Sample Questions: 20 marks each word limit specified for each question:
1. "Discuss the importance of Root Cause Analysis (RCA) in problem-solving within
organizational settings. Illustrate your answer with a real or hypothetical example
showing how RCA was used to identify and resolve a recurring issue."
(Word limit: 500–700 words)
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
Shows deep Demonstrates Basic
Limited or
understanding of good understanding;
Understanding incorrect
RCA purpose, understanding lacks depth or
of RCA understanding
process, and with minor contains some
of RCA.
significance. gaps. inaccuracies.
Example is
Strong, relevant Example is
generic or lacks Example is
Application to real/hypothetical relevant; some
clear missing or
Example example with RCA steps may
connection to irrelevant.
clear RCA steps. lack detail.
RCA.
Essay is well-
Mostly clear Organization is
structured with Disorganized;
Structure and structure; uneven; ideas
logical flow, clear lacks structure
Organization minor issues in may not flow
intro and or coherence.
organization. well.
conclusion.
No real
Good analysis;
Shows insight; analysis;
some Limited
Critical discusses why merely
discussion of analysis; mostly
Analysis RCA was essential mentions
RCA’s descriptive.
and its outcomes. points without
importance.
explanation.
Generally
Clear, Some grammar
clear; a few Poor language
Language and professional issues; clarity
language or use; hard to
Presentation language with suffers at
grammar follow.
minimal errors. times.
issues.
2. "Identify a case of failure in a system (e.g., product failure, service breakdown, safety
incident) from any industry. Conduct a root cause analysis of the case and propose
long-term corrective actions to prevent recurrence. Justify your approach."
(Word limit: 600–800 words)
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
Clear, relevant case
Good case description; Case is vague or Case is unclear,
Case with sufficient
some minor missing lacks sufficient missing, or
Description context and
details. context. irrelevant.
background.
Accurately identifies Identifies causes well; Some causes Root causes are
Root Cause
root causes using some gaps in depth or identified, but inaccurate or
Identification
RCA tools or logic. clarity. lacks RCA clarity. missing.
Proposes feasible,
Corrective Actions are relevant; Actions are
logical, and well- Actions are basic
Action justification may be unrealistic or
justified long-term or lack feasibility.
Proposals limited. unrelated.
actions.
Strong rationale Weak
Reasoning is mostly
Justification linking causes and justification; Lacks or fails to
logical; some points
and Reasoning actions; shows connections are provide rationale.
underdeveloped.
critical thinking. unclear.
Well-structured,
Generally well-written; Writing has Poor language,
Structure and clear, and free of
some grammar or multiple errors or disorganized,
Language significant grammar
clarity issues. unclear flow. difficult to follow.
issues.
3. "Evaluate the role of active listening and empathy in defusing aggressive situations.
How can these skills be integrated into daily conflict-resolution practices?"
(Word limit: 600–800 words)
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
Clearly and Shows good Basic
Understanding Poor or no
accurately defines understanding; some understanding;
of Active understanding of
active listening with details may be lacks clear
Listening the concept.
strong examples. missing. explanation.
Comprehensive and
Adequate Surface-level Little to no
Understanding nuanced explanation
explanation; partially understanding with understanding
of Empathy of empathy in
developed. vague references. demonstrated.
conflict.
Application to Insightfully connects Good link made; Limited application Weak or no
De-escalation both skills to real- some points may lack to de-escalation; connection to
world conflict conflict or de-
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
resolution. depth. general or abstract. escalation.
Provides practical,
Strategies are Some integration No clear ideas or
Integration into actionable strategies
relevant but may lack mentioned; lacks unrealistic
Daily Practice to use these skills
detail. practicality. suggestions.
daily.
Rich, relevant
Examples are clear Few or weak
Examples and examples support Examples missing
but may be examples; mostly
Analysis key points and show or irrelevant.
underdeveloped. descriptive.
clear analysis.
Logical structure,
Generally well- Some organization Poor structure and
Structure, Clarity fluent writing, and
structured; minor issues; grammar language; difficult
& Grammar minimal grammar
language errors. affects clarity. to read.
issues.
4. "Aggression in the workplace or team settings can escalate conflicts and hinder
effective problem-solving. Discuss the types of aggressive behaviors that may emerge
during conflict, their impact on collaboration, and strategies to manage or transform
such aggression into constructive dialogue."
(Word limit: 600–800 words)
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
Identification of Comprehensive, accurate Mostly Superficial or
Vague, incorrect, or
Aggressive identification with accurate with unclear
missing.
Behaviors examples. some depth. identification.
Good analysis
Limited No real
Impact on Clearly explains impact with some
explanation; may understanding or
Collaboration with insightful analysis. relevant
be descriptive. irrelevant points.
points.
Conflict Provides strong, practical Some effective Basic strategies Strategies are
Management strategies supported by strategies with limited depth missing, impractical,
Strategies theory or examples. explained. or clarity. or unrelated.
Demonstrates clear,
Some insight Basic analysis; Lacks critical
Critical Thinking reflective understanding
and reasoning lacks reflective thinking or
& Insight of aggression and its
shown. depth. coherence.
transformation.
Structure & Excellent organization; Well- Some structural Poorly organized;
Criteria Excellent (16–20) Good (11–15) Fair (6–10) Poor (0–5)
minimal grammar/spelling organized with issues; grammar significant grammar
Language
issues. minor errors. may affect clarity. or coherence issues.