ACCT7107 Case Assignment Marking Rubric – Dakota Office Products S1 2023
1
Dakota Office Products Not attempted (0) Below expectation (35%) Satisfactory (60%) Very Good (80%) Outstanding (100%)
Q1. a. (10 marks)
To identify the most appropriate
costing system for the client
business.
No relevant response has
been attempted.
The response failed to
address most relevant
elements concerning a
costing system and has
proposed inappropriate
choices for costing system
elements. OR any response
without justifications.
The response addressed
most but not all relevant
elements concerning a
costing system and has
proposed appropriate
choices for costing
system elements with
reasonably developed
justifications.
The response addressed
most but not all relevant
elements concerning a
costing system and has
proposed appropriate
choices for costing
system elements with
well-developed
justification. OR the
response addressed all
relevant elements
concerning a costing
system and has
proposed appropriate
choices for costing
system elements with
reasonably developed
justifications.
Provide more specific
guidance and examples
of how the proposed
costing system would
benefit the client's
specific business, and
emphasize the
importance of
considering
implementation and
maintenance issues.
The response addressed all
relevant elements
concerning a costing system
and has proposed
appropriate choices for
costing system elements
with well-developed
justifications. Additionally,
the response provides
insightful analysis of how
the proposed costing system
would benefit the client's
specific business, and offers
thoughtful consideration of
potential limitations and
trade-offs.
ACCT7107 Case Assignment Marking Rubric – Dakota Office Products S1 2023
2
Dakota Office Products Not attempted (0) Below expectation (35%) Satisfactory (60%) Very Good (80%) Outstanding (100%)
Q1. b. (10 marks)
To address the issue concerning
costing in the client business.
No relevant response has
been attempted.
The response failed to
correctly identify all
features of the client’s
costing system and has not
provided reasonably
developed discussion on the
chosen features.
The response correctly
identified most features
of the client’s costing
system and has provided
reasonably developed
discussion on the chosen
features.
The response correctly
identified all features of
the client’s costing
system and has provided
reasonably developed
discussion on the chosen
features.
The response correctly
identified all features of the
client’s costing system and
has provided well-
developed discussion on the
chosen features.
Q2. a. (10 marks)
To identify the most appropriate
pricing method for the client
business.
No relevant response has
been attempted.
The response failed to
identify the most
inappropriate choices for
pricing method. OR any
response without
justifications.
The response identified
the most appropriate
choice for pricing
method with under-
developed justifications.
The response identified
the most appropriate
choice for pricing
method with reasonably
developed justifications.
The response identified the
most appropriate choice for
pricing method with well-
developed justifications.
Q2. b. (10 marks)
To address the issue concerning
pricing in the client business.
No relevant response has
been attempted.
The response failed to
correctly identify any
features of the client’s
pricing method.
The response correctly
identified the most
appropriate pricing
method for the client
with under-developed
discussions on the
chosen pricing method.
The response correctly
identified the most
appropriate pricing
method for the client
with reasonably
developed discussions
on the chosen pricing
method.
The response correctly
identified the most
appropriate pricing method
for the client with well-
developed discussions on
the chosen pricing method.
ACCT7107 Case Assignment Marking Rubric – Dakota Office Products S1 2023
3
Dakota Office Products Not attempted (0) Below expectation (35%) Satisfactory (60%) Very Good (80%) Outstanding (100%)
3. (15 marks)
To critically evaluate of the costs
and benefits associated with the
recent introduction of DDS.
No response or irrelevant
response provided.
The response lacks critical
evaluation and
understanding of the DDS
costs and benefits, and only
presents surface-level
analysis with no evidence or
justification.
The response may be
incomplete or demonstrate
a misunderstanding of the
DDS.
The response provides a
satisfactory level of
critical evaluation of the
DDS costs and benefits,
but lacks depth or
thorough analysis.
The evaluation may be
too superficial or not
well-supported by
evidence.
The response presents
some reasonable
justifications and
evidence to support the
evaluation.
The response
demonstrates a very
good level of critical
evaluation of the DDS
costs and benefits, with
well-developed analysis
and evidence-based
justification.
