RTM-1 — Wednesday Afternoon Class

Project Evaluation Notes

This page publishes the RTM-1 project evaluation recap for the Wednesday Afternoon class. The goal is transparency and academic improvement: every student can review their performance, learn from common mistakes, and improve the quality of academic writing and decision-analysis projects.

The notes below emphasize high academic integrity, meaning: arguments should be supported by traceable sources, the logic must be consistent with the chosen model, and recommendations should be operational (measurable, implementable, and not purely generic).

How to Read This List

• Final Score reflects the overall quality of structure, analysis, evidence, and academic writing.
• T = To be confirmed, meaning no valid submission evidence was found in the received dataset at the time of evaluation.

---

Key Lessons From RTM-1 (General Feedback)

1) Model discipline matters (Simon / Gibson / Make-or-Buy / SWOT).
Higher-scoring projects used the model correctly and consistently (stages, criteria, alternatives, and final decision). Lower-scoring projects often presented the model “in name only” without tying it to evidence or real decision data.

2) Evidence and referencing determine credibility.
Strong work used recent and relevant references (and avoided unsupported claims). Low scores often came from minimal citations, weak source quality, or inconsistent citation styles.

3) Operational recommendations beat generic solutions.
Top papers translated analysis into specific actions (SOP, KPIs/metrics, timeline, and risk mitigation). Projects with “general advice” but no indicators lost points.

4) Integrity signals are non-negotiable.
Content that looked “swapped,” not connected, overly templated, or inconsistent raised integrity concerns. These issues significantly reduced scores.

