MANAGING PEOPLE & ORGANISATIONS ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES &a

  • 100%原创包过,高质量代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信:273427
  • 21129 MANAGING PEOPLE & ORGANISATIONS ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES & MARKING CRITERIA代写
    21129
    MANAGING PEOPLE & ORGANISATIONS
    ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES & MARKING CRITERIA
     
    Task
    As a group, prepare a presentation arguing a position in relation to one of the following topics
    from the first half of the semester:
    • Managing cultures
    • Leadership
    • Managing Individuals
    • Managing teams and groups
    Discuss the following statement:
    Practices in [your chosen topic area] have changed with the advance of post-bureaucratic
    management approaches.
    Note: Your group will be formed at the start of the semester during your tutorial. Each group will
    consist of 5 – 6 students who will be required to work together and allocate assignment tasks
    amongst yourselves.
    Group Presentation (10/25 marks – 40%)
    Assessment of the group presentation will mainly consist of two components – content quality and
    delivery style. Each student will be required to present the part of the group presentation allocated to
    him/her by the group. Attendance is compulsory and if you miss your pitch without prior approval from
    your tutor or the course coordinator then you will be awarded a ZERO mark for this component.
    Each group presentation will last for a minimum of six minutes and a maximum of 10 minutes. You must
    divide the time amongst yourselves in such a manner that each member gets at least one minute and the
    entire content is presented in a coherent manner. Students are welcome to use a variety of presentation
    mediums including paper-charts, powerpoint and prezi. Content must be of a high quality and presented
    in a succinct and clear manner whereas delivery style will be assessed based on time management, verbal
    and non-verbal (expressions and body language) skills and appropriate use of presentation medium.
    Written Summary (15/25 marks – 60%)
    The summary of 500 words (+/- 10%) (not including your title page or reference list) will be written in
    essay format and assessed on the basis of the conceptual organisation of ideas, understanding,
    coherence, written expression, referencing and formatting.
    The work should include the following sections:
    Title page
    Include word count, names and student numbers of all group members, a "TEAM LEADER" name and
    email address for correspondence, name of lecturer and class time.
    Introduction
    Set the context by presenting your overall topic, take a position and mention selected references you
    plan to use to demonstrate your overall argument.
    4
    Body
    Discuss your argument within the context of the literature. Discuss new insights/practices that have
    emerged and the underlying assumptions of these insights/practices. Compare and contrast the
    arguments and assumptions embedded in your different source materials (i.e. managerialism vs. Critical
    Management Studies or stakeholder perspectives). Approach the topic from different perspectives;
    whose voices are dominant or missing, what are the implications and what are the new emerging
    questions?
    Conclusion
    Briefly summarise your argument to draw a concluding thesis statement.
    References
    Present a reference list with least four references from quality sources, ensure they are formatted
    according to Harvard UTS conventions and that referencing is consistent throughout the report.
    Layout
    Double-space your text and use 2.5-centimetre margins. The text should be in a 12-point Times New
    Roman font and left-justified. Pages should be numbered, with the numbers appearing in the bottom
    right-hand corner of the pages.
    Submission
    Written summaries should be submitted via Turnitin by 9 PM on the due date. A group leader should be
    tasked with uploading the assignment. Each member of the group must sign a group assignment cover
    sheet indicating the percentage of work each student has contributed to the overall assignment. Group
    presentations will be made in the tutorial.
    Note: Further guidance on the process and structure of writing an essay is provided with an
    example on pages 9 to 12 of this guide.
    Assessment item 2: (Individual)
    Your second assignment will build upon your first essay and involve two parts: constructing an
    essay, and responding to your tutor’s feedback from your first essay.
    Task
    Part 1: Essay
    Write an academic essay of 1700 words (+/-10%) in which you further develop the arguments of
    your first essay by applying them within the context of one of the topics from the second half of
    the semester:
    • Managing Sustainably: Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility
    • Globalisation
    • Managing communication
    • Managing knowledge, innovation and change
    Discuss the following statement:
    5
    Practices of [your chosen topic area for essay one] contribute to managing [your chosen topic
    area from essay two] with the advance of post-bureaucratic approaches.
    You may use some of the same text and references from your first essay.
    References
    Select at least six sources from the tutorial readings and prescribed additional readings listed in
    your Tutorial Guide. Supplement your argument with at least two references from other relevant
    quality journal articles. Illustrate your arguments by cases from the lectures or relevant reports
    from reputable media outlets as secondary sources. You may also draw material from the
    recommended textbook by Clegg, Kornberger and Pitsis (2016). Provide a complete reference list
    at the end of your essay.
