Unit Code:
Assessment Brief – Level Six Undergraduate
Module Code:
HR 0372
Module Title:
Culture and Organisation
Further information about general assessment criteria, ARNA regulations, referencing and plagiarism can be found on the module’s site on the e-Learning Portal. Students are advised to read and follow this information.
Instructions on Assessment:
‘The value of a student’s international experience goes beyond purely the acquisition of language – it lies in the ability to see business and personal issues from other than your own cultural perspective’ Charles MacLeod, Head of UK Resourcing, Price Waterhouse Coopers 2008
Title: An analysis of the culture of an organisation
Your report will apply ONE theoretical framework used in the study of organizational culture to conduct an analysis of an organization’s culture.
The analysis will illustrate the culture by focusing on EITHER
1. An issue (something which the organization has responded to) OR
2. A particular organizational practice (something the organization does) OR
3. An event (some particular incident or series of incidents inside the organization) OR
4. A sub – unit (an organizational department department/division).
You will be able to choose from ONE of six organizations:
· Google http:
www.google.com
Your report will not exceed 3000 words (excluding appendices) and must use the format shown below. The
eakdown of marks for each task is shown in
ackets:
· A
ief background to the organization and its environment (10 marks)
Around 300 words (a SWOT analysis about its environment)
· An Introduction to the focus of the report (the practice, issue, event or sub-unit) (NOTE: WITHIN THIS SECTION YOU MUST INCLUDE A SENTENCE STATING YOUR FOCUS CLEARLY AND SIMPLY) (10 marks)
Around 200 words
· A
ief argument which explains/justifies why you have chosen a particular theoretical framework instead of 1 other alternative that you considered but have rejected (10 marks)
Around 300 words (please use Edgar Schein’s organizational culture model as a particular theory and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory as an alternative.
· An explanation of your chosen theoretical framework that you will use to analyse the organization, including its main concepts (20 marks)
Around 600 words
· An analysis of the practice, issue, event or sub-unit which uses the chosen theoretical framework and concepts (30 marks)
Around 1300 words
· Conclusions (including recommendations if necessary) (10 marks)
Around 300 words
· The final 10 marks will be awarded for structure of the assignment, the quality and credibility of references and use of APA referencing
Reading/Resources
Please see the TLP for this module for suggested reading. Other reading and resources will be suggested by your seminar tutor as you discuss your ideas with them.
For specific and more detailed guidance you will be able to discuss in the first instance with your seminar tutor or any member of the module team.
Word limits and penalties for assignments
If the assignment is within +10% of the stated word limit no penalty will apply.
The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment and the assignment cover sheet. The word count does not include:
· Title and Contents page
· Reference list
· Appendices
· Appropriate tables, figures and illustrations
· Glossary
· Bibliography
· Quotes from interviews and focus groups.
Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARNA page 30 Section 3.4 this will be regarded as academic misconduct.
If the word limit of the full assignment exceeds the +10% limit, 10% of the mark provisionally awarded to the assignment will be deducted. For example: if the assignment is worth 70 marks but is above the word limit by more than 10%, a penalty of 7 marks will be imposed, giving a final mark of 63.
Students are advised that they may be asked to submit an electronic version of their assignment.
Time limits and penalties for presentations
The time allocated for the presentation must be adhered to. At the end of this time, the presentation will be stopped and will be marked based on what has been delivered within the time limit.
Submission of Assessment:
All assignments must be submitted via the Programme Office. Each assignment must be accompanied by an Assessed Work Form which must be completed in full. The assignment will not be accepted by the Programme Office unless the form is completed co
ectly.
Marked assignments will be returned to students. It is advisable to retain a copy of your assignment for you own records. Your mark will be returned on the Assessed Work Form via the Undergraduate Programme Office.
Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives:
This assessment will contribute directly to the following Undergraduate programme goals and objectives
1. Knowledgeable about the theory and practice of international business and management
Objectives:
Students will be able to:
1.
Acquire knowledge of functional areas of business and management.
2.
Acquire knowledge of specialist areas of business.
X
3.
Apply their knowledge to business and management contexts.
4.
Conduct contemporary research into business and management.
2. Skilful in the use of professional and managerial techniques and processes
Objectives:
Students will be able to:
1.
Provide evidence of self reflection as a means of informing personal development planning.
2.
Demonstrate effective interpersonal communication skills and the ability to work in a team.
X
3.
Demonstrate critical thinking skills.
4.
Demonstrate problem solving skills.
3. Aware of ethical issues impacting on business and professional practice
Objectives:
Students will be able to:
1.
