|
|
0 points
|
1 point
|
2 points
|
3 points
|
|
Risk-taking: Identification and Reflection
|
Significant issues are missing; no reflection on the learning experience.
|
Limited identification of key issues and reflection.
|
Minor gaps in the key issues, Potential for more exploration of further meaningful reflection.
|
Key entrepreneurship issues precisely articulated. Deep understanding of personal and group learning.
|
|
Boundary crossing: Coordination and Transformation
|
Flawed or no collaboration plans; insights are not actionable strategies.
|
Some coordination but plans suffer from execution challenges; strategies lack innovation or adaptability.
|
Potential for effective coordination across boundaries to transform ideas into actionable strategies for sustainable entrepreneurship.
|
Diverse boundaries, coordinated and transformed; coordinated collaboration plans; learning applied to real-world scenarios with innovative thinking and adaptability.
|
|
Feasibility
|
Solutions lack practicality and feasibility; implementation challenges not addressed at all.
|
Limited consideration of feasibility; significant implementation challenges unaddressed.
|
Some aspects of feasibility considered, but significant implementation challenges remain unaddressed.
|
Well-thought-out and feasible solutions proposed, considering potential obstacles and practical implementation.
|
|
Market potential
|
Limited understanding of the target market and its potential.
|
Some understanding of the target market, but minimal exploration of market potential.
|
Some understanding of the target market, but market potential not fully explored or articulated.
|
Strong analysis of the target market (including size and characteristics) and market potential for the proposed solution.
|
|
Triple Bottom Line
|
People, planet and profit not considered.
|
Limited attention to one or two of the three bottom lines.
|
All three bottom lines addressed, but with incomplete or superficial analysis.
|
All three bottom lines addressed with thorough and well-researched analysis.
|
|
Addressing and solving the challenge
|
Insufficient consideration of challenge-specific metrics; lack of relevance to the presented challenge.
|
Minimal attention to challenge-specific metrics; limited relevance or depth.
|
Some attention to challenge-specific metrics, but limited relevance or depth.
|
Comprehensive and insightful analysis of challenge-specific metrics directly related to the presented solution to the sustainability challenge.
|
|
Novelty
|
Lack of originality:
ideas presented are common or unremarkable.
|
Limited originality:
ideas lack creativity or uniqueness.
|
Moderate level of originality:
some creative ideas presented.
|
Highly original:
demonstrates a fresh perspective.
|