Executive Solution Overview
see attached – 2 years ago **files (2)** – ## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx – ## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf **## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx** **Week 1 HRA CAP** **Cite two academic/scholarly sources and the Course Text.** Textbook: Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN…
Instant Solution Download
$6.99Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Need a Fresh Custom Paper?
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Assignment Prompt & Instructions
see attached
– 2 years ago
**files (2)**
– ## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx
– ## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf
**## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx**
**Week 1 HRA CAP**
**Cite two academic/scholarly sources and the Course Text.**
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
1.A. Select a company, possibly the one you want to research this term.
_*How might different HR metrics and analytics be best employed for that company?_
_*What workplace trends and challenges will this company need to face from your reading?_
**1.B.**
_Identify the three major corporate strategies and how they align with the HR challenges associated with the company you have chosen to research this term._ _In the research topic you have chosen, what main barriers do you see that may prevent the company from taking a more strategic approach to HR? Share recommendations to eliminate barriers._
**_1.C._** _For the company, identify steps you might take in consulting with the federal government about strategic workforce planning. What factors would you suggest senior managers examine, and what obstacles to implementing change might exist for this company? Also, what are the critical factors to consider in the design of work systems for your chosen company? How does technology play in the design of work systems for this company?_
**1.D** _Devise a staffing strategy for the company and submit for peer collaboration. Share, also, how training will be likely change the future of the company?_
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
**References**
· Blumberg, M. and Pringle, CD. 1982. The Missing Opportunity in Organizational Research: Some Implications for a Theory of Work Performance.
_Academy of Management Review_,
_7_(4): 560–569.
· Boudreau, J.W., Hopp, W., McClain, J.O. and Thomas, L.J. 2003. On the Interface Between Operations and Human Resources Management.
_Manufacturing & Service Operations Management_,
_5_(3): 179–202.
· Boudreau, J.W. and Ramstad, RM. 2006. Talentship and Human Resource Measurement and Analysis: From ROI to Strategic Organizational Change.
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 29.
· Galbraith, J. 1977.
_Organization Design_, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
· Lawler, E., Levenson, A., and Boudreau, J. 2004. HR Metrics and Analytics: Use and Impact,
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 27(4): 27–35.
· Levenson, A. 2005. Harnessing the Power of HR Analytics,
_Strategic HR Review_,
_4_(3): 28–31.
· Levenson, A. and Faber, T. 2009. Count on Productivity Gains.
_HR Magazine_, June, 68–74.
· Levenson, A., Fenlon, M.J. and Benson, G. 2010. Rethinking Retention Strategies: Work-Life Versus Deferred Compensation in a Total Rewards Strategy.
_WorldAtWork Journal_, Fourth Quarter, 41–52.
· Levenson, A., Lawler, E., and Boudreau, J. 2005. Survey on HR Analytics and HR Transformation: Feedback Report, Center for Effective Organizations, University of Southern California.
· Rothwell, W.J., and Sredl, H.J. 1992.
_TheASTD Reference Guide to Professional Human Resource Development Roles & Competencies, Second Edition, Volume II_, Amherst, MA: HRD Press, Inc.
**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice
(Criterion is missing or not
in evidence)
1-13 points
Basic
(works towards meeting
expectations;
performance needs
improvement)
14-16 points
Proficient
(meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points
Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding)
19-20 points
Support of
Week's Reading
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not refer to the
readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings
to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in
postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;
does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)
Integrates personal
observations and
knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not
present new
observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents
new observations
(17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents
new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to
Classmates
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’
postings
(1-13 points)
Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other
students to think critically
about their own work.
(17-18 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own
work.
(19-20 points)
Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence
Structure
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not
presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure
are not suitable
(14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect
readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)
References No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to
support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly
cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion
response
(17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.
(19-20 points)
**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice
(Criterion is missing or not
in evidence)
1-13 points
Basic
(works towards meeting
expectations;
performance needs
improvement)
14-16 points
Proficient
(meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points
Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding)
19-20 points
Support of
Week's Reading
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not refer to the
readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings
to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in
postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;
does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)
Integrates personal
observations and
knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not
present new
observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents
new observations
(17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents
new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to
Classmates
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’
postings
(1-13 points)
Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other
students to think critically
about their own work.
(17-18 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own
work.
(19-20 points)
Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence
Structure
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not
presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure
are not suitable
(14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect
readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)
References No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to
support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly
cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion
response
(17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.
