Category

Company
Profile

Research
Depth

Analysis and
referencing

Mark scale
Max mark = 8

Mark scale
Max mark = 8

Mark scale
Max mark = 10

0-2
Lack of adequate
representation of the
company
Completely inadequate
profile and lack of
understanding of
companys position in
industry
Multiple major
elements or key
categories of
information missing
0-2
Inadequate depth and
focus in research
Lack of any research
depth or impact in
terms of information
generated
0-1
Analysis of company is
lacking in logical
judgement or depth of
analysis
Inappropriate
statements and
inadequate analysis
References almost
completely missing

3-4
Major omission of key
information
Significant omission of
information to describe
adequately companys
position in industry
Major omission of
elements or key
categories of
information

5-6
Minor omissions of
important information
Some information
missing to fully
understand companys
market position
Some elements or key
categories of
information absent

7-8
Good, clear and
thorough profile
All necessary
information to
understand position in
market
Thorough elements or
key categories of
information present

3-4
Limited use of
resources for research
Merely adequate in
terms of significance

5-6
Appreciable scope of
resources and verified
sources
Reasonably up-to-date
information that
impacts the company
5-7
Analysis is adequately
logical and most major
areas are covered
Appropriate statements
with some justification
Some references of
minor deficiencies in
referencing technique

7-8
Using multiple,
respected sources of
information
Concise, significant and
current information
that is strategic
8-10
Analysis is logical,
thorough and
appropriate to the level
expected
Appropriate
statements, clearly
backed by referencing
Appropriate list of
references with good
referencing technique

2-4
Some important areas
not adequately dealt
with in analysis
Meaningful statements
with hardly any
justification
Major deficiencies in
list or technique of
referencing

Industry
position and
strategy

Language,
readability,
conciseness

Mark scale
Max mark = 8

0-2
Poor logical flow to
forming conclusions or
lack of conclusion
Lack of any adequate
description of Company
As position or strategy
Discussion lacking in
depth or thought or no
reference to Company
B

Mark scale
Max mark = 6

0-2
Major grammatical
errors
Major errors in
structure or flow
Severe issues in more
than one area in terms
of coherence or ideas
The information is not
made interesting or
relevant to the reader

3-4
Conclusions formed but
not closely aligned to
research or well
referenced
Position and strategy
mentioned with unclear
links to research and
analysis
Omissions in discussion
areas of inadequate
reference in Company B
3-4
Some grammatical
errors
Minor but significant
errors in structure or
flow
Clear and coherent
writing with decent
economy, vague or
incoherent in certain
areas
The information has
only moderate appeal
to the reader

5-6
Satisfactory conclusions
based on adequate
research
Position and strategy
described with links
made with research
and analysis
Adequate discussion
with reference to
Company B
5-6
Free of any
grammatical errors
Good structure and
logical flow of writing
Concise and
communicates ideas
very clearly
Written in an engaging
manner that draws the
reader in

7-8
Well thought out
conclusions aligned to
research
Clear description of
Company As position
and strategy aligned to
research and analysis
Well explained
discussion including
reference made to
Company B