Rather than a chosen topic, the GB815 Unit 2 direction feasibility memo delivers four candidate directions, six criteria fixed in advance and a provisional ranking held open. Searches like "gb 815 unit 2 assignment example", "gb815 unit 2 sample" and "gb815 unit 2 example" land here.
What a finished GB815 Unit 2 direction feasibility memo looks like
Seven pages: one summary grid and four direction profiles of roughly a page each. The opening page states the shared interest and defines six criteria before any direction appears: existing evidence, data availability, access cost, time to finish, practitioner use and the candidate's own position. Each profile follows one template, question, likely data, who controls access, what could stall it and a provisional rating. Direction A asks whether manufacturers that adopted employee stock ownership plans keep operating longer than comparable firms, using public benefit plan filings. B asks what private equity buyers change at family firms, and its profile records that the best data sit in restricted Census files. C asks why owners close instead of selling, and D surveys planning among members of an Ohio manufacturers' association. The grid closes the memo.
How a GB815 Unit 2 example is structured
Judgment is deferred on purpose, and the memo's order enforces that. Criteria come first because criteria written after the directions tend to favor whichever direction the author already preferred. An identical template for every profile makes comparison possible and exposes gaps; where a profile has nothing to write under access, the blank is visible. Ratings are provisional and each carries a reason, so that Unit 3's evidence mapping can overturn them with something to overturn. The candidate's own position appears as a criterion, and the memo is candid that working inside a machining firm helps direction D and does nothing for B. Direction C stays despite a serious sampling problem, since dropping it now would skip reasoning the course wants recorded. Closing, the memo names what would move each rating, so it doubles as a schedule for Units 3 through 5.
Criteria before directions
Six criteria, each defined in a sentence and weighted equally for now. Writing them first protects the comparison from the author's existing enthusiasm, and gives the Unit 9 matrix a starting point it can revise openly.
A: employee ownership and continuity
Plan filings with the Department of Labor identify employee stock ownership plans and record when plans terminate. The profile notes that a terminated plan might signal a sale, a closure or a restructuring, so the data exist but their meaning is uncertain.
B: private equity buyers
Strong prior evidence exists, but the firm-level data behind it sit in restricted Census files reachable only through an approved research data center project. The profile rates access as the decisive obstacle and says so without softening.
C and D side by side
Closure decisions face survivorship, since dissolved firms leave few respondents; planning practice depends on an association's willingness to circulate a survey, which nobody has yet requested. Each gets a named first step to test feasibility.
What would change each rating
A for what a plan termination means, B for any public substitute data, C for a sampling frame, D for a yes from the association. Naming the evidence that would move a rating turns deferral into a schedule.
Where marks go in GB815 Unit 2
Memos presenting one favored direction beside three straw alternatives are easy to spot and are marked accordingly, since the unit asks for genuine rivals. Criteria invented after the ratings, or criteria that simply restate the candidate's interest, undermine the comparison. Feasibility asserted without naming who controls access reads as unfinished at doctoral level; data are available is not a finding. GB815 graders also watch for directions that differ only in wording. Ratings without reasons cannot be revised intelligently in later units, and the stronger memos give each one a sentence. Dropping an awkward direction before examining it skips the reasoning the course values. Ending on what evidence would change each rating shows the memo understands its own provisional status, and instructors tend to reward that explicitly.
Get a GB815 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Outline the broad interest you are developing and any directions already on your list, with the Unit 2 instructions and rubric. Criteria come before any profile in the memo prepared from that, every direction shares one template, and each rating says what would change it. Your first custom sample carries no charge and usually arrives in 24-48h.
GB815 Unit 2 questions, answered
How many directions does the GB815 memo need?
Three or four is typical, and the instructions set the requirement. More than five tends to produce thin profiles, while two rarely gives the comparison enough range. The directions should differ in what they would measure or explain, not merely in setting, so that the later evidence map and matrix have real alternatives to choose among.
Can a direction be rated low and still stay in the memo?
Yes, and often it should. A low rating with a reason documents thinking the course wants to see, and later units sometimes reverse early judgments once evidence is mapped. Dropping a direction before its obstacles are examined removes the record of why it failed, which weakens the eventual prospectus.
Should my professional position count as a criterion?
Many sections welcome it, provided it is treated honestly. Working inside an industry can open access and supply context, but it can also narrow what a candidate notices or create conflicts of interest. The memo names both effects for each direction instead of treating insider status as a pure advantage.