Utilizing the knowledge you gained from the Week 5 Writing Assignment, incorporate that new knowledge into a cost-benefit analysis for the implementation or optimization of new technologies, or an information system (or big data project) that you could do for your current, or previous, employer organization. Make sure to include what the project is, why it is needed, the business motives for it, and the actual cost-benefit analysis. Note, if you are interested in expanding your understanding of global markets, you may select recognized firms in the emerging market sector. (Weekly learning objective 2)
See the attached 100-point Technology Business Motive Rubric
All weekly writing assignments will be written in APA and are due at the end of each respective week by Sunday at 11:59 pm.
This writing assignment must consist of a 3-5-page cost-benefit analysis in business report format. Please include all calculations in easy-to-read and understandable tables, charts, graphs, etc. in an appendix at the end of the report.
Each writing assignment must include at least two scholarly, peer-reviewed resources, as well as at least one more reputable (magazines, Ted Talks, etc) source.
Weekly writing assignments will include prompts that allow Learners to dive deeper into subjects covered in our weekly textbook readings and that align with the Course Learning Outcomes.
Criteria Unsatisfactory Meets Basic Requirements Excellent Maximum Points Points Awarded General Content/Context Content lacks sufficient coverage of topic, relevance, and/or depth of analysis. Thesis is not clearly identified. Terms and definitions not clearly stated. Reader is confused or may be misinformed. (Points:<79.9%; 0-19.9="" pts)="" content="" reflects="" minor="" problems="" re:comprehensive-ness,="" relevance,="" detail,and/or="" persuasiveness.="" thesis="" is="" only="" supported="" at="" times.="" terms="" and="" definitions="" are="" reasonably="" clear.="" reader="" gains="" few="" insights.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 20-22.4="" pts)="" coverage="" of="" topic="" is="" very="" comprehensive,="" relevant,="" well="" detailed,="" and="" persuasive.="" thesis="" is="" well-supported="" throughout.="" terms="" and="" definitions="" are="" clear="" and="" precise.="" reader="" gains="" insights.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 22.5-25="" pts)="" 25%="" or="" 25="" points="" discipline="" specific="" category="" -="" technology="" ethics="" ethical="" issues="" may="" or="" may="" not="" be="" clearly="" identifed.="" ethical="" framework="" is="" not="" present="" or="" weak="" and="" murky.="" solutions="" may="" be="" identified="" but="" may="" not="" fit="" the="" ethical="" dilemma.="" reader="" has="" a="" difficult="" time="" understanding="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-15.9="" pts)="" ethical="" issues="" are="" clearly="" identified.="" ethical="" framework="" may="" not="" be="" clearly="" identified,="" but="" there="" is="" a="" clear="" solution.="" reader="" identifies="" but="" may="" not="" fully="" understand="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 16-17.9="" pts)="" ethical="" issues="" are="" clearly="" identified.="" ethical="" framework="" is="" clear="" and="" includes="" a="" clear="" solution.="" reader="" easily="" identifies="" and="" understands="" the="" writer's="" ethical="" viewpoint.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 18-20="" pts)="" 20%="" or="" 20="" points="" research,="" sources,="" and="" evidence="" occasional="" references="" are="" provided.="" writer="" overrelies="" on="" unsubstantiated="" statements.="" the="" reader="" is="" confused="" about="" the="" source="" of="" the="" ideas="" or="" the="" references="" are="" not="" cited.="" does="" not="" meet="" the="" minimum="" requirements="" for="" academic/scholarly="" sources.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" research="" meets="" basic="" requirements="" in="" terms="" of="" relevance,="" credible="" academic="" sources,="" and="" timeliness.="" writer="" may="" rely="" too="" much="" on="" sources="" or="" not="" enough.="" sources="" help="" to="" substantiate="" thesis.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-8.9="" pts)="" research="" is="" very="" timely,="" relevant,="" and="" addresses="" all="" of="" the="" issues="" stated="" in="" the="" assignment’s="" criteria.="" writer="" relies="" on="" academic/scholarly/professional="" sources="" to="" substantiate="" thesis.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" analysis="" sets="" a="" compelling="" argument="" argument/purpose="" is="" not="" always="" clear.="" argument,="" purpose,="" and/or="" thesis="" is="" not="" well="" supported.="" tone="" is="" not="" consistently="" professional="" or="" appropriate="" for="" the="" audience,="" argument,="" and/or="" purpose.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-11.9="" pts)="" argument/purpose="" takes="" a="" clear="" stance="" but="" may="" occassionally="" digress="" from="" the="" main="" argument="" and/or="" purpose.="" tone="" is="" generally="" professional="" and="" appropriate="" for="" the="" audience,="" argument,="" and/or="" purpose.