(19-20 points)
**## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx**
**Week 1 HRA CAP**
**Cite two academic/scholarly sources and the Course Text.**
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
1.A. Select a company, possibly the one you want to research this term.
_*How might different HR metrics and analytics be best employed for that company?_
_*What workplace trends and challenges will this company need to face from your reading?_
**1.B.**
_Identify the three major corporate strategies and how they align with the HR challenges associated with the company you have chosen to research this term._ _In the research topic you have chosen, what main barriers do you see that may prevent the company from taking a more strategic approach to HR? Share recommendations to eliminate barriers._
**_1.C._** _For the company, identify steps you might take in consulting with the federal government about strategic workforce planning. What factors would you suggest senior managers examine, and what obstacles to implementing change might exist for this company? Also, what are the critical factors to consider in the design of work systems for your chosen company? How does technology play in the design of work systems for this company?_
**1.D** _Devise a staffing strategy for the company and submit for peer collaboration. Share, also, how training will be likely change the future of the company?_
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
**References**
· Blumberg, M. and Pringle, CD. 1982. The Missing Opportunity in Organizational Research: Some Implications for a Theory of Work Performance.
_Academy of Management Review_,
_7_(4): 560–569.
· Boudreau, J.W., Hopp, W., McClain, J.O. and Thomas, L.J. 2003. On the Interface Between Operations and Human Resources Management.
_Manufacturing & Service Operations Management_,
_5_(3): 179–202.
· Boudreau, J.W. and Ramstad, RM. 2006. Talentship and Human Resource Measurement and Analysis: From ROI to Strategic Organizational Change.
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 29.
· Galbraith, J. 1977.
_Organization Design_, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
· Lawler, E., Levenson, A., and Boudreau, J. 2004. HR Metrics and Analytics: Use and Impact,
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 27(4): 27–35.
· Levenson, A. 2005. Harnessing the Power of HR Analytics,
_Strategic HR Review_,
_4_(3): 28–31.
· Levenson, A. and Faber, T. 2009. Count on Productivity Gains.
_HR Magazine_, June, 68–74.
· Levenson, A., Fenlon, M.J. and Benson, G. 2010. Rethinking Retention Strategies: Work-Life Versus Deferred Compensation in a Total Rewards Strategy.
_WorldAtWork Journal_, Fourth Quarter, 41–52.
· Levenson, A., Lawler, E., and Boudreau, J. 2005. Survey on HR Analytics and HR Transformation: Feedback Report, Center for Effective Organizations, University of Southern California.
· Rothwell, W.J., and Sredl, H.J. 1992.
_TheASTD Reference Guide to Professional Human Resource Development Roles & Competencies, Second Edition, Volume II_, Amherst, MA: HRD Press, Inc.
**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice
(Criterion is missing or not
in evidence)
1-13 points
Basic
(works towards meeting
expectations;
performance needs
improvement)
14-16 points
Proficient
(meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points
Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding)
19-20 points
Support of
Week's Reading
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not refer to the
readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings
to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in
postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;
does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)
Integrates personal
observations and
knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not
present new
observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents
new observations
(17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents
new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to
Classmates
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’
postings
(1-13 points)
Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other
students to think critically
about their own work.
(17-18 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own
work.
(19-20 points)
Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence
Structure
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not
presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure
are not suitable
(14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect
readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)
References No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to
support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly
cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion
response
(17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.
(19-20 points)
**## HRAWEEK1CAP.docx**
**Week 1 HRA CAP**
**Cite two academic/scholarly sources and the Course Text.**
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
1.A. Select a company, possibly the one you want to research this term.
_*How might different HR metrics and analytics be best employed for that company?_
_*What workplace trends and challenges will this company need to face from your reading?_
**1.B.**
_Identify the three major corporate strategies and how they align with the HR challenges associated with the company you have chosen to research this term._ _In the research topic you have chosen, what main barriers do you see that may prevent the company from taking a more strategic approach to HR? Share recommendations to eliminate barriers._
**_1.C._** _For the company, identify steps you might take in consulting with the federal government about strategic workforce planning. What factors would you suggest senior managers examine, and what obstacles to implementing change might exist for this company? Also, what are the critical factors to consider in the design of work systems for your chosen company? How does technology play in the design of work systems for this company?_
**1.D** _Devise a staffing strategy for the company and submit for peer collaboration. Share, also, how training will be likely change the future of the company?_
Textbook:
Mello, J.A. (2019). Strategic human resource management (5th ed.). Cengage Learning Inc. ISBN-13:
978-1-337-61999-
**References**
· Blumberg, M. and Pringle, CD. 1982. The Missing Opportunity in Organizational Research: Some Implications for a Theory of Work Performance.
