Rubric for Case Notes: Corporate Governance at Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia: Not “A Good Thing”
Skill Development
Case Analysis Tasks
Learning Outcomes
Concepts and Analytical Tools
Stellar:
Mastery demonstrated by full
engagement in task, original ideas, and
value-added discoveries
Score
D C B B+ A- AA+
Review and synthesize facts of
the case
Discussion of MSO’s corporate
governance
Exceeds expectations and successfully
discusses MSO’s corporate governance.
Demonstrate command of
relevant concepts and analytical
tools applicable to the case
Evaluate the effectiveness of MSO’s
board of directors
Exceeds expectations and reveals important
discussions of the effectiveness of MSO’s
board of directors.
Evaluate and discuss the
organization’s current situation or
existing industry conditions
Discuss Martha Stewart’s compensation
and evaluate its effectiveness
Exceeds expectations and provides
extensive and appropriate discussions on
Martha Stewart’s compensation and
evaluate its effectiveness
Identify conclusions that can be
drawn from the analysis
Discuss the possibility of the market for
corporate control
Exceeds expectations and assesses the
possibility of the market for corporate
control.
Deliver conclusions (written, oral,
or discussion)
Discussion and communication of
analysis results through written report,
oral presentation, and/or team
participation
Exceeds expectations and delivers insightful
contributions from the analysis that
demonstrate mastery of skills and concepts.
Identify viable strategic options
Proposes strategic actions to help MSO
avoid becoming a takeover target
Exceeds expectations and purposefully
addresses the questions.
Weigh relevant decision-making
factors
Specifically factors important variables
into strategic decision making
Exceeds expectations and conducts an
intricate weighted analysis of the factors
relevant to MSO’s strategic decisions.
Build a position in support of
recommended strategic action
Presents convincing evidence to back
strategy selection and recommendations
Exceeds expectations and proposes an
integrated strategy that sustains the
company‘s competitive advantages and
performance levels.
Deliver conclusions and
recommendations (written, oral,
or discussion)
Uses written report, oral presentation,
and/or team participation to
communicate assessment and proposed
business strategy
Exceeds expectations and delivers insightful
contributions from the assessment that
demonstrate mastery of skills and concepts.
Convincing evidence to support
recommended strategic action is missing.
Assessment and/or business strategy
recommendations are incomplete.
Discussion and/or conclusions from the
analysis are absent or incomplete.
Significant discussion and conclusions from
the analysis are delivered.
Excellent discussion and strong conclusions
are drawn from the analysis.
Establishes a strong set of strategic
proposals for consideration.
Thoroughly describes important factors that
should be weighed in the strategic decision-
making process.
Presents strong and meaningful evidence in
support of recommended strategic proposals.
Excellent assessment and strong business
strategy recommendations are delivered.
Evaluation fails to sufficiently assess Martha
Stewart’s compensation and evaluate its
effectiveness.
Situation Analysis
Strategic Options and Decisions
Excludes important factors that should be
weighed in the strategic decision-making
process.
Presents good evidence in support of
recommended strategic proposals.
Significant assessment and business strategy
recommendations are delivered.
Does not establish adequate strategic actions
to help MSO avoid becoming a takeover
target.
Establishes adequate strategic proposals for
consideration.
Scoring Criteria for Levels of Performance
Below Expectations:
Shows no evidence of or significant gaps
in understanding
Meets Expectations:
Demonstrates acceptable level of
understanding and competency
Exceeds Expectations:
Demonstrates high level of
understanding and competency and
makes relevant contributions
Includes important factors that should be
weighed in the strategic decision-making
process.
Analysis is an insufficient evaluation of the
effectiveness of MSO’s board of directors.
Analysis is a sufficient evaluation of the
effectiveness of MSO’s board of directors.
Analysis is a strong evaluation of the
effectiveness of MSO’s board of directors.
Review does not fully discuss the possibility
of the market for corporate control.
Review describes significant discussions on
the possibility of the market for corporate
control.
Review provides a comprehensive discussion
of the possibility of the market for corporate
control.
Analysis excludes some of the relevant
discussions of MSO’s corporate governance.
Analysis includes significant discussions of
MSO’s corporate governance.
Analysis thoroughly discusses MSO’s
corporate governance.
Evaluation assesses Martha Stewart’s
compensation and evaluate its effectiveness.
Evaluation fully and accurately discuss
Martha Stewart’s compensation and evaluate
its effectiveness
Weight
Evaluator Comments
Total Score