CASE STUDIES IN FINANCE (FIN3CSF), SEMESTER 2, 2020 – CASE STUDY 4 ASSESSMENT GUIDE AND MARKING RUBRIC

The mark allocation across the Case Study 4 components is as follows:

 Individual visual and verbal presentation on the allocated company within your GICS sector – 10 marks
 Group visual and verbal presentation on the preferred company from those followed within your GICS sector – 5 marks

The following table provides a marking and assessment rubric for Case Study 4:

Criteria Excellent (A) Accomplished (B) Satisfactory (C) Developing (D) Unsatisfactory (N)

Individual company Conducting of an excellent
presentation overall individual company
presentation. The visual
presentation component
provides a very clear,
informative and attractive
summary and analysis of
the company structure and
operations, highly relevant
consideration of the current
environment and provides
a comprehensive and
accurate company intrinsic
valuation. The verbal
presentation component is
very clear and confident,
well-structured and directly
associated with the visual
presentation and provides a
logical and fully justified
overall investment
Conducting of a very good
overall individual company
presentation. The visual
presentation component
provides a relatively clear,
informative and attractive
summary and analysis of
the company structure and
operations, relevant
consideration of the current
environment and provides
a relatively comprehensive
and accurate company
intrinsic valuation. The
verbal presentation
component is relatively
clear and confident,
relatively well-structured
and associated with the
visual presentation and
provides a relatively logical
and justified overall
investment
Conducting of a good
overall individual company
presentation. The visual
presentation component
provides a reasonably clear,
informative and attractive
summary and analysis of
the company structure and
operations, some
consideration of the current
environment and provides
a reasonably
comprehensive and mostly
accurate company intrinsic
valuation. The verbal
presentation component is
reasonably clear and
confident, generally well-
structured and associated
with the visual presentation
and provides a reasonably
logical and justified overall
investment
Conducting of a fair overall
individual company
presentation. The visual
presentation component
provides a somewhat clear,
simplistic and basic
summary and analysis of
the company structure and
operations, limited
consideration of the current
environment and provides a
limited company intrinsic
valuation which has a
number of errors. The
verbal presentation
component is not
particularly clear and
confident, and not directly
associated with the visual
presentation. It may just
involve reading directly
from notes or the slides and
provides a basic and partly
Conducting of a poor
overall individual company
presentation. The visual
presentation component
provides a very simplistic
and unclear summary and
analysis of the company
structure and operations
with some errors, very
limited or no consideration
of the current environment
and provides a mostly
incorrect or extremely
limited company intrinsic
valuation. The verbal
presentation component is
very poorly delivered, not
coherent and not related to
the slide or visual content.
An overall investment
recommendation is either
not provided or is largely
illogical and not justified
 recommendation in relation
to the company analysed.
Group company Conducting of an excellent
recommendation overall group presentation.
presentation The presentation involves
verbal presentation
components from all group
members, which is
cohesive, very clear and
well-structured overall. The
visual presentation
provides a very creative,
informative and focused
comparison or similar
assessment across the
individual companies
analysed. The preferred
company recommendation
is logically derived and fully
justified based on the group
presentation content.
recommendation in relation
to the company analysed.
Conducting of a very good
overall group presentation.
The presentation involves
verbal presentation
components from all group
members, which is
relatively cohesive, clear
and well-structured overall.
The visual presentation
provides a relatively
creative, informative and
focused comparison or
similar assessment across
the individual companies
analysed. The preferred
company recommendation
is relatively logically
derived and justified based
on the group presentation
content.
recommendation in relation
to the company analysed.
Conducting of a good
overall group presentation.
The presentation involves
verbal presentation
components from all group
members, which is
reasonably cohesive, clear
and well-structured overall.
The visual presentation
provides a reasonably
informative and focused
comparison or similar
assessment across the
individual companies
analysed, but which lacks
creativity. The preferred
company recommendation
is reasonably logically
derived and justified based
on the group presentation
content.
illogical and unjustified
overall investment
recommendation in relation
to the company analysed.
Conducting of a fair overall
group presentation. The
presentation involves
verbal presentation
components from all or
most of the group
members, which is
generally cohesive, clear
but simplistic in structure.
The visual presentation
provides a simplistic
comparison or similar
assessment across the
individual companies
analysed which is not well
developed and lacks
creativity. The preferred
company recommendation
is simplistic, may not be
fully logical and not
justified based on the group
presentation content.
using the presentation
contents.
Conducting of a poor
overall group presentation.
The presentation involves
verbal presentation
components from only one
or a limited number of the
group members, which is
not clear and cohesive in
structure. The visual
presentation provides a
very simplistic and
inappropriate comparison
or similar assessment
across the individual
companies analysed which
is very poorly developed
overall. The preferred
company recommendation
is incorrect and illogical and
not justified at all based on
the group presentation
content.