Q The Japanese bullet trains carry millions of passengers at very high speeds topping out at 320 KPH. In addition, Japan is in a relatively high seismic area and is subject to routine earthquake activity. With the inherent risks of operating under these conditions, the operating company has embraced a meticulous and world-class maintenance program. This documentary shows the East Japan Railway Company's precision maintenance regime as carried out on bullet train tracks and carriages in order to ensure maximum safety and ongoing operation of these high-speed trains. Follow this hyperlink to watch a video from NHK World documentary describing Japan’s Bullet Train maintenance routine: Japan Bullets Trains' Maintenance Routine (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) Question 1 - What might be some implications of reducing the cost and time invested into the current maintenance program? Question 2 - Where do you think East Japan Railways maintenance effort lies on the maintenance continuum? Provide evidence to support your view. Question 3 - Are there any other industries or companies where you think a similar approach to “Doctor Yellow” could be applied? Rubric Case Study Rubric Case Study Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeApplication of Chapter Concepts to Case Study Example 10 to >7.0 pts Excellent Supports CS diagnosis and opinions with strong relevant arguments and well documented evidence; presents a balanced and holistic critical view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective. CS response shows evidence of knowledge and understanding of assigned reading and interactive exercises. Provides quality and quantity of relevant concepts applied to the specifics of the CS. Includes analytics, research, observation, ideas and recommendations, potential solutions and sensitivity analysis. Goes beyond the basic answers to the prompts and demonstrates thoroughness of responses by incorporating numerous chapter concepts. 7 to >5.0 pts Average Supports diagnosis, suggestions and opinions with limited reasoning and evidence; presents a somewhat one-sided or incomplete argument; demonstrates modest engagement of chapter concepts to the ideas presented. Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between identified issues/problems and concepts studied in readings, interactive exercises and/or lectures; demonstrates some command of the analytical tools studied; supplements case study with limited research. Answers to the prompts are basic and routine. 5 to >0 pts Poor CS response is light in content with little or no action suggested and/or inappropriate solutions proposed to the issues in the case study. Lacks suitable connection between the issues identified and the concepts studied in the readings and interactive elements; supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete research, documentation and citation of resources. Does not adequately answer all the CS prompts. 10 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent - Relevance, analytical thought and expression of ideas/points 5 to >3.0 pts Excellent Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the main issues/problems/opportunities in the case study. Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all identified issues/problems; includes all necessary supporting materials and/or calculations. 3 to >2.0 pts Sufficiently Average Identifies and demonstrates an average understanding of most of the issues/problems/opportunities. Presents a moderate analysis of most of the issues identified within the CS; May lack appropriate elaboration to express ideas/points. May be missing some support materials and/or necessary calculations. 2 to >0 pts Poor Identifies and demonstrates at or below minimum acceptable understanding of the issues/problems/opportunities within the CS. Lacks analytical fortitude, or responses are irrelevant Presents a superficial or incomplete analysis of the identified issues; omits supporting materials and/or necessary calculations. 5 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeProfessionalism - Writing mechanics and formatting quality of written submittal 5 to >4.0 pts Impeccable - few to zero errors Demonstrates clarity, content flow and correctness; formatting is appropriate and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors. 4 to >2.0 pts Presentable Occasional grammar or spelling errors, however document offers a clear presentation of ideas; may lack organization or proper formatting. 2 to >0 pts Poorly presented - numerous errors Writing style is unfocused, difficult to follow, rambling, or contains serious/numerous errors; poorly organized or does not follow specified guidelines. 5 pts Total Points: 20 PreviousNext