    Part 2: Reflective response to Tutor’s Feedback from Assignment 1.
    Your second task is to write a response of approximately 300 words (+/-10%), to the feedback
    your tutor provided to your first essay. You may want to break your response down into chunks
    by providing section headings based upon the marking rubric used to provide student
    assignment feedback. Explain, how you will use this feedback to improve your second essay.
    What have you done differently? What have you kept the same? Part two should be presented
    on a new page after the reference list from your second essay.
    Layout
    Your essay and reflections should be printed on one side of A4 paper only. Double space your
    text and use 2 to 4 centimetre wide margins. The text should be in a 12-point Times New Roman
    font and left-justified. Pages should be numbered, with the numbers appearing in the bottom
    right hand corner of the pages.
    Note: Further guidance on the process and structure of writing an essay is provided with an
    example on pages 9 to 12 of this guide.
    Prescribed readings
    Prescribed readings on the foundations of management and organisation studies
    Clegg, S.R. & Baumeler, C. 2010, 'Essai: from iron cages to liquid modernity in organization
    analysis', Organization studies, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 1713-33.
    Josserand, E., Teo, S. & Clegg, S.R. 2006, 'From bureaucratic to post-bureaucratic: the
    difficulties of transition', Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp.
    54-64.
    McKenna, S., Garcia-Lorenzo, L. & Bridgman, T. 2010, 'Managing, managerial control and
    managerial identity in the post-bureaucratic world', Journal of Management Development,
    vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 128-36.
    6
    Smith, J.H. 1998, 'The enduring legacy of Elton Mayo', Human Relations, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 221-
    49.
    Simpson, A.V., Clegg, S. & Pitsis, T. 2014, '“I used to care but things have changed”: A
    genealogy of compassion in organizational theory"', Journal of Management Inquiry, vol.
    23, no. 4, pp. 347–59.
    Prescribed readings on power and post-bureaucracy
    Courpasson, D. & Clegg, S.R. 2012, 'The polyarchic bureaucracy: Cooperative resistance in the workplace
    and the construction of a new political structure of organizations', Research in the Sociology of
    Organizations, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 55-79.
    Josserand, E., Villesèche, F. & Bardon, T. 2012, 'Being an active member of a corporate alumni network: A
    critical appraisal', paper presented to the British Academy of Management, Cardiff, UK.
    Knights, D. & Roberts, J. 1982, 'The power of organization or the organization of power?', Organization
    Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 47-63.
    McKenna, S., Garcia-Lorenzo, L., & Bridgman, T. 2010, ‘Managing, managerial control and managerial
    identity in the post-bureaucratic world’ Journal of Management Development, vol. 29, no. 2, pp.
    128 – 136.
    Prasad, P. & Prasad, A. 2000, 'Stretching the iron cage: The constitution and implications of routine
    workplace resistance', Organization Science, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 387-403.
    Simpson, A.V., Clegg, S. & Freeder, D. 2013, 'Power, compassion and organization', Journal of Political
    Power, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 385-404.
    Zimbardo, P.G., Maslach, C. & Haney, C. 2000, 'Reflections on the Stanford prison experiment: Genesis,
    transformations, consequences', in T. Blass (ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on
    the Milgram paradigm, vol. Mawarh, NJ, Lawrence Erlbraum Associates, pp. 193-237.
    Prescribed readings on culture
    Brewis, J. 2007, 'Culture', in D. Knights & H. Willmott (eds), Introducing organizational behaviour and
    management, Thomson Learning, London, pp. 344-74.
    Fredrickson, B.L. 2003, 'Positive emotions and upward spirals in organizations', in K.S. Cameron, J.E.
    Dutton & R.E. Quinn (eds), Positive organizational scholarship, Berrett-Khoeler, San Francisco, CA,
    pp. 163-75.
    Igo, T. & Skitmore, M. 2006, ‘Diagnosing the organizational culture of an Australian engineering
    consultancy using the competing values framework’, Construction Innovation, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 121
    – 139.
    Kärreman, D. & Alvesson, M. 2004, 'Cages in tandem: Management control, social identity, and
    identification in a knowledge-intensive firm', Organization, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 149-75.
    Ogbonna, E. & Wilkinson, B. 2003, 'The false promise of organizational culture change: A case study of
    middle managers in grocery retailing*', Journal of Management Studies, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 1151-78.
