Final Portfolio

Walkthrough
Dr. Will Kurlinkus
What Are You Submitting For
Your Self Review Today?
1. A to do list: I’m missing this, I need to edit this
2. Answers to my questions as we walk along
3. For the yes or no questions, turn to the person next to
you and have them approve.
 1. Double Check the Submission Guidelines
2. Wednesday April 30 @ 9AM Central Time
Submission (you will receive points off if it’s even
minutes late)

Reminders 3. Word File Titled: “Portfolio - Last First”

 Follow our formatting video
(except for the report page
numbers should be right aligned—I
made a mistake there) and double
Formatting check the submission guidelines
for formatting instructions.
Common Formatting Errors

Common Errors Our Grading Rubric Says

• Correctly embed and format website links; use the • uploaded in a single doc, in the correct order; follows
author’s name, the publication title, or a brief descriptive requirements for headers, email case labels, margins,
phrase as display text instead of the entire URL. Don’t link font, line spacing, block format, no underlining, no ALL
the word “article” link one of those key pieces of info CAPS, signed source checklist, Title page has correct
information
• Everything but headings should be 12 point times new
roman font
• Are all source names italicize and are all article, podcast • Page numbering & ToC correctly formatted; correct info
episode names in quotes? appears in ToC (no exec. summ. subheads in ToC); p.
numbers accurate throughout portfolio, visible hyperlinks
• No indents—leave a line of white space correctly embedded using Word function; no random
• No underlines beyond links blank pages; no wonky/missing page breaks
• No All Caps
• Sign the source checklist—or use a cursive font to write
your name
• No page separation between intro to conclusion
Formatting Check-In
• Copy and paste an example of what an ideal linked sentence looks like.
• Copy and paste what your visual hierarchy is for: level 1 (biggest
heading), level 2 (medium heading), and level 3 (smallest heading)
• Is your file named correctly?
• Are all pieces there and in the correct order?
• Do all your links work? Check now.
• Are key terms vs. the words “article” linked.
• Do all source mention a credential: an author name, a source name,
etc.
• Is your source checklist signed?
Common
• Add connecting and transition words: for • The Rubric Says:
example, for instance, similarly, another
topic covered, etc. • clear & easy-to-follow
sentences (includes

Editing Errors
• Not cutting the fluff sentences with outside
• Not putting the most important words at info/signal phrases or
the front of bullets hyperlinks
• Repeating the same info in multiple • concise business prose
sections: this is in terms of content (e.g., [avoids #fluffguffgeekweasel,
don’t have a double intro in your comm
challenge) but also structure (eg don’t use outdated Business-ese: i.e. per
the same topic sentence and “for your request; generic business
example” and “similarly” for every val
resources paragraph) cliches/phrases (“ever evolving
industry;” “I hope you’re doing
well...”); circling, rambling
and/or repetition; excessive
passives, nominalizations,
using “I” or “you” in report,
etc.]
• Error Free
Example Paragraph to Edit
One of the predominant root causes contributing to the overarching communication inefficiencies in today’s
dynamic and digitally transformed workplace ecosystem is the conspicuous absence of a clearly delineated,
strategically integrated framework for goal alignment and expectation management in asynchronous, remote-
first collaboration environments. In the absence of traditional, in-person touchpoints, junior-level marketing
analysts often find themselves deprived of organically occurring, real-time micro-interactions—those vital
“hallway moments”—that facilitate agile knowledge exchange and emotional nuance detection. In lieu of these
spontaneous engagements, there exists a heavy and often inefficient dependency on asynchronous
communication platforms such as email chains and instant messaging ecosystems, which frequently lead to
increased semantic ambiguity and the unintended proliferation of misaligned interpretations. Moreover, within
the context of high-velocity, deadline-driven deliverable cycles, there is a pervasive reluctance among emerging
professionals to engage in clarification-seeking behavior due to a perceived risk of being perceived as
operational bottlenecks or lacking strategic acumen—a phenomenon aptly labeled by Rob Cross in an MIT
Sloan Management Review thought leadership piece as “collaboration overload.” Finally, the entrenched
existence of compartmentalized “organizational silos” exacerbates these challenges, as interdepartmental
opacity often hinders visibility into divergent workflows, competing priorities, and nuanced compliance
frameworks. This creates a fragmented understanding that is particularly detrimental to early-career
employees, who lack the institutional context to accurately interpret or tailor their communications for
maximum cross-functional impact.
Editing Check-In
• Find a sentence that has fluff/empty language, repetition, or overly
formal/artificial wording. Past the original sentence and then
paste an edited version.
Email to
Graders: Look
• Subject Line
• Recipient