The response shows a
good understanding of
the DDS, presents a
balanced perspective,
and offers insightful
analysis on the costs and
benefits of the system.
The response presents an
outstanding level of critical
evaluation of the DDS costs
and benefits, with in-depth
and thorough analysis,
supported by well-
researched evidence and
convincing justification.
The response demonstrates
a high level of
understanding of the DDS
and its implications for the
client's business, presents a
nuanced perspective, and
offers innovative ideas for
improving the system.
4. (20 marks)
Present an integrated analysis on
client’s profitability.
No response or irrelevant
response provided.
The response lacks
integration and analysis of
the client's profitability, and
only presents surface-level
data with no evidence or
justification.
The response may be
incomplete or demonstrate
a misunderstanding of the
profitability analysis.
The response provides a
satisfactory level of
integration and analysis
of the client's
profitability, but lacks
depth or thorough
analysis. The evaluation
may be too superficial or
not well-supported by
evidence.
The response presents
some reasonable
justifications and
evidence to support the
profitability analysis.
The response
demonstrates a very
good level of integration
and analysis of the
client's profitability, with
well-developed analysis
and evidence-based
justification.
The response shows a
good understanding of
the profitability analysis,
presents a balanced
perspective, and offers
insightful analysis on the
key profitability drivers
of the business.
The response presents an
outstanding level of
integration and analysis of
the client's profitability,
with in-depth and thorough
analysis, supported by well-
researched evidence and
convincing justification.
The response demonstrates
a high level of
understanding of the
profitability analysis and its
implications for the client's
business, presents a
nuanced perspective, and
offers innovative ideas for
improving profitability.
ACCT7107 Case Assignment Marking Rubric – Dakota Office Products S1 2023
4
Dakota Office Products Not attempted (0) Below expectation (35%) Satisfactory (60%) Very Good (80%) Outstanding (100%)
5. (10 marks)
Give considerations to capacity
decisions in cost allocation.
No response or irrelevant
response provided.
The response fails to
identify capacity
considerations in cost
allocation, or the discussion
is incomplete and lacks
justification or evidence.
The response may
demonstrate a lack of
understanding of capacity
considerations in cost
allocation.
The response identifies
some capacity
considerations in cost
allocation and presents a
basic understanding of
the concept, but the
discussion may lack
depth or clarity.
The response provides
some justifications and
evidence to support the
capacity considerations.
The response
demonstrates a good
understanding of
capacity considerations
in cost allocation, with
well-developed
discussion and analysis
of the concept.
The response provides
evidence-based
justifications and
examples to support the
capacity considerations,
and shows how they can
impact cost allocation
decisions.
The response presents an
outstanding level of
understanding and analysis
of capacity considerations in
cost allocation, with in-
depth and thorough
discussion and analysis of
the concept.
The response provides
compelling evidence-based
justifications and examples
to support the capacity
considerations, and shows
how they can impact cost
allocation decisions in a
nuanced and sophisticated
way. The response may also
offer innovative or creative
ideas for optimizing cost
allocation based on capacity
considerations.
ACCT7107 Case Assignment Marking Rubric – Dakota Office Products S1 2023
5
Dakota Office Products Not attempted (0) Below expectation (35%) Satisfactory (60%) Very Good (80%) Outstanding (100%)
6. (15 marks)
Provide critical
recommendations.
No response or irrelevant
response provided
The response provided
recommendations that are
not relevant or feasible for
the company or are poorly
supported.
The response also did not
fully address the question
prompt.
The response provided
relevant and feasible
recommendations for
Dakota Office Products,
but they were not fully
supported with evidence
or reasoning.
The response also could
have gone into more
detail or provided more
specific action steps.
The response provided
clear and well-supported
recommendations that
are relevant and feasible
for Dakota Office
Products.
The response also
showed a good
understanding of the
company's situation and
how the
recommendations could
address the issues
identified in the case.
The response provided
excellent recommendations
that are well-supported with
evidence and reasoning, and
are both relevant and
feasible for Dakota Office
Products.
The response also went
above and beyond in
providing specific action
steps and demonstrating a
deep understanding of the
company's situation and the
potential impacts of the
recommendations.