I can tell that you worked hard on your paper, but there are several important ways it could have been a stronger paper.
The chief problem is that you seem to have misinterpreted the instructions as writing a general recommendation that companies should train workers. The instructions ask you to request approval for conducting research for what will end up being your WA4 report. Check the instructions and rubric carefully when you prepare assignments. A lot of the information you provide is irrelevant to satisfying the instructions and will not get credit on the rubric.
Another problem with your paper is that it contains generally good advice for any organization, but is not specific to your particular organization and its particular problems. This will also be a problem in your WA4 paper. We should have an e-mail conversation about what exactly you have in mind for WA4 because I’m afraid you’re way off track.
I see that you used information from your reading but you cite only one source within the text of your paper; listing three titles in the list of references is not enough. Citing it also helps you establish your credibility as someone who has already started to investigate the issue.
I strongly recommend using reader-friendly headings in a memo as long as yours.
In general, most of your sentences suffer from low readability, especially the overuse of the passive voice and workplace jargon (“the different assumption will be resonated so that a proper approach can be maintained on a matter pertaining the organization functionality”). Follow the advice in the assigned readings about sentence style the assignment schedule for weeks 5 and 6 and the corresponding forum topics.
Using the rubric categories, here is my feedback.
Rubric Name: WA3 — memo to decision-maker on final report – rubric
|Formatting of the memoThe memorandum follows standard conventions for its header, including the Date, To, From, and Subject linesYou need names and titles of recipients and sender.Audiencethe memo is written to a specific decision-makerYou need to identify the specific decision-maker(s) by name and title and the organization you work for.Introduction of the memoThe introduction states that the writer is proposing to carry out a studyYou need to follow the instructions, which ask you to propose carrying out a study.Body of the memoThe memo describes the background of the problem or needMissing.The memo describes the benefits to the company or communityIt’s unclear to me what kind of training you’re recommending or what the specific benefits are. You refer vaguely to increased productivity, but I don’t know what the specific benefits are.The memo indicates how the writer will conduct the study, including details of primary and secondary research involvedMissing.The memo indicates the amount of time that will be neededMissing.The memo indicates any resources (budget, support, personnel, etc.) needed for successful completion of the projectMissing.The memo provides a date and method of delivery of the final product: the research-based persuasive reportMissing.Conclusion of memoThe conclusion contains a formal request for approval.Missing.The conclusion reminds the decision-makers of the benefits that will accrue from the work being proposedOK.Grammar and mechanicsThe conventions of Standard Written English, including usage and punctuation, are maintained throughout the documentSeveral errors; I’ll point them out if you wish.|