Incentive Plan
1. An overview of the organization for which your team is developing an incentive plan.
2. A performance metric to monitor employee performance.
3. Motivation strategies and techniques to appeal to employees.
4. Incentive compensation to remain competitive within the industry.
5. Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric (SEE BELOW). Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
RUBRIC
Incentive Plan
| 1 Unsatisfactory 0.00% | 2 Less than Satisfactory 74.00% | 3 Satisfactory 79.00% | 4 Good 87.00% | 5 Excellent 100.00% | ||
| 70.0 %Content | ||||||
| 15.0 %Performance Metric | A performance metric is not included. | A performance metric is included, but it is not clear or cannot clearly monitor employee performance. | A performance metric that monitors employee performance is included. | A performance metric that monitors employee performance incorporates a visual representation and a brief description. | A well-developed performance metric that monitors employee performance incorporates an organized visual representation and a detailed description explaining how to use the metric to monitor employee performance. | |
| 20.0 %Motivation Strategies and Techniques | Motivation strategies or techniques are not included. | Motivation strategies or techniques are included, but they lack detail or are incomplete. | Only one motivation strategy or technique is included. | Multiple motivation strategies and techniques are included. There is an explanation for implementing the strategies or techniques to appeal to the employees within the organization. | Multiple motivation strategies and techniques are included. There is a clear explanation for implementing the strategies or techniques to appeal to the employees within the organization. | |
| 25.0 %Incentive Compensation | An incentive compensation proposal is not included. | An incentive compensation proposal is included, but it lacks detail or is incomplete. | An incentive compensation proposal is included. | An incentive compensation proposal discusses the plan of the organization to remain competitive within the industry. There is a relationship between the performance metrics and incentives. | An incentive compensation proposal discusses the detailed plan of the organization to remain competitive within the industry. There is a relationship between the performance metrics and incentives and applies motivation and techniques to the proposal. | |
| 10.0 % Moral Hazards | Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization are not included. | Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization are included, but they lack detail or are incomplete. | Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization are included. There is some mention of strategies to prevent hazards. | Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization include a detailed description and more than one strategy to prevent hazards. | Moral hazards affecting employees and the organization include a comprehensive description of both hazards and preventative strategies. | |
| 20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness | ||||||
| 7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose | Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. | Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear. | Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose. | Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. | Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. | |
| 8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction | Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. | Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. | Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. | Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. | Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. | |
| 5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) | Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used. | Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. | Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. | Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. | Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. | |
| 10.0 %Format | ||||||
| 5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) | Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. | Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. | Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. | Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. | All format elements are correct. | |
| 5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) | Sources are not documented. | Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. | Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. | Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error. | |
| 100 % Total Weightage |