    7
    Rosen, M. 1988, 'You asked for it: Christmas at the bosses' expense', Journal of Management Studies, vol.
    25, no. 5, pp. 463-80.
    Schein, E.H. 1990, 'Organizational culture', American Psychologist, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 109-19.
    Wray-Bliss, E. 2003, 'Quick fixes, management culture and drug culture: Excellence and ecstasy, bpr and
    brown', Culture and Organization, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 161-76.
    Prescribed readings on leadership
    Blake, R.R., Mouton, J.S. & Bidwell, A.C. 1962, 'Managerial grid', Advanced Management-Office Executive,
    vol 1, no. 9, pp. 12-15.
    Bolden, R. & Gosling, J. 2006, 'Leadership competencies: Time to change the tune?', Leadership, vol. 2,
    no. 2, pp. 147-63.
    Browning, B.W. 2007, 'Leadership in desperate times: An analysis of endurance: Shackleton's incredible
    voyage through the lens of leadership theory', Advances in Developing Human Resources, vol. 9,
    no. 2, pp. 183-98.
    Cameron, K. 2011, 'Responsible leadership as virtuous leadership', Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 98, no.
    1, pp. 25-35.
    Dutton, J.E., Frost, P., Worline, M.C., Lilius, J.M. & Kanov, J.M. 2002, 'Leading in times of trauma', Harvard
    Business Review, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 54-61.
    Gabriel, Y. 1997, 'Meeting god: When organizational members come face to face with the supreme
    leader', Human Relations, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 315-42.
    Herman, S. 2007, 'Leadership training in a “not-leadership” society', Journal of Management Education,
    vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 151-5.
    Meindl, J.R., Ehrlich, S.B. & Dukerich, J.M. 1985, 'The romance of leadership', Administrative Science
    Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 78-102.
    Wray-Bliss, E. 2012, 'Leadership and the deified/demonic: A cultural examination of ceo sanctification',
    Business ethics: a European review, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 434-49.
    Prescribed readings on human resource management
    Almeida, S., Fernando, M. & Sheridan, A. 2012, 'Revealing the screening: Organisational factors
    influencing the recruitment of immigrant professionals', The International Journal of Human
    Resource Management, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 1950-65.
    Arrowsmith, J. & Parker, J. 2013, ‘The meaning of ‘employee engagement’ for the values and
    roles of the HRM function’, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
    vol. 24, no. 14, pp. 2692–2712.
    Booth, A., Leigh, A. & Varganova, E. 2010, Does racial and ethnic discrimination vary across
    minority groups? Evidence from a field experiment, Discussion paper Series, DP No. 4947,
    Institute for the Study of Labor, Bonn.
    Guest, D. 2011, ‘Human resource management and performance: still searching for some
    answers’, Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 3-13.
    Greenwood M. 2013, ‘Ethical analyses of HRM: A review and research agenda’. Journal of
    Business Ethics vol. 114 no. 2, pp. 355-366.
    8
    Linley, P.A., Harrington, S. & Hill, J.R.W. 2005, 'Selection and development: A new perspective
    on some old problems', Selection and Development Review, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 3-6.
    Syed,J. & Pio, E. 2010, ‘Veiled Diversity? Workplace experiences of Muslim Women in Australia’,
    Asia Pacific Journal of Management, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 115-137.
    Prescribed readings on managing individuals
    Parashar, S., Dhar, S. & Dhar, U. 2004, 'Perception of values: A study of future professionals', Journal of
    Human Values, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 143-52.
    Peterson, C. & Seligman, M.E.P. 2004, Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification,
    Oxford University Press, USA, New York.
    Roberts, L. M., Spreitzer, G., Dutton, J., Quinn, R., Heaphy, E., & Barker, B. 2005, 'How to play to your
    strengths', Harvard Business Review, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 74-80.
    Roberts, L., Dutton, J., Spreitzer, G., Heaphy, E. & Quinn, R. 2005, 'Composing the reflected best-self
    portrait: Building pathways for becoming extraordinary in work organizations', Academy of
    Management Review, vol. 30, no. 4, p. 712.
    Schwartz, S.H. 1992, 'Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and
    empirical tests in 20 countries', Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1-
    65.
    Sluss, D.M & Ashforth, B.E. 2007, ‘Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work
    relationships’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 32, no1, pp. 9-32.
    Wrzeniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P. & Schawartz, B. 1997, 'Jobs, careers, and callings: People's
    relations to their work', Journal of Research in Personality, vol. 31, pp. 21-33.
    Prescribed readings on managing teams and groups
    Barker, J.R. 1993, 'Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in self-managing teams', Administrative
    Science Quarterly, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 408-37.
    Belbin, R.M. 2004, Management teams: why they succeed or fail, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann,
    Oxford.
    Dimitroff, R.D., Schmidt, L. & Bond, T. 2005, 'Organizational behavior and disaster: A study of conflict at
    NASA', Project Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 28-38.
    Frey, L.R. 2004, 'The symbolic-interpretive perspective on group dynamics', Small Group Research, vol. 35,
    no. 3, pp. 277-306.
    Losada, M. & Heaphy, E. 2004, 'The role of positivity and connectivity in the performance of business
    teams', American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 740-65.
    Smith, D.M. & Edmondson, A.C. 2006, 'Too hot to handle? How to manage relationship conflict',
    California Management Review, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 6-31.
    Tuckman, B.W. & Jensen, M.A.C. 1977, 'Stages of small-group development revisited', Group &
    Organization Management, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 419-27.
    Prescribed readings on ethics and CSR
    Cameron, K.S., Bright, D. & Caza, A. 2004, 'Exploring the relationships between organizational
    virtuousness and performance', American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 766-90.
    9
    Fernando, M., Dharmage, S. & Almeida, S. 2008, 'Ethical ideologies of senior Australian managers: An
    empirical study', Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 145-55.
    Schwartz, M. 2000, 'Why ethical codes constitute an unconscionable regression', Journal of Business
    Ethics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 173-84.
    Stubbs, W. & Cocklin, C. 2008, 'Conceptualizing a “sustainability business model”', Organization &
    Environment, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 103-27.
    Sisodia, R.S. 2011, 'Conscious capitalism: A better way to win”', California Management Review, vol. 53,
    no. 3, pp. 98-108.
    Wray-Bliss, E. 2007, 'Ethics in work', in D. Knights & H. Willmott (eds), Introducing organizational
    behaviour and management, Thomson Learning, pp. 506-33.
    Prescribed readings on globalisation
    Banerjee, S.B. 2008, 'Necrocapitalism', Organization Studies, vol. 29, no. 12, pp. 1541-63.
    Chan, J., Pun, N. & Selden, M. 2013, 'The politics of global production: Apple, Foxconn and China's new
    working class', New Technology, Work and Employment, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 100-15.
    Gold, S., Hahn, R. & Seuring, S. 2013, 'Sustainable supply chain management in “base of the pyramid”
    food projects—a path to triple bottom line approaches for multinationals?', International Business
    Review, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 784-99.
    Morgan, G. 2006, 'The ugly face: Organizations as instruments of domination', in, Images of organization,
    Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 291-336.
    Rego, A., Clegg, S. & Cunha, M. 2011, 'The positive power of character strengths and virtues for global
    leaders', in K.S. Cameron & G. Spreitzer (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational
    Scholarship, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
    Zakaria, N., Amelinckx, A. & Wilemon, D. 2004, 'Working together apart? Building a knowledge-sharing
    culture for global virtual teams', Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 15-29.
    Prescribed readings on communication
    Barry, B. 2007, 'The cringing and the craven: Freedom of expression in, around, and beyond the
    workplace', Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 263-96.
    Jack, G. 2004, 'On speech, critique and protection', Ephemera, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 121-34.
    Klein, N. 2000, 'The branding of learning', in, No logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies, Picador, New York,
    pp. 87-105.
    Watson, T.J. 1995, 'Rhetoric, discourse and argument in organizational sense making: A reflexive tale',
    Organization Studies, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 805-21.
    Whitney, D. 1998, ‘Let's change the subject and change our organization: An appreciative inquiry approach
    to organization change’, Career Development International, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 314-319.
    Prescribed readings on knowledge, innovation and change
    10
    Birkinshaw, J. & Gibson, C. 2004, 'Building ambidexterity into an organization', MIT Sloan Management
    Review, vol. 45, pp. 47-55.
    Brown, T. 2008, 'Design thinking', Harvard Business Review, vol. 86, no. 6, p. 84.
    Cunha, J.V. & Cunha, M.P. 2001, 'Brave new (paradoxical) world: Structure and improvisation in virtual
    teams', Strategic Change, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 337-47.
