MNG81001 MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION
| Assessment 2 | PERSUASIVE MEMO |
| Document design | Part 1: Memo format Part 2: Five (5) Powerpoint slides |
| Due Date | Friday 15th December XXXXXXXXXX00am (QLD time) |
| Length | 750 words total (memo and PPT slides) (+/- 10%) |
| Weight | 20% Memo (60% or 12/20) PPT slides (40% or 8/20) |
Assessment Task
Your Sydney HQ is developing a new marketing team with team members located in New York, Beijing and Mumbai. This will necessitate the establishment of a virtual team spread over four different time zones to use both synchronous (real time) and asynchronous (not concurrent) communication. A number of the team have expressed concerns about how it will all work, and meetings might be scheduled when one part of the team is about to go to lunch, while the other part is asleep.
To help 'sell' the idea to the team, your boss, the Marketing Director, is planning a virtual meeting with all team members. She is aware of the concerns and knows how important the presentation will be in creating a favourable association with virtual teams, as well as a good opportunity to build engagement, trust and candour among the team members.
To prepare for the virtual meeting she has asked you to: (i) evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of synchronous and asynchronous communication, and (ii) develop recommendations on how to use both synchronous and asynchronous communication tools, to not only be productive, but to maintain positive working relationships.
Please note: Part 1 will be presented as a memo. Part 2 will be presented as five (5) Powerpoint slides.
Persuasion aims to influence other people’s behaviours and attitudes. Successful persuasion shows readers ‘what’s in it for them’. Persuasive writing is one of the main types of academic writing. At work, some of the persuasive documents you might have to write are proposals, offers to clients, and memos suggesting alternative methods or new ways of doing particular tasks.
Persuasive writing has all the features of analytical writing (that is, information plus reorganising the information), with the addition of your own point of view. Most essays at university are persuasive, and there is a persuasive element in at least the discussion and conclusion of a research article. Points of view in academic writing can include an argument, a recommendation, interpretation of findings or evaluation of the work of others.
In persuasive writing, each claim you make needs to be supported by some evidence, for example a reference to research findings or published sources. The kinds of instructions for a persuasive assignment include: argue, evaluate, discuss, take a position.
Please follow these guidelines to complete the assessment:
1. To help reach your own point of view on the facts or ideas:
· read some other points of view on the topic. Who do you feel is the most convincing?
· look for patterns in the data or references. Where is the evidence strongest? ◦
· list several different interpretations. What are the real-life implications of each one? Which ones are likely to be most useful or beneficial? Which ones have some problems?
· discuss the facts and ideas with someone else. Do you agree with their point of view?
2. To develop your argument:
· list the different reasons for your point of view.
· think about the different types and sources of evidence which you can use to support your point of view.
· consider different ways that your point of view is similar to, and different from, the points of view of other researchers.
· look for various ways to break your point of view into parts.
3. To present your argument, make sure:
· your text develops a coherent argument where all the individual claims work together to support your overall point of view.
· your reasoning for each claim is clear to the reader.
· your assumptions are valid.
· you have evidence for every claim you make.
· you use evidence that is convincing and directly relevant.
4. Use three to five secondary sources.
5. Submit Assessment 2 to Turnitin via the Blackboard site no later that the due date: Friday 15th December XXXXXXXXXX00am (QLD time).
6. Refer to the Marking Criteria Guide and Marking Rubric located under Assessment Details.
PRIOS/CDT brief (covered in lecture and tutorials) for Assessment 2:
a. Purpose: The purpose of this document is to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of synchronous and asynchronous communication tools and persuade team members of the benefits and advantages of working as a virtual team.
b. Readers: Your boss (the Marketing Director of XYZ Company).
c. Information: Based on secondary sources.
d. Organisation: Direct order approach (start with you most significant criterion, etc.)
e. Style: Formal. Focus on being clear and concise, not flowery or overly-descriptive. Be sure to proofread carefully to ensure that there are no sentence-level errors such as spelling mistakes, wrong word choice, incorrect punctuation, etc.
f. Channel choice: Written document.
g. Document design: Part 1: Memo format. Part 2: Powerpoint slides.
h. Length: Total 750 words for both Part 1 and Part 2. A good target for each Powerpoint slide would be a three-word title plus a maximum of five bullet points of four words each.