---

RTM-1 Final Score Recap — Wednesday Afternoon

No.	NIM	Student Name	Score	Title (very short)	Short Evaluation Notes (specific)
1	64250720	SHAFARANTI CAHYA UTAMI	87	Simon Model – KAI	Simon stages complete + clear case example; citations fairly neat.
2	64250980	AYU DIA PUTRI	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
3	64250983	MOHAMMAD BRIGADE FATAHILLAH	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Operational–marketing analysis exists; references are not yet strong/recent.
4	64250984	KEYSIA OLLIVIA FEBRIANTI	78	ShopeeFood (complaints)	Case is relevant, but solutions remain generic; minimal citations.
5	64250992	SAIFA RAHMA AZZAHRA	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Logical structure; evaluation of decision alternatives is not sharp enough.
6	64250999	REIHAN ADI CHANDRA	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Analytical framework exists; citation style is inconsistent.
7	64251013	NAJWA AMALIA SALEHA	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
8	64251025	SYIFA ADELIA MANDASARI	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
9	64251027	OKTAVIA RAHMADANI ARIANTO	85	Lalamove Partnership	Problem is clear; supporting data/numbers are still minimal.
10	64251028	DWI ANGGRAYNI	88	Woven Bag SME	Decision stages are structured; recommendations are operational and realistic.
11	64251029	ASILA KIRANI ZALFATISNA	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
12	64251034	BUNGA PRATIWI	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Adequate analysis; lacks comparison/alternative decision options.
13	64251036	INTAN NURUL AINI	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
14	64251047	WANDA AYU RIZKIANI	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
15	64251048	LATIFAH ATTAZKIYYAH	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
16	64251049	MUHAMMAD DICKY RAIHAN	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Clear make/buy comparison; explicit criteria; references are sufficient.
17	64251056	FERNANDO WIJAYA	78	ShopeeFood (complaints)	Problem exists; solution is not tied to measurable indicators/metrics.
18	64251066	MUHAMAD RIZKY ALBIANSYAH YUSUF	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
19	64251071	NAYLA MOZZA AZAHRA	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Systematic; risk/mitigation section is underdeveloped.
20	64251073	JELITA WAHYU NINGSIH	78	ShopeeFood (complaints)	Very brief analysis; limited evidence and citations.
21	64251079	OLYVIA RAMADHANI	78	ShopeeFood (complaints)	Relevant case; alternatives and criteria are not structured.
22	64251087	FITRIYYATUL AZZIZAH	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
23	64251088	DEFA SANDI SANJAYA	85	Lalamove Partnership	Good analysis; recommendations lack KPIs/indicators.
24	64251091	MIKO RAFAEL HUTAPEA	85	—	Complete structure; descriptive data; needs stronger sources and clearer metrics.
25	64251097	MADRIDTYA SUCI RAMADHANI NUR AMALIA	84	—	Clear structure; SOP exists; data/references are general; citations are not strong.
26	64251100	RIVANA SAFITRI	85	—	Complete structure; descriptive data; needs stronger sources and clearer metrics.
27	64251102	LUTHFIYAH WASILATUN SYAFIIQOH	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
28	64251106	MUHAMMAD DAFARIDZA	88	Woven Bag SME	Complete stages; decision justification is reasonable.
29	64251107	AURELLIA PUTRI HERLAMBANG	85	Lalamove Partnership	Problem is defined; lacks benchmark/comparison.
30	64251112	INTAN NUR AINI	86	Warkop Lima Enam	Clear narrative; references are not dominated by the last ≤5 years.
31	64251119	RATNA AGUSTINA	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
32	64251121	RACHEL ELISABETH HERWANTO	88	Woven Bag SME	Strong argument; operational recommendation; formatting is fairly neat.
33	64251122	ADITYA TIRTANA AMRULLAH	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
34	64251124	ANDINI NERINDRA PUTRI	85	—	Complete structure; descriptive data; needs stronger sources and clearer metrics.
35	64251134	NATASYA ZULAIKA IRRAYYA	88	Woven Bag SME	Good structure; key claim sources should be strengthened.
36	64251140	YULLIA HASBITA PUTRI	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
37	64251141	FIOLA AMANDA ZENA	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Clear decision criteria; concise cost–benefit reasoning.
38	64251154	APRILIA HARGENI	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
39	64251159	AISYAH NURHASANAH	80	—	Model exists; KPIs/risks are not specific enough.
40	64251161	RIZKA AMELIA	88	Woven Bag SME	Decision stages are structured; recommendations are realistic and applicable.
41	64251172	MUHAMAD AL FAKHRI	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Comparative make/buy; criteria basis is explicit.
42	64251174	MUHAMAD RIANSYAH	85	—	Complete structure; descriptive data; needs stronger sources and clearer metrics.
43	64251177	MAYA S.R SIMANJUNTAK	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
44	64251184	DINI CAHAYA INDAH PUTRI	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
45	64251202	KARINA VEGA AZAHRA	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
46	64251216	REIFAN NOVAL FADILLAH	85	—	Complete structure; descriptive data; needs stronger sources and clearer metrics.
47	64251220	PINKAN PERMATA SURGANI	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
48	64251229	NAZWA AMELIA	88	Woven Bag SME	Clear discussion; citations need better consistency.
49	64251239	YOGA PANGESTU	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Complete analysis; decision supported by criteria; neat writing.
50	64251245	RASHYA ALDINO	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Clear criteria and alternatives; strong decision justification.
51	64251249	ZAZKIA EKA PRATIWI	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Clear option comparison; decisive conclusion summary.
52	64251252	ANITA INNA MARSELA	90	Make or Buy (NBDI)	Clear comparison; cost/risk justification included.
53	64251262	DWI ARYADIKA	85	Lalamove Partnership	Analysis exists; evaluation KPIs/indicators are not explicit.
54	64251266	DAFA DWI RADJA	85	Lalamove Partnership	Acceptable structure; minimal supporting numbers/data.
55	64251272	RAISAH FAUZIAH MUDIYANTI	86	—	Quantitative data + Gibson steps are clear; terms and data-source consistency need work.
56	64251280	STEVEN CHRISTOPER SIMAMORA	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
57	64251283	MUHAMAD HABIBI FADILAH	85	—	Complete with references; video/link not final (presentation evidence is weak).