at the Example •
o
Intro: purpose of email—you’re submitting the portfolio to be graded
Contents list: Include the full titles of your “attached” Investigative Report, Source

in Our Slides Checklist, Writer’s/Reader’s Profile, Generative AI Transparency Statement(s) (include one
for each document where you used generative AI) , and email cases.

But Make Sure •

o Put the titles of these documents in quotation marks (e.g., “Tone: Apology” email)

Advising the recipient of any action that you want them to take.

You Have All • Ending on a brief positive note.

the Up-Dated • Has appropriate salutation and sign off “Dear X” and “Sincerely Your Name”

Contents
Email to Graders
• Paste your paragraph that gets the graders to focus on
something/the action you’d like them to take.
• Paste your specific list with full titles of things
 o descriptive report title: Should mention both the
comm challenge, the val resources, and the
career/company
o recipient name [Submitted to name of boss at
Cover Page business]
o author name [Submitted by (student)]
o date submitted [portfolio due date]
Cover Page Check-In
• Paste all info that is supposed to be on the cover page.
 • Use Word to generate. Do not make one manually.
• Include only sections of the report from the executive
summary to conclusion. Do not include other portfolio
documents (i.e. source checklist and emails).

Table of • Confirm page numbers are accurate and consistent

with their respective place in the report.

Contents • Review entries for clear heading hierarchy (ex: report

conclusion heading shouldn’t be listed as a sub-
heading in the communication challenge section).
 • accurate, concise, readable
executive summary that replaces
Executive rather than introduces report
Summary: • Has at least one specific line for
each part of the report: purpose &
Watch Video context, each of the two sources,
For Example comm challenge, and solutions
Introduction: • concise and focused
introductions/openings
• What the Rubric Says:
concise & focused
introductions/openings
Watch Video appropriate to each document
type that provide sufficient
appropriate to each document
type; useful context for the rest
For Example context for understanding the
purpose of the message
of the message; direct: purpose
& preview in first paragraph;
indirect: logical buffer/lead in;
• Two things all intros must report intro contains all
do—report and email: necessary elements (purpose
Provide context (why are with mention of DC or for
you writing? What has been whom the report’s info would
going on?) Preface be useful), audience, scope,
preview or mapping thesis that
contents (what’s in this lays out the order of topics in
document) body of report; no fluff
Valuable Resources: The Rubric

Best = student explains how resources work and why they are useful/interesting for
early career professionals in the d.c./field/industry/role; goes into appropriate detail
& effectively illustrates analysis with examples

OK = analysis of texts could use more depth but is present; some illustrative,
applicable examples or concrete detail that effectively support analysis

Getting Worse = superficial, vague, unclear, or weak analysis of resources; doesn’t

clearly connect to d.c./field/industry; details/examples rarely related to analysis or
excessive focus on topics from resources/articles rather than a utility analysis
 • Not choosing two distinct approved resources
• Not starting with a summary at the top of each source
that goes over some key features, author types, and
prefaces what you’re talking about in your valuation
(also bad if introduction has like five lists and I can’t tell
which items you’re going to talk about).

