Choose one of the following two scenarios based on your professional interests: Scenario 1: Business Management Context Your company, a retail chain, is experiencing fluctuating customer satisfaction
Assignment Overview
In this capstone project, you'll demonstrate your ability to leverage your full range of statistical and analytical skills to solve a real-world problem, either in a business or healthcare context. This assessment will showcase your capability to frame statistical problems, conduct rigorous data analysis using Excel, and communicate your findings clearly and persuasively to guide decision-making.
Assignment Objectives
- Evaluate a real-world problem to determine its suitability for statistical analysis (CLO1).
- Design an appropriate hypothesis and testing plan (CLO4).
- Utilize Excel to collect, analyze, and present descriptive, inferential, or predictive statistical data (CLO3).
- Analyze results from statistical analyses comprehensively (CLO5).
- Recommend actionable and justified resolutions based on statistical findings (CLO2 & CLO6).
Task Description
Choose one of the following two scenarios based on your professional interests:
Scenario 1: Business Management Context Your company, a retail chain, is experiencing fluctuating customer satisfaction ratings across various regions. Upper management is concerned about inconsistent customer experience affecting long-term brand reputation and profitability. You are tasked with statistically analyzing customer satisfaction data, sales trends, and regional demographics to identify key problem areas and opportunities for strategic improvement.
Scenario 2: Healthcare Management Context Your healthcare facility is experiencing increasing patient wait times and inconsistent patient satisfaction scores across different departments. Senior management is concerned about the implications for patient care quality and overall operational efficiency. You are tasked with analyzing patient flow data, staffing patterns, and patient feedback surveys to identify underlying causes and recommend evidence-based operational improvements.
Steps for Completion
Step 1: Problem Framing (CLO1)
- Clearly describe and frame your chosen scenario as a statistical problem.
- Explain why the issue is suitable for statistical analysis, outlining the types of data required and potential outcomes.
Step 2: Hypothesis and Testing Plan (CLO4)
- Formulate specific, testable hypotheses related to your scenario.
- Identify appropriate statistical tests and methods suitable for evaluating these hypotheses.
- Clearly justify why these tests and methods are appropriate based on your data and objectives.
Step 3: Data Analysis and Visualization (CLO3 & CLO5)
- Utilize Excel to perform comprehensive data analysis (descriptive statistics, inferential tests, regression analyses, etc.).
- Prepare clear and accurate visuals (charts, graphs, dashboards) to effectively illustrate your analytical results.
- Provide insightful interpretations of your findings.
Step 4: Recommendations and Strategic Decisions (CLO2 & CLO6)
- Based on your analysis, formulate clear, practical, and actionable recommendations.
- Clearly align each recommendation with specific statistical evidence from your analysis.
- Discuss how your recommendations will practically address the identified problems and support strategic organizational decisions.
Submission Format (Choose One)
- Formal Business-Style Report:
- 3–5 pages, professionally formatted with embedded visuals (charts, graphs, dashboards).
- Clearly organized into sections: Introduction, Methods, Results & Interpretation, Recommendations, and Conclusion.
OR
- Recorded Presentation:
- 5–7 minutes with voice-over narration of visual slides.
- Organized clearly into slides covering: Introduction, Methods, Results & Interpretation, Recommendations, and Conclusion.
|
Criteria |
Exemplary |
Proficient |
Developing |
Needs
Improvement |
Not
Submitted |
Criterion
Score |
|
Problem Framing |
50 points Clearly
identifies and explicitly describes 3 elements: (1) Scenario clearly framed as
a statistical problem, (2) Clear explanation of suitability for statistical
analysis, (3) Clearly identifies types of data required. (25 pts) |
30 points Explicitly
describes 2 of 3 elements clearly. (20 pts) |
15 points Clearly
describes 1 of 3 elements clearly. (15 pts) |
10 points Vague or
unclear description without explicit identification of required elements. (10
pts) |
5 points No submission
or off-topic response. (0 pts) |
Score of
Problem Framing, / 50 |
|
Hypothesis and
Testing Plan |
50 points Explicitly and
clearly defines 3 elements: (1) Clear, testable null and alternative
hypotheses, (2) Appropriate statistical tests clearly identified, (3)
Explicit justification clearly aligning tests to data and objectives. (30
pts) |
30 points Explicitly
describes 2 of 3 elements clearly. (24 pts) |
18 points Clearly
describes 1 of 3 elements explicitly. (18 pts) |
12 points Unclear or
vague identification of hypothesis or test; weak or no justification. (12
pts) |
6 points No submission
or irrelevant response. (0 pts) |
Score of
Hypothesis and Testing Plan, / 50 |
|
Data Analysis
& Visualization |
40 points Clearly
presents and explicitly completes 4 elements: (1) Accurate
descriptive/inferential statistical analyses, (2) Comprehensive Excel
analysis shown, (3) Effective, clear, and accurate visuals (charts/graphs),
(4) Insightful interpretation of findings clearly provided. (35 pts) |
28 points Clearly
presents 3 of 4 elements explicitly. (28 pts) |
21 points Clearly
presents 2 of 4 elements explicitly. (21 pts) |
14 points Vague, unclear,
or limited data analysis/visualization with minimal interpretation. (14 pts) |
7 points No submission
or irrelevant response. (0 pts) |
Score of Data
Analysis & Visualization, / 40 |
|
Recommendations
& Strategic Decisions |
30 points Clearly and
explicitly addresses 3 elements: (1) Provides clear, practical, and
actionable recommendations explicitly based on analysis, (2) Clearly aligns
recommendations explicitly with statistical evidence, (3) Clearly discusses
practical impact on strategic organizational decisions. (30 pts) |
24 points Explicitly
addresses 2 of 3 elements clearly. (24 pts) |
18 points Clearly
addresses 1 of 3 elements explicitly. (18 pts) |
12 points Recommendations
vague or minimally connected to data; minimal discussion of strategic impact.
(12 pts) |
6 points No submission
or irrelevant response. (0 pts) |
Score of
Recommendations & Strategic Decisions, / 30 |
|
Professional
Communication & Format |
15 points Submission
explicitly meets 3 elements: (1) Clear professional language and tone
explicitly appropriate for audience, (2) Meets formatting requirements
explicitly (3–5-page report or 5–7-minute narrated presentation), (3)
Submission clearly organized into required sections explicitly: Introduction,
Methods, Results & Interpretation, Recommendations, Conclusion. (15 pts) |
12 points Submission
explicitly meets 2 of 3 elements clearly. (12 pts) |
9 points Submission
clearly meets 1 of 3 elements explicitly. (9 pts) |
6 points Unclear or
minimally professional submission; multiple format or organization issues. (6
pts) |
3 points No submission
or irrelevant response. (0 pts) |
Score of
Professional Communication & Format, / 15 |
|
Skills |
15 points The student skillfully and
consistently integrates relevant skills into the assignment. Application is
accurate, contextually appropriate, and enhances the depth or originality of
the assignment. Demonstrates mastery through insightful use of skills. (15 pts) |
12 points The student applies relevant skills
accurately and appropriately. The use of skills supports key ideas or
analysis and demonstrates a strong understanding. Integration is effective
but may lack the depth or originality of a mastery-level response. (12 pts) |
9 points The student applies relevant skills
inconsistently or with partial success. Connections to the assignment may be
unclear, generalized, or only loosely aligned with the topic. Demonstrates a
basic understanding but with limited integration. (9 pts) |
6 points The student attempts to apply
relevant skills but with evident inaccuracies, oversimplifications, or weak
alignment with the assignment content. Demonstrates limited awareness or
understanding. (6 pts.) |
