutely rehire you for
future consulting.
Good (B)
The client approves the
presentation. Your work “gets
the job done.” They are
satisfied and will consider
rehiring you in the future.
Superb organization. Major
Solid organization. Clearly
audience consideration. Intro:
considered audience. Intro:
engaging; clear thesis; good
mostly engaging; clear thesis;
preview. Body: nice balance
good preview. Body: mostly
of speakers & info.; wellbalanced speakers & info.;
developed transitions; Logical
mostly developed transitions;
flow/easy to follow.
Often easy to follow. Conclusion:
Conclusion: Excellent review
Good review & thesis
& thesis restatement; clear
restatement; call to action and
call to action and strong
closing statement.
closing statement.
Professionally, effectively &
briefly review situation for the Mostly professional situation
client. Identifies the relevant
review. Identifies most of the
people, issues, and facts in the key people, issues, and facts in
case. Everyone has a clear,
the case. Everyone has a clear
comprehensive understanding of understanding of situation.
situation.
Identifies and understands all
Meets expectations. Identifies
main issues in the case study.
and understands most of the
Excellent definition, citation,
main issues in the case study.
and explanation of key
Defined, cited, and explained
concepts. Insightful,
key concepts well. Thorough
thorough, and well-supported
and well-supported analysis of
analysis of all issues.
most of the issues
Fair (C)
The client is dissatisfied and
has to spend time suggesting
revisions. They are confused
how you thought this
presentation was
appropriate. In the future,
the client would hire
different consulting group.
Poor (D)
The client is troubled by the
poor presentation quality.
Revisions are essential.
They’re shocked you thought
this was appropriate for
clients. They have wasted
their time and ask your
company for consultants or a
refund.
Incomplete (F)
The client considers the poor
quality, missing sections,
and/or your sloppiness as a
sign that you may need to be
replaced. You showed a basic
misunderstanding of the job &
leadership communication.
They fire you and actively
deter others from hiring you.
Needs more organization and
audience consideration.
Intro: Needs work with
engagement, clearer thesis
and/or preview. Body: Needs
balance with speakers &
info.; unpracticed or missing
transitions; difficult to follow.
Conclusion: Needs better
review, thesis restatement,
call to action, and/or closing.
Poor organization and limited
audience consideration.
Organizational sections are of
poor quality, missing a few
portions, and are difficult to
understand. Unprofessional
and disappointing.
Lacks organization and did not
consider the audience.
Organizational sections are of
poor quality, missing
significant portions, and
confuse the audience.
Unprofessional. Shows
misunderstanding of
organization fundamentals.
Somewhat professional
situation review. Identifies
some of the key people,
issues, and facts. Audience
would like clearer
understanding of situation.
Poor/unprofessional situation
review. Poor explanation of
and/or missing key people,
issues, and facts. Audience
does not have a good
understanding of situation.
Inadequate situation review.
Inadequate explanation of
and/or missing key people,
issues, and facts. Audience is
incredibly confused.
Identifies & understands
some issues in the case
study. Need more work in
clearly defining, citing, and
explaining concepts in depth.
Superficial and somewhatcited analysis of some issues.
Identifies & understands only
a few issues. Missing concept
definitions, citations, and
explanations. Incomplete issue
analysis; needs more support
for analysis. Major errors;
needs more detail.
Missing multiple issues in the
case study. Lacking in
definitions, citations, and/or
explanations of concepts. No
analysis of the issues; lacking
support. Shows a fundamental
misunderstanding of concepts.
6
Effective
strategies
(20%)
Provided specific and realistic
solutions with appropriate
justifications and well-cited
support to all issues in case.
Appropriate, well-thoughtout solutions to most of the
issues. Conclusions
supported with evidence.
Superficial and/or
inappropriate solutions to
some issues. More support/
justification needed.
Little or no action suggested,
and/or inappropriate solutions
to all of the issues. Lacking
support.
No action suggested, and/or
inappropriate solutions to all of
the issues in the case. Missing
support.
Recs &
Plan
(15%)
Gives detailed, realistic,
appropriate, & well-supported
recommendations/plan.
Presents realistic/appropriate
recommendations & action
plan. Mostly supported.
Some recommendations
realistic or appropriate. Needs
more detail and support.
Few realistic/appropriate
solutions. Lacking detail and
support.
Does not provide realistic or
appropriate recommendations
or plan. Does not use support.
Delivery (15%)
210 points
Outstanding! Polished,
cohesive, & appropriate
energy to hold audience
interest. Poised, if made
mistakes, recovered well and
maintained professionalism.
Physical: Superb eye contact
& did not read notes.
Animated facial expressions.
Attire enhanced credibility.
Gestures enhanced delivery.