Valuable • Not choosing and including 4 articles per resource and

2-3 sections/topics

Resources • Not writing for the benefit of early career professionals

at a specific company and telling us how these
resources would be used in a specific process or
Common Errors purpose
• Not describing contents enough: avoid vague
summaries and quotes that don’t actually tell me a tip
or specific useful bit of info. Tell me tips and tricks
learned from the article. Should not be too long though.
• Not carefully following point, evidence, analysis
• Not including subheadings
Final Thoughts
• Remember that your goal is to describe the resource
as a whole, you are arguing your 2-3 themes/sections
under each resource (ai, client communication,
collaboration, etc.) are representative of the larger
source.
• If you are reviewing a resource or organization and only
describe one aspect of it you should tell your readers
in the intro—the society of professional cheesemakers
includes annual meetings, training certificates, and a
trade journal, the annual meetings, however, will be
most useful to early-career cheesemakers at craft and
described below.
• Do a second source comparative in the second
sources intro
• Use transition words: similarly, for example, for
instance
Valuable Resources Checkin
• Paste the best body paragraph from one of your sources.
• Highlight the point in green, the evidence in light blue, and the
analysis in yellow.
• Why do you think this is the best of your valuable resources
paragraphs?
Communication Challenge:
Rubric
1. defined interpersonal challenge: 1. context, [Link], 3. situation, 4 partners, 5. strategy(ies) that are
relevant, logical, and consistent through the section.

2. in-depth explanation of the communication challenge and appropriately matching strategy(ies);

clear alignment between challenge and strategy(ies) to student’s DC/industry/job role (assess
connection between sources in research categories)

• Excellent = student cogently explains how & why comm. challenge matters to the specific
d.c./industry/field for specific partners/situations/consequences; goes into appropriate detail with
relevant and illustrative examples; strategy(ies) connected to challenge, partners/situation; may also
evaluate strategy(ies) in terms of pros/cons

• Points Off: explanation of comm. challenge & strategy(ies) could use more depth & relevance but is
present; not quite enough discussion of why it matters or occurs or how it affects the people
involved; some connection to DC/industry/job role though could be more clearly connected; not
enough discussion of consequences/significance; OR strategy(ies) not connected well enough to
challenge/situation/partners but are clearly explained and do make an attempt to connect them

3. suitable information and focus for report audience; level/number of details; information serves
reader’s needs in report; anticipates audience objections and questions; source checklist has
links and required context info

• Excellent= writer clearly understands audience & all information appropriate to the selected
audience in all docs; report may not be perfect, but info and presentation of it in report meets needs
of report recipient (i.e. provides info that would be useful for onboarding/relevant to what their
boss asked for); rational choices of sources in report’s prof. sources section;
Common
• Unclear/unspecific on required parts: specific early career person,
specific communication partner, specific task/process being done, Examples of a major issue (not an
specific context (when, where—a report over zoom in person) exhaustive list):
• A double introduction where you do an overview then another
•
Errors
paragraph that is roughly similar called challenge description. We key aspect of report missing,
don’t need both.
such as an entire strategy not
• Not giving an example that is then solved with the solution.
there
• Blaming someone: don’t blame bosses, colleagues, or clients as
dumb—be tactful. Points will be taken off in tone if you do. • prof sources section of report
• Not proving the problem exists using sources and then drawing from analyzes content marketing or
sources in the solution
some other problem source
• Trying to make up a key term or process with no evidence in the
solution. Your key term or process should come from somewhere. • Irrelevant info in multiple
• You don’t need a bulleted or numbered list. paragraphs or an entire
• Too many steps in your solution without describing any one of those subsection and/or extreme
steps adequately. Reduce the number of steps and describe them
with research and detail—showing me how they solve your
lack of conceptual concision
hypothetical.
• Way too long or short
• Solution is not interpersonal communication oriented (just adopt this
new technology is not a good solution here)
• Source checklist is just a list
• Solution is not something an early career person can actually do/act
on (this solution shouldn’t be for bosses)
of URLs without the context
info
Communication Challenge Check In
1. Write down and label each of the required pieces of your communication challenge: 1.
context (what’s happening when the situation arises—in a specific meeting, over the
phone, what medium?), [Link] (what process is being disrupted), 3. situation (the
challenge), 4 partners (a specific person you are communicating with), 5. strategy(ies)
(your solution) that are relevant, logical, and consistent through the section.
2. Paste your example of the problem from your problem section
3. Paste your example of how that specific problem is solved from your solution section.
Should be a specific reference back to the problem story.
4. Explain why the comm challenge is interpersonal communication oriented enough and
how it is early career enough
5. Does your comm challenge have a numbered or bulleted list in the solutions section?
Should it be numbered or bulleted, why? Could you get rid of 1 or 2 of the bullets and still
have a successful description? Could you expand the other bullets? Do your solutions
have sources in those numbers and bullets?
6. Is it clear where your solutions came from—does each have at least one source
connected-–ideally 2-3?
Conclusion
clear, effective conclusion (report)/relationship-
building closings (emails)
• All docs have effective endings: report leaves the
reader with the main takeaway(s) at the
appropriate level of detail (names prof. sources &
comm. Challenge with strategy(ies)); emails end
with steps for future action (if needed), the
appropriate tone, and a successful goodwill closing
Research on The Rubric
effective incorporation of quotes, paraphrases, summary, data, etc.; meaningful attribution/signal
phrases; varied, appropriate word choices in signal phrases; meaningful hyperlinked text that
support writer’s credibility or point
• Excellent: no dropped quotations (no quotes as stand alone sentences); consistent use of meaningful
attributive tags and signal phrases (no quotes without knowing where they are from); text makes it
easy to understand when student uses outside info
effective conceptual synthesis of multiple sources within sections/sub-sections (grade report &
research email together)
• Excellent= most sections/subsections have at least 2 sources that are linked through analysis/student
commentary

