AMH 2042 RVC Spring 2019 Essay Paper Grading Rubric Adopted from Professor Jay Aronson, Carnegie Mellon University Excellent Good Needs Improvement Poor F Overall Impression Author directly addresses main question or issue, and adds new insight to the subject not provided in lectures, readings, or class discussions. The author has retained nearly all of the knowledge presented in class. He/She is able to synthesize this knowledge in new ways and relate to material not covered in the course. Author competently addresses main question or issue, but does not add much new insight into the subject. That said, it is clear that the author has learned a great deal in class and is able to communicate this knowledge to others. Author attempts to address main question or issue, but fails. The author has retained some information from the course, but does not fully understand its meaning or context and cannot clearly convey it to others. Essay does NOT address main question or issue, and it is obvious that author has not retained any information from the course. P L A G I A R I S M Argument Essay contains a clear argument—i.e., lets the reader know exactly what the author is trying to communicate. An argument is present, but reader must reconstruct it from the text. Author attempts, but fails, to make an argument (e.g., starts with a rhetorical question/statement or anecdote that is never put into context). No attempt is made to articulate an argument. Evidence Provides compelling and accurate evidence that convinces reader to accept main argument. The importance/relevance of all pieces of evidence is clearly stated. There are no gaps in reasoning—i.e., the reader does not need to assume anything or do additional research to accept main argument. Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects of the main argument but not all. The importance/ relevance of some evidence presented may not be totally clear. Reader must make a few mental leaps or do some additional research to fully accept all aspects of main argument. Not enough evidence is provided to support author’s argument, or evidence is incomplete, incorrect, or oversimplified. Information from lectures and readings is not effectively used. Either no evidence is provided, or there are numerous factual mistakes, omissions or oversimplifications. There is little or no mention of information from lectures and readings. Excellent Good Needs Improvement Poor F Counter-Evidence The author considers the evidence, or alternate interpretations of evidence, that could be used to refute or weaken his/her argument, and thoughtfully responds to it. Author acknowledges that counter-evidence or alternative interpretations exists, and lists them fully, but does not effectively explain to reader why his/her argument still stands. Author acknowledges some of the most obvious counter-evidence and alternative explanations, but is not comprehensi.

1. AMH 2042 RVC Spring 2019
Essay Paper Grading Rubric
Adopted from Professor Jay Aronson, Carnegie Mellon
University
Excellent
Good
Needs Improvement
Poor
F
Overall Impression
Author directly addresses main question or issue, and adds new
insight to the subject not provided in lectures, readings, or class
discussions. The author has retained nearly all of the
knowledge presented in class. He/She is able to synthesize this
knowledge in new ways and relate to material not covered in the
course.
Author competently addresses main question or issue, but does
not add much new insight into the subject. That said, it is clear
that the author has learned a great deal in class and is able to
communicate this knowledge to others.
Author attempts to address main question or issue, but fails.
The author has retained some information from the course, but
does not fully understand its meaning or context and cannot
clearly convey it to others.
Essay does NOT address main question or issue, and it is
obvious that author has not retained any information from the
course.
P
L

2. A
G
I
A
R
I
S
M
Argument
Essay contains a clear argument—i.e., lets the reader know
exactly what the author is trying to communicate.
An argument is present, but reader must reconstruct it from the
text.
Author attempts, but fails, to make an argument (e.g., starts
with a rhetorical question/statement or anecdote that is never
put into context).
No attempt is made to articulate an argument.
Evidence
Provides compelling and accurate evidence that convinces
reader to accept main argument. The importance/relevance of
all pieces of evidence is clearly stated. There are no gaps in
reasoning—i.e., the reader does not need to assume anything or
do additional research to accept main argument.
Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects
of the main argument but not all. The importance/ relevance of
some evidence presented may not be totally clear. Reader must
make a few mental leaps or do some additional research to fully
accept all aspects of main argument.

