The document discusses Boeing's approach to addressing labor shortages. It asks the reader to review a case study on Boeing's HR planning and recruitment. It then poses three questions: 1. Explain at least three advantages of filling positions with current employees rather than outside candidates. 2. What external recruitment sources is Boeing currently using? Recommend at least three other sources and why they would be beneficial. 3. How would you advise Boeing to select its engineers? In other words, which selection methods would you advise them to use, in what order and why?

1. Read the case description “Boeing’s high flying approach to HR
planning and recruitment” on page 92-93 of the customized
textbook at the end of chapter 5 and answer the following
questions :
1. To meet labour shortages within the company, Boeing starts
with promotions and transfers. Explain at least three advantages
it might experience from filling positions with current
employees rather than outside candidates.
2. What external recruitment source(s) is Boeing currently
using? Besides this or these, what other sources would you
recommend for Boeing? Give at least three other suggestions
and explain why it would be beneficial for Boeing.
3. How would you advise Boeing to select its engineers? In
other words, which selection methods would you advise them to
use, in what order and why?

2. HCM520
Critical Thinking Writing Rubric - Module 3
Exceeds
Expectation
Meets Expectation Below Expectation Limited Evidence
Content, Research, and Analysis
21-25 Points 16-20 Points 11-15 Points 6-10 Points
Requirements Exceeds
Expectation -
Includes all of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
Meets Expectation
- Includes most of
the required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
Below Expectation
- Includes some of
the required
components, as

3. specified in the
assignment.
Limited Evidence -
Includes few of the
required
components, as
specified in the
assignment.
21-25 Points 16-20 Points 11-15 Points 6-10 Points
Content Exceeds
Expectation -
Demonstrates
substantial and
extensive
knowledge of the
materials, with no
errors or major
omissions.
Meets Expectation
- Demonstrates
adequate
knowledge of the
materials; may
include some
minor errors or
omissions.
Below Expectation
- Demonstrates fair
knowledge of the
materials and/or
includes some

4. major errors or
omissions.
Limited Evidence -
Fails to
demonstrate
knowledge of the
materials and/or
includes many
major errors or
omissions.
25-30 Points 19-24 Points 13-18 Points 7-12 Points
Analysis Exceeds
Expectation -
Provides strong
thought, insight,
and analysis of
concepts and
applications.
Meets Expectation
- Provides
adequate thought,
insight, and
analysis of
concepts and
applications.
Below Expectation
- Provides poor
thought, insight,
and analysis of
concepts and
applications.

5. Limited Evidence -
Provides little or no
thought, insight,
and analysis of
concepts and
applications.
13-15 Points 10-12 Points 7-9 Points 4-6 Points
Sources Exceeds
Expectation -
Sources go above
and beyond
required criteria,
and are well
chosen to provide
effective
substance and
perspectives on
the issue under
examination.
Meets Expectation
- Sources meet
required criteria
and are adequately
chosen to provide
substance and
perspectives on the
issue under
examination.
Below Expectation
- Sources meet
required criteria,

6. but are poorly
chosen to provide
substance and
perspectives on the
issue under
examination.
Limited Evidence -
Source selection
and integration of
knowledge from
the course is
clearly deficient.
Mechanics and Writing
5 Points 4 Points 3 Points 1-2 Points
Demonstrates
college-level
proficiency in
Exceeds
Expectation -
Project is clearly
Meets Expectation
- Project is fairly
well organized and
Below Expectation
- Project is poorly
organized and
Limited Evidence -
Project is not

7. organized or well
HCM520
Critical Thinking Writing Rubric - Module 3
organization,
grammar and
style.
organized, well
written, and in
proper format as
outlined in the
assignment. Strong
sentence and
paragraph
structure; contains
no errors in
grammar, spelling,
APA style, or APA
citations and
references.
written, and is in
proper format as
outlined in the
assignment.
Reasonably good
sentence and
paragraph
structure; may
include a few
minor errors in

8. grammar, spelling,
APA style, or APA
citations and
references.
written, and may
not follow proper
format as outlined
in the assignment.
Inconsistent to
inadequate
sentence and
paragraph
development,
and/or includes
numerous or major
errors in grammar,
spelling, APA style,
or APA citations
and references.
written, and is not
in proper format as
outlined in the
assignment. Poor
quality work;
unacceptable in
terms of grammar,
spelling, APA style,
and APA citations
and references.
Total points possible = 100