BSAN2201 Principles of Business Analytics
Case Study – Assessment Criteria
The briefing notes for the case study are suggestive of the criteria we will use in assessing the case
study. More formally, we will use the following eight criteria to assess and evaluate the case study.
The first five criteria focus on the content of your case study. The final three criteria focus on your
presentation ability – including your ability to present well and engage with audience. If one or two
criteria are more important that the others, they are probably the fourth and fifth criteria –
recommend/generalise and conclude/reflect.
Here is a full list of the eight criteria with support questions – to help communicate our expectations
for each criterion. Note that the first five criteria have a strong tie-in to the first five suggested
sections of your case study.
Identify/motivate/articulate – does your case study identify an issue/problem/question and
sufficiently motivate and articulate it?
Describe/document – does your case study provide a sufficient description of the focal firm and
integrate relevant evidence to strengthen your subsequent analysis?
Analyse – does your case study introduce new ideas and/or insights and demonstrate synthesis of
your ideas, and demonstrate a commitment to intellectual inquiry (curiosity and questioning)?
Recommend/generalise – does your case study propose solutions to the issue/problem/question it
addresses, are the solutions general to contexts other than that of the focal firm?
Conclude/reflect – does your case study show the pursuit of ideas to their possible
conclusions/consequences, and consider issues/questions/problems that should be further
explored?
Structure/sequence – is your presentation a logical sequence of ideas, organised into parts that
establish a clear line of argument?
Language/mechanics/professionalism – have you used vocabulary and expression appropriate for a
formal business presentation, are your spoken words and supporting presentation slides free from
errors in grammar, sentence construction, and spelling?
Engagement/interest – does your use of language and visuals generate and sustain audience
engagement and interest, and support understanding of key concepts?
Further, each criterion has meaningful descriptors per the table on the following pages. Take these
descriptors to be indictive of the marking criteria to be used for assessing the case study. Finally, the
University’s criterion-referenced assessment policy implies that your submission will be assessed
against the criteria using the indicative descriptors of the following table. Read them carefully and
perhaps perform a self-assessment (or check of your own work) before you submit.
2
Marking Criteria
Grade/Criterion Pass “4”
Functional achievement
Credit “5”
Proficient achievement
Distinction “6”
Advanced achievement
High Distinction “7”
Exceptional achievement
Identify/motivate/articulate
Introduces topic but only
partially motivates it,
issue/question/problem
not well articulated
Identifies a topic and
offers some motivation
for it, some attempt to
articulate a related issue/
question/problem
Identifies and offers a
generally excellent
motivation for a topic, the
issue/question/problem is
generally well articulated
Identifies an important
topic, offers an excellent
motivation for the topic,
articulates an important
issue/question/problem
to be addressed
Describe/document Description of focal firm is
incomplete in some
respects, presented
evidence not particularly
well integrated with
analysis
Describes the focal firm in
some detail, some
integration of relevant
evidence
Provides a generally
comprehensive
description of the focal
firm, generally excellent
integration of relevant
evidence
Provides a comprehensive
description of the focal
firm, excellent integration
of relevant evidence to
support subsequent
analysis
Analyse Mixed evidence of
original thinking in
relation to the focal firm,
generally unquestioning
approach taken to
analysis
Some evidence of original
thinking in relation to the
focal firm, but not well
integrated/synthesised,
some evidence of
questioning/curiosity
Introduces new ideas in
relation to the focal firm,
new insights generally
well synthesised, evidence
of intellectual inquiry
Introduces new and useful
ideas in relation to the
focal firm, synthesises
new insights into a
coherent whole, evidence
of intellectual inquiry
Recommend/generalise Solutions to the issue/
question/problem not
sufficiently original or
clear, limited attempt to
generalise solution to
other contexts
Proposes solutions to the
issue/question/problem
that have some
originality, some attempt
at generalising solution to
other contexts
Proposes generally clear
and original solutions to
the issue/question/
problem addressed,
generalisation of solutions
mostly appropriate
Proposes clear and
original solutions to the
issue/question/problem
addressed, appropriately
generalised solutions to
other contexts





3


Marking Criteria (Cont’d)

Grade/Criterion Pass “4”
Functional achievement
Credit “5”
Proficient achievement
Distinction “6”
Advanced achievement
High Distinction “7”
Exceptional achievement
Conclude/reflect Does not adequately
pursue ideas or fully
explore their
consequences, does not
sufficiently develop
extension ideas
Mostly pursues ideas to
their conclusions and
generally explores their
consequences, some
consideration of issues to
be further explored
Pursues ideas to their
conclusions and generally
explores their
consequences, considers
issues that should be
further examined
Pursues ideas to their
conclusions and vigorously
explores their
consequences, considers
issues that should be
further explored and how
Research/referencing Some evidence of
research to support the
case study, generally
correct referencing within
the document and
reference list
Generally, well
researched case study
with some evidence of
synthesis of his/her own
ideas with those of the
briefing notes, correct
referencing within the
document and reference
list
Well researched case
study with a generally
thoughtful synthesis of
his/her own ideas with the
briefing notes, correct
referencing within the
document and reference
list
Well researched case
study and very thoughtful
integration of his/her own
ideas with those of the
briefing notes, correct
referencing within the
document and reference
list
Sequence/structure

The presentation is a
logical in parts but lacks
on overarching logic,
some lines of argument
not fully developed
The presentation is a
generally logical
sequence, but some lines
of argument are not fully
developed
The presentation is a
generally logical sequence
of ideas, organised
following a clear and
generally compelling line
or reasoning
Presentation is a logical
sequence of ideas,
organised in a way that
establishes a clear and
compelling line of
reasoning
Language/mechanics/
professionalism
Use of expression and
vocabulary is generally
appropriate for a business
presentation, some errors
of spoken language and
text
Use of expression and
vocabulary is generally
appropriate for a business
presentation, spoken
language and text is
mostly error free
The presentation uses
appropriate expression
and vocabulary for a
business context, spoken
language and text is
generally error free
The presentation uses
highly appropriate
expression and vocabulary
for a business context, the
spoken language and text
is free from errors
4
Marking Criteria (Cont’d)
Grade/Criterion Pass “4”
Functional achievement
Credit “5”
Proficient achievement
Distinction “6”
Advanced achievement
High Distinction “7”
Exceptional achievement
Engagement/Interest Use of slides and visuals
lacking in some respects,
audience engagement
and interest not
sufficiently generated or
sustained
Generally good use of
slides and visuals to
generate audience
engagement, audience
interest not consistently
sustained
Generally excellent use of
slides and visuals to
generate high levels of
audience engagement and
interest throughout most
of the presentation
Excellent use of slides and
visuals to generate and
sustain high levels of
audience engagement and
interest throughout the
presentation