3. Not enough evidence is provided to support author’s argument,
or evidence is incomplete, incorrect, or oversimplified.
Information from lectures and readings is not effectively used.
Either no evidence is provided, or there are numerous factual
mistakes, omissions or oversimplifications. There is little or no
mention of information from lectures and readings.
Excellent
Good
Needs Improvement
Poor
F
Counter-Evidence
The author considers the evidence, or alternate interpretations
of evidence, that could be used to refute or weaken his/her
argument, and thoughtfully responds to it.
Author acknowledges that counter-evidence or alternative
interpretations exists, and lists them fully, but does not
effectively explain to reader why his/her argument still stands.
Author acknowledges some of the most obvious counter-
evidence and alternative explanations, but is not comprehensive
in this task. There is little or no attempt made to respond to
them.
No acknowledgement of counter-evidence or alternative
interpretations.
Sources
Note: You should always consult the assignment description to
find out what kinds of sources are required.
Evidence is used from a wide range of sources, including
lectures and course readings. When required, author also
consults scholarly books, websites, journal articles, etc. not
explicitly discussed in class.
Evidence is used from many sources, but author relies heavily

4. on a more limited set of sources. Some effort is made to go
beyond material presented in class when required, but not much.
If outside sources are used, they are primarily non-scholarly
(i.e., intended for a general audience) and/or web-based.
Uses only a few of the sources provided in class, or does not go
beyond what has been provided by professor when required to
do additional research.
Does not use sources, only minimally uses sources provided by
instructor, or relies exclusively on non-scholarly outside
sources.
Citations
All evidence is properly cited in footnotes or endnotes.
All evidence is cited in footnotes or endnotes, but there are
some minor problems with completeness or format of some
citations.
Some pieces are unreferenced or inaccurately referenced, and
there are problems with completeness and format of citations.
No attempt is made to cite evidence.
Excellent
Good
Needs Improvement
Poor
F
Organization
Essay contains an intro, main body, and conclusion.
Introduction lays out main argument and gives an outline of
what the reader can expect in the essay. The conclusion brings
everything together, acknowledges potential shortcomings of
the paper, and gives the reader a sense of what further work
might be done to advance the subject matter described in the
paper.
Essay contains an intro, main body, and conclusion. The
introduction lays out the main argument but gives the reader

5. little idea of what to expect in the essay. The conclusion nicely
summarizes the main argument and evidence, but does not move
beyond what has already been presented in the paper.
Essay contains an intro, main body, and conclusion. The
introduction gives the reader an idea of what to expect in the
paper, but does not effectively lay out the main argument. It
may begin with a set of rhetorical questions, or an anecdote that
is never fully explained. The conclusion does little more than
restate the problematic introduction. Intro and/or conclusion
may be too wordy or short.
Essay has no clear organizational pattern.
Clarity and Style
All sentences are grammatically correct and clearly written. No
words are misused or unnecessarily fancy. Technical terms,
words from other languages, and words from other historical
periods are always explained. All information is accurate and
up-to-date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread
(ideally by you and somebody else), and contains no errors.
All sentences are grammatically correct and clearly written. An
occasional word is misused or unnecessarily fancy. Technical
terms, words from other languages, and words from other
historical periods are usually, but not always, explained. All
information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has been spell-
checked AND proofread, and contains no more than a few minor
errors, which do not adversely affect the reader’s ability to
understand the essay.
A few sentences are grammatically incorrect or not clearly
written. Several words are misused. Technical terms, words
from other languages, and words from other historical periods
are rarely explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-
date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread, but still
contains several errors. Reader’s ability to understand essay
may be compromised by these errors.
Paper is full of grammatical errors and bad writing. Several
words are misused. Technical terms, words from other

6. languages, and words from other historical periods are rarely
explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-date.
Paper has not been spell-checked or proofread, and contains
numerous errors. Reader has a difficult time understanding
essay because of errors.
PAGE
1
Eberly Center for Teaching Excellence, Carnegie Mellon
University
Running head: BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY 1
Breitt, Starr & Diamond Case Study
Tony Archuleta-Perkins
New England College

7. BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY
2
Abstract
Transformational leadership approach would be the best
solution for Breitt, Starr & Diamond
LLC. The three founders never wanted to be leaders, they
wanted to focus on their creative
expertise. The four behaviors that define transformational
leadership exemplify the culture need
at Breitt, Starr & Diamond LLC. The newly hired general
manager, Brad Howser followed an
authoritarian leadership model. This approach was upsetting
with the existing team, as they were
not included in paradigm shift of leadership and strategy of the
company. Howser’s approach to

8. leadership was also transactional in nature. This approach was
very efficient financially and was
the first to launch internal controls. In the beginning of my
own career, I would consider myself
a Country Club Manager, as I wanted to please everyone. Over
the years, I have to learned to
transform into Team Management approach.
Keywords: leadership, culture shifts, paradigms, behaviors
BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY
3
Transformational leadership would be the best approach for the
case study of Breitt, Starr
& Diamond LLC. The company was formed with the three of
them, each bringing their
specialized creative expertise. The agency had grown so much
that it required hiring of seven
new employees to help sustain the growth of the business. The
foundation of the business is that
of small, creative, open, trustworthy work environment.

