Assignment2.1 Justification Report – Part 1&nbsp(NO PLAGIARI

Assignment2.1: Justification Report – Part 1 (NO PLAGIARISM)In Assignments 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, you will develop a formal,researched justification report that culminates in a recommendation toimplement a particular product, service, or program in your place of employmentin phases. This recommended product, service, or program should resolve aproblem that you identify in your workplace and should be directed to youremployer (even if you do not actually plan to share it with your employer). Assignment 2.1 has two parts. First, you will develop a blockbusiness letter requesting subject approval for your report topic. The lettershould be properly formatted per the guidelines below and should be addressedto your professor (you may use your local campus address for the purposes ofthis assignment) (3/4’s page to 1 page long). Additionally, you will develop anannotated bibliography (1-2 pages long) detailing potential sources for use inyour report. See the Week 3 tab in Blackboard for examples of block letterformat and the annotated bibliography expected for this assignment.The block letter must:· Be properly formatted including sender’s address, date,recipient’s address, greeting, 3-4 body paragraphs, and salutation.· Highlight the intention of the report (what problem will bediscussed and what potential alternatives will be used to address the problem).· Discuss five criteria to be used to compare the alternativeslisted above.Your annotated bibliography must:· Be formatted with an accurate APA reference entry to be followedby a short 2-3 line summary of why the source may be relevant in the finalreport.· Should cover a minimum of 2-4 quality sources.Yourassignment must:Be typed, singlespaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on allsides; citations and references must follow APA as required.Include a coverpage containing the title of the assignment, your name, the professor’sname, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the referencepage are not included in the required assignment page length.Thespecific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:· Supportideas or claims in body paragraphs with clear details, examples, and explanations.· Organizeideas logically by using transitional words, phrases, and sentences.· Usesentence variety and effective word choice in written communication.· Applywriting process strategies to develop formal business reports and / orproposals.Usetechnology and information resources to research issues related toselected topics.Writeclearly and concisely using proper writing mechanics.Gradingfor this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization ofthe paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric.Chosen topic:Thetopic for my justification report is ‘A technologically drivencompany’. The criteria to be used here is the good performance criteria.This is because these criteria will help me interpret how various activitiesare being conducted in the company; are they fast or slow. Slow activities willsignify no technological application as fast activities will help me see theessence of technology in the company. Secondly, this criterion will also helpme draw a conclusion as to whether indeed the company is technologicallydriven. This is because fast activities will mean good performance and slowactivities low/poor performance by the company.I attached a justification report sample and Justification Report Templatebelow.Points:150Assignment 2.1:Justification Report – Part 1CriteriaUnacceptableBelow 60% FMeets Minimum Expectations60-69% DFair70-79% CProficient80-89% BExemplary90-100% A1.Proper block letter format (addresses,spacing, greeting, design, salutation).Weight:15%Didnot follow guidelines for format, spacing, and/or design (3 or more majorformat errors).Multipleissues with format elements, spacing, and/or design (2 major format errors;multiple minor errors).Generalformat and spacing presented in submission correct (1 major format error;multiple minor errors).Formatmostly followed proper guidelines (no more than 4 minor errors).Formatfollowed proper guidelines as detailed (no more than 2 minor errors).2.Provide appropriate content described inassignment details (problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).Weight:15%Didnot follow guidelines for content (3 or more major errors).Multipleissues with content elements (2 missing or underdeveloped elements; multipleminor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/orcriteria).Generalcontent properly presented (1 missing or underdeveloped element; multipleminor errors with problem discussion, potential alternatives, and/orcriteria).Contentmostly followed proper guidelines (no more than 4 minor errors with problemdiscussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).Contentfollowed proper guidelines detailed (no more than 2 minor errors with problemdiscussion, potential alternatives, and/or criteria).3. Professional style inpresentation of information (appropriate word choice, design, tone).  Weight: 5%Did not present information in appropriate style (3 or more majorerrors).Multipleissues with professional style (2 major errors).Generalprofessional style in presentation of information (1 major error; multipleminor errors).Professionalstyle in presentation of information mostly effective (3-4 minor errors).Professionalstyle in presentation of information excellent (0-2 minor errors).4. Appropriate format for AnnotatedBibliography per posted example (including accurate APA entries, design,spacing). Weight: 25%Did not follow proper format (3 or more major errors).Multiple issues with appropriate format for AnnotatedBibliography per posted example (2 major errors).General format correct for Annotated Bibliography (1 majorerror; multiple minor errors).Appropriate format mostly followed for Annotated Bibliographyper posted example (3-4 minor errors).Appropriate format for Annotated Bibliography followed properguidelines as detailed (no more than 2 minor errors).5. Shortdescriptions provided (1-3 lines) for each source discussing potentialrelevance to assignment.Weight:15%Didnot include short descriptions for each source presented.Descriptionsprovided insufficient in terms of detail/clarity in discussing potentialrelevance to assignment (missing 1 or more descriptions).Descriptionsprovided generally relevant but needed more detail/clarity in discussingpotential relevance to assignment (no missing descriptions).Descriptionsall present and at least one has minor content issues.Alldescriptions presented and no minor content issues.6. Included 2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (quality, topic,relevance).Weight: 5%Didnot provide sources as required.Missingminimum 1 source or at least 1 source not relevant for assignment.Included2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (2 major problems with quality, topic,or relevance).Included2-4 sources per assignment guidelines (1 major problem / 3 minor errors withquality, topic, or relevance).Allsources presented were high quality, relevant, and topical (less than 2 minorerrors).7. Writing clarity, mechanics, proper grammar/spelling/sentencedevelopment.Weight: 20%Morethan 8 errors present. 7-8errors present.5-6errors present.3-4errors present.0-2errors present.

Did you know you can hire someone to answer this question? Yes, is a hub of paper writers dedicated to completing research and summaries, critical thinking tasks, essays, coursework, and other homework tasks. It is simple as ABC.