IS THERE SUPPORT? specific examples, details, or cited evidence that support your claims/analysis
(includes all docs, except submission email)
• Excellent = all claims in all docs supported by some sort of evidence (whether in a specific paragraph
or directly connected to a subsequent commentary paragraph);

DO WE BUY IT? convincing connection of credible evidence to convince your reader to accept &/or
understand your point of view (includes all docs, except submission email) Assess analysis in the
research email here
• Excellent = most evidence credible and effectively connects to claims in every applicable document; no
instances of content marketing unless the student has made a convincing case for using that source;
ok if only one source is misrepresented
 • Leave it in the order you find it, don’t delete
or add spaces, only fill in spaces for your ten
sources
• Don’t have more than ten sources
• Make sure your sources are actually used in

10 Source the portfolio (only can be used in the

valuable resources or comm challenge
sections)
Checklist • Have all required info: author name, title of
article, date, link
• Make sure you are counting things: no more
than two sources per organization; only 4
trades will count; etc.
Hand Your 10 Source Checklist
Off to The Person Next to You
and Have them Check the Links
to Make Sure They Work, are the
Correct Date Ranges, and Are
Categorized Properly
Reader/Writers
Profile
AI Statement
 suitable information and focus for email audiences as directed by the prompts; follows email
case prompts' directions and/or does email case assignments correctly; level/number of
details; information serves reader's needs in email cases;

• Excellent= writer clearly understands audience & all information appropriate to the selected
audience in emails; emails may not be perfect, but info in them and presentation of it meets
needs of recipients; submission email adds appropriate context; provides full titles of
documents (can just say “Investigative Report” or “Tone Email” but shouldn’t say “Email Case
1”); highlights any action recipient should take that makes sense

Examples of a major issue (not an exhaustive list):

• student misreads an email prompt, resulting in email that isn’t really doing assignment

• student doesn’t include any sources from requested source types for research emails (check
case for specific requirements)