Identify an ethical dilemma in a business situation
2.
Suggest ethical solutions to this dilemma
4. Employable as graduates
Objectives:
Students will be able to:
1.
In the context of securing graduate employment demonstrate the skills of self presentation.
Assessment Criteria
Task
0 – 29
30 - 39
40 - 49
50 - 59
60 - 69
70 - 79
80 – 100
A
ief background to the organisation and its environment
Lack of clear information on the organisation and its environment. Few or no supporting references
Insufficient information provided on the background and/or the environment but more detail needed. Insufficient references.
Some relevant information provided on the background and/or the environment but more detail needed. Uses a small number of references
Reasonable background on the organisation and its environment has been provided. Limited references have been provided.
Good level of detail on the organisation and its environment. Some appropriate references are used.
Very good level of detail on the organisation and its environment. A range of references are used.
Excellent level of detail on the organisation and its environment. A wide range of references are used.
·
0-2 marks
3 marks
4 marks
5 marks
6 marks
7 marks
8-10 marks
Identification & justification of choosing a central FOCUS (the practice, issue, event or sub-unit)
No clear choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit.
Insufficient information on the choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
Fair choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
Reasonable choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
Good choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
Very good choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
Excellent choice of issue, practice, event or sub-unit
·
0-2 marks
3 marks
4 marks
5 marks
6 marks
7 marks
8-10 marks
A
ief argument which explains/justifies why you have chosen a particular theoretical framework instead of one alternative
Poor argument which does not provide a clear case for choice of framework and/or no discussion of an alternative
Lack of detail in the argument which does not provide a sufficiently clear case for choice of framework and/or insufficient discussion of an alternative
Some relevant arguments provided but more detail required. Limited discussion of alternative frameworks.
Reasonable discussion of why the chosen framework was selected as opposed to an alternative one.
Good discussion of why the framework was chosen and good insights into an alternative selection. Relevant examples used to make points.
Detailed discussion of choice of framework and useful insights into an alternative selection. Good examples used to reinforce arguments.
Excellent discussion of chosen framework and the selection process. Excellent use of supporting arguments.
·
0-2 marks
3 marks
4 marks
5 marks
6 marks
7 marks
8-10 marks
An explanation of your chosen theoretical framework, including its main concepts
Theoretical framework not identified or understood
Theoretical framework has been chosen but little integration with relevant evidence
The key points of the theoretical framework are described.
There is a reasonable attempt to
eakdown the theoretical framework and its key elements
The theoretical framework has been clearly articulated though mostly in a descriptive manne
A very good insight into the framework and concepts with some useful analysis
A critical analysis of the framework and concepts has been provided with supporting references
0-5 marks
6-7 marks
8-9 marks
10-11 marks
12-13 marks
14-15 marks
16-20 marks
Task
0 – 29
30 - 39
40 - 49
50 - 59
60 - 69
70 - 79
80 – 100
An analysis of the practice, issue, event or sub-unit which uses the chosen theoretical framework and concepts
Little attempt to analyse the case using an appropriate theoretical framework
Attempt to analyse the case may be made but incoherent, inconsistent or inappropriate to a discussion of culture in an organization.
Attempts to apply relevant concepts to describe the culture of the organization
Some integration between the theoretical framework and the case.
Accurate application of relevant concepts to describe the culture of the organization but little attempt to analyse the organization using concepts and theory.
Analysis clearly demonstrates the culture.
Concepts drawn from the theoretical framework are used to analyse the case and locate the organizational culture within the framework.
Critical analysis differentiates and integrates arguments and evidence at the level of organizational practice.
Critical analysis differentiates and integrates arguments and evidence at the level of organizational practice and at different levels of theoretical abstraction.
·
0-8 marks
9-11 marks
12-14 marks
15-17 marks
18-20 marks
21-23 marks
24-30 marks
Conclusions (including recommendations if necessary)
Very poor or few relevant conclusions have been outlined. No appropriate recommendations are provided.
An attempt to conclude the work has been made with some basic recommendations (where appropriate).
A basic conclusion has been provided which lacks depth or links to the main body of the assignment. Some recommendations are provided (where appropriate).
There may be an attempt to show the effects of the culture and to conclude with relevant recommendations (where appropriate).
The effects of culture are clearly demonstrated. Concludes with relevant recommendations (where appropriate).
Provides convincing account of the effects of culture. Concludes with appropriate recommendations (where appropriate), drawing on evidence and similar cases.
Provides astute account of the effects of culture