Please note:
1. All applications for Special Consideration need to be submitted before the due date of the assessment item. For more information see http://scu.edu.au/students/index.php/30 and Rule 3 - Coursework Awards - Student Assessment and Examinations http://policies.scu.edu.au/view.current.php?id=0014
Computer failure will not be accepted as a reason for missing an assessment deadline: you are strongly advised to backup all of your work, for example on a USB flash drive, to ensure that you are still able to submit to a deadline in the event of a computer related failure.
2. In cases where there are no accepted mitigating circumstances as determined through Special Consideration procedures, late submission of assessment tasks will lead automatically to the imposition of a penalty. Penalties will be applied for late submissions as soon as the deadline is reached.
3. Students are reminded of the extremely serious view the University takes with regard to plagiarism and are strongly advised to read the university’s policies on academic integrity and the penalties associated with academic misconduct (see: https://policies.scu.edu.au/ view.current.php?id=00142, as well as information in the UIG).
Marking criteria/weighting
| Evaluation criteria
| Task | Weighting |
| 1.Purpose & Audience Understanding and addressing the question
| Has the student understood the task and covered the key points? Does the response adequately address the topic and task? Does this document take into account the needs of the audience? Does this document provide adequate information for the reader? Does the writer thoroughly address any potential questions from the reader? | 40% |
| | | |
| 2. Structure & Organisation Thesis/argument, introduction, conclusion, paragraphs | Is there a clear structure to the response? Does the introduction, body and conclusion contain all the identifying features? Do the paragraphs contain one main idea that is explored using relevant evidence? | 30% |
| Powerpoint slides | Relevance to the topic Font (size, style, readability) Format (colour, layout, background) Logical organisation Supports spoken content Language use (grammar, spelling, punctuation) Acknowledgment of sources (referencing) | |
| | | |
| 3.Research & Language Integrating evidence (paraphrasing, synthesising and quotations) Referencing – in-text (citing) and reference list. Sentences – spelling, punctuation, grammar.
| Is there evidence of research? Is it properly referenced? Are source materials properly integrated and referenced in-text? Is there a range of vocabulary? Are sentences grammatically correct? Are sentences accurate and complete? Has a spell check been used? Is spelling accurate? | 30% |
| | | |
| Fail | Pass | Credit | Distinction | High Distinction |
| 0 - 49 | 50 - 64 | 65 - 74 | 75 - 84 | XXXXXXXXXX |
| | | | | |
| Multiple parts of the assignment are missing or incomplete. Student fails to answer the question. | Essential elements are imprecise or absent. Work at a level that would be considered basic. | Key elements are presented but could be further developed and given ore depth. | Most aspects included in a final, well-developed form. | The assignment contains all required elements and is of the highest order. |
| 1. Purpose and Audience (40%) | 2. Structure and Organisation: Memo | 3. Research and Language Use 30% |
| High Distinction | High Distinction | High Distinction |
| All aspects of the assessment are comprehensively and appropriately explored, supported and covered. The writer’s position and/or purpose is clear and fully developed throughout the assessment. All ideas are relevant and appropriate for the audience. Reference to required number of relevant sources. The specified word length is met (750 words +/– 10%). Writing communicates meaning clearly and achieves purpose of the task. | The introduction is solid and thorough and includes all identifying features. Strong and relevant thesis statement with controlling idea(s) linked to topic sentences. Conclusion clearly relates back to the title, thesis statement and main points. Presents a well-defined summary of the whole paper. Well-defined argument. Information and ideas are logically organised and easily followed Paragraphing is used appropriately and skillfully. Format enhances readability of the paper. | Paraphrases and synthesises information in own words; cites the originating author(s) and provides the corresponding reference. Quotes (where appropriate) used sparingly and cited correctly. Information is correctly referenced following the SCU Harvard style for both in-text and end-of-text referencing. A wide range of vocabulary is used accurately and appropriately (for audience); spelling is correct. A wide range of grammatical structures are used accurately and appropriately throughout with no errors (incl. punctuation errors. |
