Rubric Name: Case Study #3 Rubric Criteria Provided an excellent introduction which included a well-reasoned explanation as to why “cybersecurity” is considered an industry but does not have a unique NAICS code. The overview appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources. Provided an outstanding introduction which included a well-reasoned explanation as to why “cybersecurity” is considered an industry but does not have a unique NAICS code. Explained the importance of standardized industry classification codes (who uses them and why).The overview appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources. Provided an introduction which included an explanation as to why “cybersecurity” is considered an industry but does not have a unique NAICS code. Explained the importance of standardized industry classifications. The overview appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources. Provided an overview but the section lacked important details about the case. Information from authoritative sources was cited and used in the overview. Attempted to provide an introduction to the case study but this section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources.  The introduction and/or overview sections of the paper were off topic.  Introduction included an excellent explanation of the importance of standardized industry classification codes including 3 or more examples of who uses NAICS codes and why. Appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative sources. Introduction included an outstanding explanation of the importance of standardized industry classification codes including 2 or more examples of who uses NAICS codes and why. Appropriately used information from 2 or more authoritative sources. Introduction included an explanation of the importance of standardized industry classification codes including at least one example of who uses NAICS codes and why. Appropriately used information from authoritative sources. Introduction mentioned the importance of standardized industry classification codes and gave at least one example of who uses NAICS codes and why.  Attempted to provide information about NAICS codes but the discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information drawn from authoritative sources. This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide information about NAICS codes. Provided an excellent analysis and discussion of one or more industry codes which could be used by the cybersecurity company & product as listed in the assignment. Included a comparison between the company’s business activities and the industry characteristics for the four classification families listed in this assignment (prefixes 334, 44, 51, & 54). Appropriately used information  from 3 or more authoritative sources. Provided an outstanding analysis and discussion of one or more industry codes which could be used by the cybersecurity company ...

1. Rubric Name: Case Study #3 Rubric
Criteria
Provided an excellent introduction which included a well-
reasoned explanation as to why “cybersecurity” is considered an
industry but does not have a unique NAICS code. The overview
appropriately used information from 3 or more authoritative
sources.
Provided an outstanding introduction which included a well-
reasoned explanation as to why “cybersecurity” is considered an
industry but does not have a unique NAICS code. Explained the
importance of standardized industry classification codes (who
uses them and why).The overview appropriately used
information from 3 or more authoritative sources.
Provided an introduction which included an explanation as to
why “cybersecurity” is considered an industry but does not have
a unique NAICS code. Explained the importance of standardized
industry classifications. The overview appropriately used
information from 2 or more authoritative sources.
Provided an overview but the section lacked important details
about the case. Information from authoritative sources was cited
and used in the overview.
Attempted to provide an introduction to the case study but this
section lacked detail and/or was not well supported by
information drawn from authoritative sources.
The introduction and/or overview sections of the paper were off
topic.
Introduction included an excellent explanation of the

2. importance of standardized industry classification codes
including 3 or more examples of who uses NAICS codes and
why. Appropriately used information from 3 or more
authoritative sources.
Introduction included an outstanding explanation of the
importance of standardized industry classification codes
including 2 or more examples of who uses NAICS codes and
why. Appropriately used information from 2 or more
authoritative sources.
Introduction included an explanation of the importance of
standardized industry classification codes including at least one
example of who uses NAICS codes and why. Appropriately used
information from authoritative sources.
Introduction mentioned the importance of standardized industry
classification codes and gave at least one example of who uses
NAICS codes and why.
Attempted to provide information about NAICS codes but the
discussion lacked detail and/or was not well supported by
information drawn from authoritative sources.
This section was missing, off topic, or failed to provide
information about NAICS codes.
Provided an excellent analysis and discussion of one or more
industry codes which could be used by the cybersecurity
company & product as listed in the assignment. Included a
comparison between the company’s business activities and the
industry characteristics for the four classification families listed
in this assignment (prefixes 334, 44, 51, & 54). Appropriately
used information
from 3 or more authoritative sources.
Provided an outstanding analysis and discussion of one or more
industry codes which could be used by the cybersecurity
company & product as listed in the assignment. Included a
comparison between the company’s business activities and the
industry characteristics for the four classification families listed
in this assignment (prefixes 334, 44, 51, & 54). Appropriately
used information