Email Rubric •
•
submission email doesn’t address most of the areas requested
Irrelevant info in multiple paragraphs or an entire subsection and/or extreme lack of
conceptual concision
Tone Lapses (not an exhaustive list):
• Hey boss as salutation
• Use of uninclusive language like “businessmen”
• excessively formal language in an email to a close colleague; excessively informal language to
a superior or someone unknown
• Buffer works as a buffer but has a weird tonal issue:
• Thanks for the lit offer to put a tasting bar in our break room. Your new menu items,
especially the delish strawberry and Nutella combo, sound dope.
For Each Email Case
You Are Choosing
• What are the top three revisions you plan to
make or have made based on my feedback?
• Which subject line is the vaguest—why? How
might you make it more specific?
• Does each intro have context/why you are
writing and a summary of what is in the email?
(bad news email is slightly different)
• Is it on its own page in the portfolio?
• Do you have the full name of the email case at
top?
• Does the conclusion mention next steps and do
“relationship building” ie end on a positive
note?
 Since the Email Case Says
Her—Let’s Make Sure That You
Say Her and that Aditya is
gendered female
Tone Emails
Aditya: Tell Your Team Your Tell Your Partner/Boss There’s
Listening Something Bad Happening
• Intro context: specific department you run, mention a specific • Nothing negative goes in Subject line or intro.
company too. They’ve asked you in the last meeting to propose a
hybrid work to Aditya. • Buffer intro should still mention specifics of who you are and what
the context is. What is the relationship and task you are talking
• Let them know that you are not the final decision maker. about?
• Nice to have a mention of why you agree with them. • Second para is problem description. Give evidence. Be detailed,
date, time, frequency, specifics of the problem as well as
• Good to ask for their advice/research. ramifications.
• Say a specific date you will meet with Aditya • Don’t blame someone if you don’t need to.
• Make sure the tone is not too formal, this is your team/friends. Use • Then solve the problem. What are some first steps. Be specific.
the we tone—we and us want this. Not many of you.
• Be careful with tone: don’t talk down to this person who is an expert
• Your goal is not to be on the company’s side here. It is to reassure at this—it’s either a boss or a boss of another company. They know
them. why closing is important, they don’t need explanations of basic
concepts.
• Try to avoid meta langauge, "I want to talk about. First, I just want to
say, etc." "I'm just reaching out." Just say it
• Call to action-–set up a specific thing to do next. A meeting.
Formatting Emails
Aditya: Deliver Report to Senior
Leadership Summarize a PowerPoint
• You need to start with an email saying thank you for the continued • See the other case for formatting
support here's the report, then you need to have a separate report
for the senior leadership team with an title, into, and your data. • Don’t forget to CC Mina
• In class we talked about how bullet points always need at least a • Intro should say why you’re writing and have a content list of the
sentence that introduces the list (before the bullets) as well as a document.
sentence after the bullets that analyzes why/how this information
would be applied by the company to the company's benefit. • Don’t try to cover everything.
• You need to visually distinguish your bullet headings (the phrase • Be more specific in your analysis sentences on what you think the
that comes before the colon in your bullets) by italicizing, bolding, data suggests for your team/industry specifically. What does
or something different. sustainability mean in your industry, for example. As the
assignment case says "Provide context related to your company
• Your bullets are a bit long and difficult to scan sometimes. They and/or industry to help explain survey results.”
should be two lines max and include a key word or phrase after the
bullet that is italicized or bolded to call out the key content. • Next steps needs to specifcially refer to Ramy Khail and give his
email address for questions/concerns and the division focus group
• -For your bullets I'd recommend starting them with the key
idea/stat rather than the source. The idea is more important than
the credential (still keep the credential, just move it to the end).
 • Introduction needs to have context before jumping into the
proposal. Why are you asking for this? What has happened?
Did someone quit? Did your team ask you
• For the intro, you want to have context as well as prefacing
what is in the message. Some of you don't strongly enough
say, I've laid out key research to support this ask below.
Research • ~2-3 times: Point: claims about benefits of hyrbid work,
evidence 1-2 sources, analysis why the company would
Email: Aditya benefit from doing this and why your industry would benefit
if possible.
Hybrid Work • Don’t forget a specific proposal
• Double-check your source quality: 3 sources after January
2020, links work, of high quality (trade, proff org, popular
magazine, newspaper) no content marketing, no random
blogs, no Forbes Business
• Tone: Aditya is your boss who knows all about the specific
job. Don’t talk down.