58	64251286	PUTRA ILHAM PRATAMA	84	—	Clear structure; SOP exists; data/references are general; citations are not strong.
59	64251299	SUCI	85	Lalamove Partnership	Problem is clear; success metrics are not explicit.
60	64251307	SALSABIL HAURA SABRINNA	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
61	64251312	MAULINDA SAVITRI	87	—	Strong argumentation with sourced data; improve citation consistency and academic tone.
62	64251323	RIZKY FIRDAUS RAMADHAN	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
63	64251334	NABILLAH NUR KHADIJAH	83	QR Code Attendance	Framework exists; impact/risk analysis is still brief.
64	64251350	MUHAMMAD RAIHAN PUTRA LAKSONO	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
65	64251351	ZAENAL AHYAR	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
66	64251356	NADJWA LAURA ADINDA	83	QR Code Attendance	Adequate explanation; citations need stronger consistency.
67	64251358	VITO MAGHNAR KUSDARMONO	70	—	Incomplete: still general; missing data/alternatives/SOP/KPI.
68	64251361	CHAIRANI SYARIF	83	QR Code Attendance	Structure is fine; implementation steps are not specific.
69	64251390	AULIYA DIYAH SEKARARUM	87	Simon Model – KAI	Clear decision stages; problem–alternative linkage exists.
70	64251430	DIAN WAHYU SEPTIASARI	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
71	64251454	DEVINA AYU NAYSILA	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Clear problem; still descriptive (not evaluative enough).
72	64251455	MUHAMMAD DAFFA PRIBADI	70	—	Incomplete: still general; missing data/alternatives/SOP/KPI.
73	64251463	ILHAM RAMADHAN	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
74	64251466	MEIKA KIRANA SUDIRMAN	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
75	64251468	SIRIN RUWAYDA	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
76	64251469	AHMAD SULTAN DEWANTARA	70	—	Incomplete: still general; missing data/alternatives/SOP/KPI.
77	64251472	AISYAH	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Complete explanation; outcome indicators/supporting data are limited.
78	64251473	ALIFA RIZKY ARDIANTI	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
79	64251492	HAFNAN FAUZI	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
80	64251500	ARDHIA GARINI PRATIWI ALAM	87	Simon Model – KAI	Structured analysis; recommendations can be more operational.
81	64251502	DESI NUR AULIA PUTRI	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Framework exists; alternative evaluation is not deep enough.
82	64251507	WIDIAH ASMA FADILAH	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
83	64251509	SHALMA FHADDILLAH SUNARI	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
84	64251515	ADELA PUTRI	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
85	64251528	VIOLA SEPTIYANTI PUTRI SUWANDA	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Good structure; key claim references should be stronger.
86	64251533	ALIFA WINDU CAHYANI	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
87	64251541	RADITYA CHANDRAWINATA	T	—	No valid submission evidence found in the received dataset.
88	64251545	SUKKAYINAH	87	Simon Model – KAI	Clear stages; citations are not strong/consistent yet.
89	64251568	CLIFT DUCHESNAYE YORISMAN	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
90	64251572	RAMA ALFARIZKY	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
91	64251592	MUHAMMAD RUSDIAWAN	83	QR Code Attendance	Clear idea; weakness/risk analysis is not detailed.
92	64251594	KHALIFAH HAIDAR TSAQIB	82	Coffee SME (Simon)	Stages exist; recommendations are generic with minimal evidence.
93	64251614	MUHAMMAD ARIQ FATTAH WIJAYA	70	—	Incomplete: still general; missing data/alternatives/SOP/KPI.
94	64251627	JOSUA SIMANJUNTAK	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
95	64251632	MUHAMMAD KHOIF BILLAH	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
96	64251634	DZAKWAN DWI RENDRAHADI	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
97	64251637	DEBBY RAMADHANI	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
98	64251641	DESWITA ZAHRA	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
99	64251649	MUHAMMAD ADITYA ANANDA RUSWANDI	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
100	64251650	SHINTA NURAINI ASSURA	87	Simon Model – KAI	Strong structure; implementation steps need more detail.
101	64251682	ALYA NAKHWAH KHASIBAH	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
102	64251693	KHOIRUNNISA RAMADHANTI	83	—	Clear case; Simon model is not tied to real data.
103	64251695	MUHAMAD ZACKY MIRZA ABDILAH	70	—	Incomplete: general content; missing data/alternatives/SOP/KPI.
104	64251701	GILBERT MARFRIS	70	—	Incomplete: many core parts are blank (data/alternatives/SOP/KPI).
105	64251708	MARIA AURELIA LIMA	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
106	64251738	AISHA KHUMAIRA AULIA	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
107	64251740	ANNASTASYA MAULIA JUNIART	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
108	64251749	LOUISA SUKMA SANDRIYAN	87	Simon Model – KAI	Decision stages complete; citations should be strengthened.
109	64251762	SARAH AULIA SIREGAR	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
110	64251763	MUHAMMAD KAFKA DIVA HARAKI ALMUNAWAR	90	—	Complete and operational; KPIs/mitigation exist; citations need consistency.
111	64251790	RATU ANANDA FAUZIA	83	QR Code Attendance	Adequate discussion; benefits should be validated using data/observation.
112	64251801	FEBBRY NUR FATIHAH	82	Coffee SME (Simon)	Structure exists; alternatives and criteria are still thin.
113	64251809	CHANDA WARDANA	82	Coffee SME (Simon)	Explanation exists; citations/references are not clearly shown.
114	64251817	SALWA AZ ZAHRA SUBYANTO	88	—	Very complete; maintain paraphrasing integrity and avoid templated writing.
115	64251820	CHELSEAIMANIAT PUTRI ZEGA	78	—	SWOT exists; content mismatch/swapped (content integrity issue).
116	64251834	DIMAS AJI TRIYANTO	82	Coffee SME (Simon)	Problem identification is fine; recommendations are not operational enough.
117	64251841	ASHILA WAHYU RAMADHANI	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Clear structure; decision consequence analysis must be sharpened.
118	64251845	DARREN ABELLINO HOTMATUA SINAGA	84	HIMA Decision (Gibson)	Clear problem; supporting data/references are minimal.
119	64251860	MEITHA SOFIANI FARADILA	83	QR Code Attendance	Implementation evidence and citations are still limited.
120	64251867	TYAN ADHI TRITAMA	82	Coffee SME (Simon)	Stages exist; decision argument remains general.