3. from 2 or more authoritative sources.
Provided a discussion of one or more industry codes which
could be used by the cybersecurity company & product as listed
in the assignment. Compared the company’s business activities
and the industry characteristics for at least 2 classification
families listed in this assignment (prefixes 334, 44, 51, & 54).
Appropriately used information
from authoritative sources.
Provided a discussion of one or more industry codes which
could be used by the cybersecurity company & product as listed
in the assignment. Compared the company’s business activities
and the industry characteristics to NAICS classifications.
Appropriately used information
from authoritative sources.
Provided a discussion of NAICS industry codes as used by
cybersecurity companies. T
he discussion
lacked detail and/or was not well supported by information
drawn from authoritative sources.
This section was off topic or failed to provide information about
cybersecurity related NAICS codes.
Provided an excellent “best fit” recommendation for a single
NAICS code to be used by the target cybersecurity company (a)
on its website, (b) in its business directory listings, and (c) in
financial reports. Justification included discussion of the
company’s cybersecurity product as part of the rationale for the
selected NAICS code. Appropriately used information
from 3 or more authoritative sources.
Provided an outstanding “best fit” recommendation for a single
NAICS code to be used by the target cybersecurity company
(a) on its website, (b) in its business directory listings, and (c)
in financial reports.
Justification included discussion of the company’s
cybersecurity product as part of the rationale for the selected
NAICS code. Appropriately used information
from 2 or more authoritative sources

4. .
Provided a “best fit” recommendation for a single NAICS code
to be used by the target cybersecurity company
(a) on its website, (b) in its business directory listings, and (c)
in financial reports.
Justification included discussion of the company’s
cybersecurity product as part of the rationale for the selected
NAICS code. Appropriately used information
from authoritative sources.
Recommended a NAICS code to be used by the target
cybersecurity company. Discussion included mention of the
company’s cybersecurity product. Appropriately used
information
from authoritative sources.
Identified an appropriate NAICS code but the discussion lacked
detail and/or was not well supported by information from
authoritative sources.
Did not address selection of an appropriate NAICS code.
Demonstrated excellence in the integration of standard
cybersecurity terminology into the case study.
Provided an outstanding integration of standard cybersecurity
terminology into the case study.
Integrated standard cybersecurity terminology into the into the
case study
Used standard cybersecurity terminology but this usage was not
well integrated with the discussion.
Misused standard cybersecurity terminology.
Did not integrate standard cybersecurity terminology into the
discussion.
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
resources. Reference list entries and in-text citations are
correctly formatted using the appropriate APA style for each
type of resource.
Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
resources. One or two minor errors in APA format for in-text
citations and/or reference list entries.

5. Work contains a reference list containing entries for all cited
resources. No more than 3 minor errors in APA format for in-
text citations and/or reference list entries.
Work has no more than three paragraphs with omissions of
citations crediting sources for facts and information. Work
contains a reference list containing entries for cited resources.
Work contains no more than 5 minor errors in APA format for
in-text citations and/or reference list entries.
Work attempts to credit sources but demonstrates a fundamental
failure to understand and apply the APA formatting standard as
defined in the
Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association
(6
th
ed.).
Reference list is missing. Work demonstrates an overall failure
to incorporate and/or credit authoritative sources for
information used in the paper.
Submitted work shows outstanding organization and the use of
color, fonts, titles, headings and sub-headings, etc. is
appropriate to the assignment type.
Submitted work has minor style or formatting flaws but still
presents a professional appearance. Submitted work is well
organized and appropriately uses color, fonts, and section
headings (per the assignment’s directions).
Organization and/or appearance of submitted work could be
improved through better use of fonts, color, titles, headings, etc.
OR Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors.
Professional appearance could be improved.
Submitted work has multiple style or formatting errors.
Organization and professional appearance need substantial
improvement.
Submitted work meets minimum requirements but has major
style and formatting errors. Work is disorganized and needs to
be rewritten for readability and professional appearance.
No work submitted.

6. No formatting, grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors.
Work contains minor errors in formatting, grammar, spelling or
punctuation which do not significantly impact professional
appearance.
Errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, or punctuation which
detract from professional appearance of the submitted work.
Submitted work has numerous errors in formatting, spelling,
grammar, or punctuation. Work is unprofessional in appearance.
Submitted work is difficult to read / understand and has
significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation,
or word usage.