9. “Transformational leaders transform the personal values of
followers to support the
vision and goals of the organization by fostering an
environment where relationships can be
formed and by establishing a climate of trust in which visions
can be shared” (Stone, Russell, &
Patterson, 2004). In 1991 it was established by Avolio four
primary behaviors that constitute
transformational leadership (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino,
1991):
1. Idealized influence.
2. Inspirational motivation.
3. Intellectual stimulation.
4. Individualized consideration.
“Leaders are being driven into unfamiliar territory where
change remains the only
constant” (Sarros & Santora, 2001). This was the exact
predicament that Josh, Rachel & Justin
found themselves in before deciding to hire Brad Howser, their
new General Manager.
Regarding the leadership grid, Howser followed the Authority
Compliance (Bateman,
Snell, & Konopaske, 2019). This methodology proved to be

10. good for the firm regarding
efficiencies, operations and potentially cost savings.
Unfortunately, the negative impact upon
the firm was the lack of regard, or empathy towards the
employees. Two confirmed
resignations and one more on the way is a sure tale sign of
potentially not the best leadership
move.
BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY
4
Transactional leadership would be another methodology that
Howser followed. This was
show by his actions of keeping to strict schedules, controlling
the manner in which supplies
were ordered by his custom designed form. All signs of good
internal controls, but at what
costs?
H. James & Voehl describe the required essentials needed to
move forward with a
cultural change management (CCM) process:

11. • Change should be embraced as the all employees’ culture and
not only the top
management’s vision or desire.
• Change should be considered in terms of corporate culture and
business needs
simultaneously.
• The core part of any CCM effort is to have a management
transformation strategy.
• People will not change unless and until they are
psychologically ready to
withdraw from their current daily habits (H. James & Voehl,
2015).
In the case of Breitt, Starr & Diamond, these crucial steps were
not taken. Howser was being a
good leader, but perhaps was acting in a silo and was not
getting the leadership team involved,
nor was he getting the team involved. Thus, created a hostile
environment between the founders
and their employees.
“In becoming a leader, it is essential that you take on the role
in ways and practices that
you can be comfortable with” (Canning, 2016). These words sit
very personally with the author

12. of this case study. In my career, I have been able to mold my
leadership style to one that is more
effective. In the beginning, I would certainly classify myself as
the Country Club Leader
(Bateman, Snell, & Konopaske, 2019). As of now, I have been
able to transform my style to that
of Team Management (Bateman, Snell, & Konopaske, 2019).
Per Rego, Pereira Lopes &
BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY
5
Volkmann Simpson the Leadership Grid they established would
mimic of Bateman et al. The
categories I would certainly classify as under Rego et al would
be Authentic and Machiavelically
Authentic, respectively (Rego, Pereira Lopes, & Volkmann
Simpson, 2017). Essentially, my
style is one that I will get the global strategic picture
accomplished, but able to guide the team to
get the details delegated appropriately.

13. BREITT, STARR & DIAMOND CASE STUDY
6
References
Avolio, B., Waldman, D., & Yammarino, F. (1991). Leading int
he 1990s: the four Is of
transformational leadership. Journal of European Industrial
Training, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp.
9-16.
Bateman, T. S., Snell, S. A., & Konopaske, R. (2019).
Management: Leading & Collaborating in

14. a Competitive World. New York: McGraw Hill Education.
Canning, B. (2016). Define Your Leadership Style.
MotorAge.Com, pp. 8-9.
H. James, H., & Voehl, F. (2015). Cultural Change
Management. International Journal of
Innovation Science, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 55-74.
Rego, P., Pereira Lopes, M., & Volkmann Simpson, A. (2017).
The Authentic-Machiavellian
Leadership Grid: A Typology of Leadership Styles. Journal of
Leadership Styles, Vol. 11
No. 2, pp. 48-51.
Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2001, July). The
transformational-transactional leadership model
in practice. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 383-
393.
Stone, A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2004).
Transformational versus servant leadership: a
difference in leader focus. Emerald Insight, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp.
349-361.