| Distinction | Distinction | Distinction |
| All aspects of the assessment are addressed and supported sufficiently and appropriately. The writer’s position and/or purpose is clear and well-developed. The specified word length is met (750 words +/– 10%). Information and ideas are relevant and appropriate for the audience (minor lapses may occur). Writing communicates meaning to a satisfactory level and achieves purpose of the task. | The introduction is clear and appropriate and includes all identifying features. Appropriate and relevant thesis statement with controlling idea(s) linked to topic sentences. Conclusion clearly relates back to the title, thesis statement and main points. Presents a good summary of the whole paper. The organisation of information and ideas is logical (only minor lapses/loss of coherence occur). Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is often very effective, and internal headings are often effective and sufficient. Paragraphing is appropriate. Each paragraph has one clear main idea (lapses are rare). | Paraphrases and synthesises information in own words; cites the originating author(s) and provides the corresponding reference. Quotes (where appropriate) used sparingly and cited correctly In-text and end-of-text referencing is mostly accurate (some minor inconsistencies/inaccuracies) A range of vocabulary is used accurately and appropriately (for audience); minor spelling errors. A range of grammatical structures are appropriately used; some minor errors, (incl. punctuation errors). |
| Credit | Credit | Credit |
| Nearly all aspects of the assessment are addressed with appropriate support (although more support may be needed in some areas). The writer’s position and/or purpose are generally developed and clear. The specified word length is met (750 words +/– 10%). Most information and ideas are extended sufficiently, but there may be a minor lack of clarity or focus and/or relevance in some supporting ideas/material. Writing generally communicates effectively but logic and meaning not always clear. | The introduction is adequate; outlines identifying features but greater clarity required. The thesis statement makes an overly broad claim and is somewhat ambiguous in meaning. Conclusion addresses most main areas adequately. Information and ideas are generally organised logically (lapses/loss of coherence may occur). Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is helpful (although errors, repetitive use, or underuse occur), and some internal headings are well-managed. Paragraphing is generally effective and appropriate but may not always be logical, and/or the main idea of the paragraph may not always be clear. | Most attempts at paraphrasing and synthesising are sufficient, accurate, and appropriate; cites the originating author(s) and provides the corresponding reference. Quotes (where appropriate) used sparingly and mostly cited correctly. Some errors in the SCU Harvard reference style - in-text and end-of-text referencing. Vocabulary is generally used adequately, accurately and appropriately (for audience), some spelling errors. Grammatical structures are generally used accurately and appropriately, although errors (incl. punctuation errors) occur, and these may impede communication. |
| Pass | Pass | Pass |
| Most major aspects of the assessment are addressed (minor aspects may be missing), but some parts lack appropriate support and/or extension. The format of the assessment may not be appropriate and/or the specified word length (750 words +/-10%) is not met. The writer’s position and/or purpose lacks clarity. Information and ideas may be insufficiently extended for the audience, and there may be a lack of clarity and/or relevance. There may be some repetition. Writing generally communicates adequately but logic and meaning not always clear. | Some aspects of the introduction are sufficient; although at times overly vague with broad generalisations; greater clarity and direction needed. Thesis statement makes an overly general claim and is somewhat ambiguous in meaning. Conclusion attempted but does not appropriately sum up findings or link back to the thesis statement. Information and ideas may not always have a clear progression, and there may be a lack of coherence in some areas. Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is sometimes helpful (although errors, repetitive use, or underuse occur), but internal headings may be missing and/or inappropriate. Paragraphing is evident but may not always be logical and/or the main idea of some paragraphs is unclear. | Most attempts at paraphrasing and synthesising are insufficient, inaccurate, and/or inappropriate; not all originating author(s) cited with corresponding reference. Overreliance on quotes (where appropriate); some errors in citation. In-text and end-of-text referencing lacks accuracy and/or consistency. Vocabulary is adequate but is sometimes used inaccurately and/or inappropriately (for audience), and spelling errors may occur. Grammatical structures lack accuracy, and errors (incl. punctuation errors) impede communication. |
| Fail | Fail | Fail |
| The requirements of assessment are not sufficiently covered and/or supported. The format of the assessment is not appropriate. The specified word length exceeds 825 words/is less than 675 words. The writer’s position and purpose often lacks clarity. Information and ideas are insufficiently extended and/or supported for the audience. Those presented are often irrelevant, repetitive and/or inadequate. Logic and meaning not clear. | The introduction is poorly written; does not address the main identifying features (purpose, thesis statement and blueprint). No thesis statement provided. No logical conclusion. Fails to summarise the main ideas which have been discussed or make a final comment about the paper’s main idea. Information and ideas lack a clear progression and coherence. Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is often erroneous or missing, and internal headings are missing and/or inappropriate. Paragraphing may be missing, and the main idea of paragraphs is often unclear. | Evidence of paraphrasing plagiarism; original author's words moved around, while summarising the main ideas; fails to cite the original author(s) and to provide the corresponding bibliographic reference. Overreliance on (>10%) or no quotes. Fails to follow Harvard referencing style for both in-text and end-of-text referencing. Vocabulary is often inadequate, inappropriate (for audience) and inaccurate; words often incorrect or incorrectly used; substantial spelling errors. Grammatical structures lack accuracy, and errors (incl. punctuation errors) strain communication. Attempts at paraphrasing are insufficient, inaccurate, and/or inappropriate. |
Powerpoint presentation
| High Distinction ((10 – 12) | Distinction (9 – 9.5) | Credit (8 – 8.5) | Pass (6 – 7.5) | Fail >6 |
| PPT presentation vey informative, well organised, interesting and relevant to the assignment. Content is accurate and information presented in a logical order. Presentation flows well and logically. Presentation reflects extensive use of tools in a creative way. Correct number of slides. Font, format and images are appropriate and pleasing to the eye. No spelling or grammatical errors. Text in author’s own words. Acknowledgment of sources. | PPT presentation informative, organised and provides ample information relevant to the assignment. Content is accurate but some information is not presented in a logical order, but is still generally easy to follow. Correct number of slides. Presentation flows well and logically. Font, format and images are mostly appropriate. Few spelling or grammatical errors. Text in author’s own words. Acknowledgment of sources. | PPT presentation provides adequate information, some key concepts left out, organisation is acceptable. Content is accurate but information is not presented in a logical order, making it difficult to follow. Some tools used to show acceptable understanding. Correct number of slides. Some errors in use of font, format and images. Some spelling or grammatical errors. Text in author’s own words. Acknowledgment of sources. | PPT presentation provides minimal information, many concepts unrelated, poorly organised. Content is questionable and information is not presented in a logical order, making it difficult to follow. Tools are not used in a relevant manner. Lacking in number of slides. Some errors in use of font, format and images. Some spelling or grammatical errors. Most of text in author’s own words. Acknowledgment of sources. | PPT presentation not informative, or relevant tot e assignment, no apparent oganisation. Content is inaccurate and is not presented in a logical order, making it difficult to follow. Presentation has no flow. Tools are not used in a relevant manner. Lacking in number of slides. Some errors in use of font, format and images. Many spelling or grammatical errors. Most of text in author’s own words. Acknowledgment of sources. |