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 12-13.4="" pts)="" argument/purpose="" takes="" a="" clear="" stance="" and="" is="" readily="" apparent="" to="" the="" reader.="" tone="" is="" consistently="" professional="" and="" appropriate="" for="" the="" argument,="" audience,="" and/or="" purpose="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 13.5-15="" pts)="" 15%="" or="" 15="" points="" conclusion="" conclusion="" is="" not="" included="" or="" leaves="" the="" reader="" confused="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-3.9="" pts)="" conclusion="" summarizes="" the="" main="" points,="" though="" some="" new="" information="" is="" introduced="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 4-4.4="" pts)="" conclusion="" summarizes="" the="" main="" points.="" no="" new="" information="" is="" introduced;="" conclusion="" flows="" from="" the="" body="" of="" report="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 4.5-5="" pts)="" 5%="" or="" 5="" points="" structure="" organization="" and="" structure="" of="" the="" paper="" detract="" from="" the="" writer’s="" message.="" paragraphs="" are="" disjointed.="" writing="" is="" not="" arranged="" logically.="" ideas="" fail="" to="" make="" sense="" together.="" does="" not="" include="" all="" assignment="" requirements.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" adequate="" structure;="" ideas="" are="" arranged="" logically="" to="" support="" thesis="" and="" are="" usually="" clearly="" linked="" to="" each="" other.="" paragraph="" and="" sentence="" transitions="" are="" mostly="" logical="" with="" minor="" flow="" issues="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-="" 8.9="" pts)="" paper="" is="" very="" well="" structured.="" ideas="" are="" arranged="" logically="" to="" support="" thesis.="" they="" flow="" smoothly="" from="" one="" to="" another="" and="" are="" clearly="" linked="" to="" each="" other.="" paragraph="" and="" sentence="" transitions="" are="" logically="" presented="" and="" flow="" throughout="" the="" paper="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-="" 10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" notre="" dame="" college="" business="" division="" mba="" 630="" -="" ethics="" writing="" assignment="" rubric="" c="" o="" n="" t="" e="" n="" t="" w="" r="" it="" in="" g="" writing="" style="" writing="" contains="" numerous="" grammar,="" punctuation,="" spelling,="" and="" word="" choice="" errors.="" language="" uses="" slang="" or="" conversational="" tone="" with="" minimal="" to="" no="" use="" of="" terms="" and="" concepts.="" word="" choice="" distracts="" the="" reader,="" while="" some="" words="" are="" used="" inappropriately.="" some="" sentences="" may="" be="" constructed="" awkwardly.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-7.9="" pts)="" writing="" contains="" few="" grammar,="" punctuation,="" spelling,="" and="" word="" choice="" errors.="" some="" mechanical="" errors="" or="" typos="" are="" present,="" but="" are="" not="" overly="" distracting.="" some="" appropriateness="" to="" terms="" and="" concepts="" with="" moderate="" explanation.="" sentences="" are="" well="" phrased="" and="" demonstrate="" some="" variety="" in="" length="" and="" structure.="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 8-8.9="" pts)="" writing="" follows="" rules="" of="" grammar="" usage="" and="" punctuation;="" spelling="" and="" word="" choices="" are="" correct,="" language="" clear="" and="" precise="" with="" appropriateness="" to="" terms="" and="" concepts.="" sentences="" are="" well-="" phrased="" and="" varied="" in="" length="" and="" structure.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 9-="" 10="" pts)="" 10%="" or="" 10="" points="" formatting="" -="" apa="" or="" other="" professional="" formatting="" paper="" significantly="" deviates="" from="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" assigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" (points:=""><79.9%; 0-3.9 pts) paper follows designated guidelines for apa format or other asigned professional formatting style re: required sections, documentation, margins, headings, etc. with minor deviations (points: 80% - 89.9%; 4-4.4 pts) paper follows all designated guidelines for apa format or other assigned professional formatting style re: required sections, documentation, margins, headings, etc. (points: 90%+; 4.5-5 pts) 5% or 5 points 0 total (out of 100) 100 percentage 100.00% w r it in g comments: 0-3.9="" pts)="" paper="" follows="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" asigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" with="" minor="" deviations="" (points:="" 80%="" -="" 89.9%;="" 4-4.4="" pts)="" paper="" follows="" all="" designated="" guidelines="" for="" apa="" format="" or="" other="" assigned="" professional="" formatting="" style="" re:="" required="" sections,="" documentation,="" margins,="" headings,="" etc.="" (points:="" 90%+;="" 4.5-5="" pts)="" 5%="" or="" 5="" points="" 0="" total="" (out="" of="" 100)="" 100="" percentage="" 100.00%="" w="" r="" it="" in="" g="">