_Academy of Management Review_,
_7_(4): 560–569.
· Boudreau, J.W., Hopp, W., McClain, J.O. and Thomas, L.J. 2003. On the Interface Between Operations and Human Resources Management.
_Manufacturing & Service Operations Management_,
_5_(3): 179–202.
· Boudreau, J.W. and Ramstad, RM. 2006. Talentship and Human Resource Measurement and Analysis: From ROI to Strategic Organizational Change.
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 29.
· Galbraith, J. 1977.
_Organization Design_, Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
· Lawler, E., Levenson, A., and Boudreau, J. 2004. HR Metrics and Analytics: Use and Impact,
_Human Resource Planning Journal_, 27(4): 27–35.
· Levenson, A. 2005. Harnessing the Power of HR Analytics,
_Strategic HR Review_,
_4_(3): 28–31.
· Levenson, A. and Faber, T. 2009. Count on Productivity Gains.
_HR Magazine_, June, 68–74.
· Levenson, A., Fenlon, M.J. and Benson, G. 2010. Rethinking Retention Strategies: Work-Life Versus Deferred Compensation in a Total Rewards Strategy.
_WorldAtWork Journal_, Fourth Quarter, 41–52.
· Levenson, A., Lawler, E., and Boudreau, J. 2005. Survey on HR Analytics and HR Transformation: Feedback Report, Center for Effective Organizations, University of Southern California.
· Rothwell, W.J., and Sredl, H.J. 1992.
_TheASTD Reference Guide to Professional Human Resource Development Roles & Competencies, Second Edition, Volume II_, Amherst, MA: HRD Press, Inc.
**## GradDiscussionRubric.pdf**
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
Criteria No Submission
0 points
Novice
(Criterion is missing or not
in evidence)
1-13 points
Basic
(works towards meeting
expectations;
performance needs
improvement)
14-16 points
Proficient
(meets expectations;
performance is satisfactory)
17-18 points
Exemplary
(exceeds expectations;
performance is outstanding)
19-20 points
Support of
Week's Reading
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not refer to the
readings to support postings
(1-13 points)
Alludes to the readings
to support postings
(14-16 points)
Refers to examples from the
readings to support postings
(17-18 points)
Provides concrete examples from
the readings to support postings;
integrates prior readings in
postings
(19-20 points)
Observations No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Does not integrate personal
observations or knowledge;
does not present new
observations
(1-13 points)
Integrates personal
observations and
knowledge in a cursory
manner; does not
present new
observations
(14-16 points)
Integrates personal
observations and knowledge
in an accurate way; presents
new observations
(17-18 points)
Integrates personal observations
and knowledge in an accurate and
highly insightful way; presents
new observations
(19-20 points)
Response to
Classmates
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Responds in a cursory
manner to classmates’
postings
(1-13 points)
Constructively responds
to classmates’ postings
(14-16 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; offers
insight that encourages other
students to think critically
about their own work.
(17-18 points)
Constructively responds to
classmates’ postings; masterfully
connects the material presented
in classmates’ postings to their
responses; encourages classmates
to think critically about their own
work.
(19-20 points)
Organization,
Word Choice,
and Sentence
Structure
No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Posts are disorganized and
information is not presented
in a logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are not suitable
(1-13 points)
Posts are somewhat
disorganized, and
information is not
presented in a logical
sequence; word choice
and sentence structure
are not suitable
(14-16 points)
Posts are organized, and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word
choice and sentence
structure are suitable; there
are a few errors; however,
errors do not affect
readability.
(17-18 points)
Posts are organized and
information is presented in a
logical sequence; word choice and
sentence structure are suitable;
no errors in the response.
(19-20 points)
References No Student
Submission
(0 points)
Includes no sources to
support conclusions
(1-13 points)
Includes 1 outside
source to support and
enrich the discussion;
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and
enrich the discussion;
sources are properly cited in
Includes 2 or more outside
sources to support and enrich the
discussion; sources are cited using
APA format; style guidelines are
TCOB Graduate Studies Discussion Rubric
sources are not properly
cited in APA format
(14-16 points)
APA format and are properly
integrated into the discussion
response
(17-18 points)
masterfully integrated into the
discussion response.
(19-20 points)
Leave a Reply