Excellent use of physical
environment. Vocal: Spoke
clearly, with appropriate rate,
volume, & animated delivery.
Correct pronunciation and
very few fillers.
Mostly cohesive delivery.
Often maintained appropriate
energy to hold interest.
Mostly poised and recovered
from mistakes, Physical: Good
eye contact & rarely used
notes. Good facial
expressions. Attire mostly
enhanced credibility. Often
poised & most gestures
enhanced delivery. Used
physical environment mostly
well. Vocal: Generally, spoke
clearly, with appropriate rate,
volume, & animated delivery.
Good pronunciation and a
few fillers.
Delivery needs more work.
Somewhat cohesive. Some
low or inconsistent energy.
Issues maintaining poise/
professionalism if made
mistakes. Physical: Fair eye
contact & frequently used
notes. Some good facial
expressions. Attire somewhat
enhanced credibility. Some
gestures and use of
environment were distracting.
Vocal: Sometimes difficult to
hear/understand; rate and
volume inconsistent. Some
issues with pronunciation and
multiple fillers.
Delivery feels unpracticed and
disjointed. Low or inconsistent
energy. Low professionalism
recovering from mistakes.
Physical: Poor eye contact &
often read notes. Distracting
facial expressions. Attire,
gestures, and environment
use detracted from credibility.
Vocal: Difficult to follow; rate
and volume erratic.
Pronunciation issues and lots
of fillers.
Delivery is not rehearsed and
rambling. Very low energy.
Unprofessional and unpoised.
Physical: little eye contact &
primarily read notes. Poor
facial expressions.
Unprofessional attire.
Distracting gestures or use of
physical environment. Vocal:
significant issues; hard to hear,
monotone, poor pacing.
Excessive pronunciation issues
and fillers.
Response to Audience
Questions (5%)
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
Excellent handling of Q&A.
Group professionally opened
and closed the Q&A portion.
Demonstrated mastery of case &
problems/solutions. Showed
group cohesion by taking turns
answering questions. Polite and
professional audience
interactions. Prepared with list
of possible questions in case
audience didn’t have any.
Good handling of Q&A. Group
had mostly professional open
& close of Q&A. Showed solid
understanding of case &
problems/solutions. Mostly
balanced in answering
questions. Polite/professional
audience interactions. Mostly
prepared with list of possible
questions in case audience
didn’t have any.
Q&A needs improvement. Had
somewhat professional open
& close of Q&A. Showed some
understanding of case &
problems/solutions. Answers
needed more detail. Some
balance in speaker turntaking. Needs more
professional audience
interactions. Somewhat
prepared if audience didn’t
have questions.
Q&A is poor. Missing or
disjointed open or close of
Q&A. Didn’t show
understanding of case &
problems/solutions. Answers
lacking substance. Speakers
unbalanced. Low
professionalism in audience
interactions. Minimal
preparation if audience didn’t
have questions.
Q&A is unprofessional and
lacking. Forgot to have Q&A or
missing both opening/closing
of Q&A. Shows fundamental
misunderstanding of case &
problems/solutions. Speakers
unbalanced and ill-prepared.
Unprofessionalism in audience
interactions. Not prepared if
audience didn’t have
questions.
7
BCOM 4300: Group Case Study Assignment
210 points
Visual Aid (10%)
Outstanding slide design/layout.
Some slides are clear and
Poorly designed aid. Most
Most slides are clear and
Slides are clear and aesthetically
aesthetically pleasing. Some
slides had design issues, were Serious errors & missing slides.
aesthetically pleasing. Text
engaging. Text not wordy. No
text and font readable and not
disorganized, and not
Disorganized & ill-formatted.
and font are readable/not
noticeable errors. Enhanced
overly wordy. Multiple
aesthetically pleasing. Too
Not aesthetically pleasing. Too
overly wordy. Minimal errors.
audience understanding and
spelling errors. Provided a
much text. Multiple errors.
much text. Distracted from the
Aids audience understanding.
increased presentation
basic understanding for
Did not enhance audience
presentation. Not wellWell-practiced physical
credibility. Incredibly wellaudience. More practiced
understanding. Lacked
presented. No effort for design
interaction with most slides.
practiced physical interaction.
physical interaction needed.
practiced physical interaction.
consistency.
Mostly cohesive design.
Cohesive design throughout.
Some design consistency.
Minimal design consistency.
Additional Deductions: -3% for every missing citation not meeting the source count (sources must be cited verbally and according to how we discussed oral citations in lecture);
-1% for each 10 seconds (over/under the assignment’s time range; The Q&A timing will be timed separately from the presentation timing); offensive comments/delivery; etc.)
Important Note: If it is clear that a group member(s) is not as prepared or professional as their group, they may be graded separately or incur individual grade deductions.
8