    Harris, M. 2006, ‘Technology, innovation and post-bureaucracy: the case of the British Library"’, Journal
    of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19 no. 1, pp.80 - 92
    Josserand, E. 2004, ‘Cooperation within Bureaucracies: Are Communities of Practice an Answer?’,
    M@n@gement, vol. 7, no. 3,pp. 307-339.
    Josserand, E., Teo, S. & Clegg, S. 2006, 'From bureaucratic to post-bureaucratic: The difficulties of
    transition', Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 54-64.
    Wenger, E.C. & Snyder, W.M. 2000, 'Communities of practice: The organizational frontier', Harvard
    Business Review, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 139-46.
    Weick, K.E. & Westley, F. 1999, 'Affirming an oxymoron', in S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W.R. Nord (eds),
    Managing organizations: Current issues, Sage, London, pp. 190-208.
    Please note that most of these articles/readings can be accessed via e-readings by going to the UTS
    Library website and typing 21129 into the search-bar.
    ASSESSMENT AND EXPECTATIONS
    A central aim for this subject is to develop your skills in critical and analytical thinking
    within the context of management and organisations. A fundamental mechanism
    through which such thinking is developed and demonstrated is through writing:
    particularly in the format of an extended academic essay.
    GUIDANCE ON THE REQUIRED FORMAT OF THE ACADEMIC ESSAYS
    An academic essay must have:
    1. An explicit argument that answers a basic premise or question:
    An academic essay is not merely a summary of what has already been written on a
    subject. It is, instead, a presentation of your argument, supported by academic sources,
    on the specific question set. You should tell the reader in your Introduction very clearly
    what your answer will be and tell them how your essay is to be structured to present
    your answer.
    For example, if you had been asked a question on whether strong management can
    prevent fraudulent business practices, your opening sentence might look something like
    this: ‘In this essay I am going to argue that fraudulent business practices happen because
    of, not despite, ‘strong management’. I am going to suggest that, in part, the pressure
    put upon employees by their managers can generate a culture where corners are cut and
    proper checks and balances are not carried out. I conclude that stronger management,
    therefore, may not be the solution to ending corporate fraud’.
    2. An argument that has a clear, logical structure:
    Having told the reader in the Introduction explicitly what your answer to the question is,
    your essay should be logically structured to develop your argument. Organise the main
    11
    part of your essay into three or four sections. Tell the reader in your Introduction what
    these sections are, and link these sections to your overall argument. Remind the reader
    at the start of each new section how the argument is progressing. For further details on
    developing a critical review and writing assessments see the following links:
    • Critical review: http://www.elssa.uts.edu.au/resources/research/critical.html
    • Guide to writing assessments:
    http://www.business.uts.edu.au/teaching/guide/guide.pdf
    3. Evidence of substantial and relevant reading:
    To pass Assessment 1 your essay must provide at least 6 references and for essay 2 you
    must provide at least 8, making extensive use of the:
    • the readings/articles listed in the ‘tutorial guidelines and readings’
    • other pertinent references given to you in lectures
    • relevant ideas from the recommended text book.
    4. A Conclusion:
    All work needs to have a conclusion that summarises the arguments put forward in your
    essay and how these arguments have answered the question(s) set. Have conviction in
    your arguments. Avoid conclusions that end with ‘it depends’ or ‘this needs more
    research’.
    5. References:
    An academic essay must be supported by many references to published academic work.
    For this subject your main references must be the tutorial readings and additional
    readings listed in the tutorial guide. Be sure to acknowledge fully any references or
    quotes you have used using the Harvard UTS reference style: e.g. (Roberts, 1984). Further
    information on the Harvard UTS reference style is found in the Faculty of Business Guide
    to Writing Assignments available online:
    http://www.lib.uts.edu.au/help/referencing/harvard-uts-referencing-guide. Your essay
    must also have a Reference list, which is an alphabetical list of the full publication details
    of all the items you have explicitly referenced in your work, referenced according to
    Harvard UTS conventions (i.e. do not use bullet points for your reference list and ensure
    that you use a hanging indent – with the first line flush left with the margin and
    subsequent lines indented the same width as a paragraph indent).
    Examples of essay introductions/paragraphs
    The following sample essay introductory paragraphs were written by Professor Edward Wray
    Bliss for MPO, and are provided ONLY to illustrate how to write your introduction. These
    paragraphs are NOT based on the essay questions.
    12
    Example 1:
    In this essay, I am going to argue that work can certainly be a source of satisfaction and joy for
    individuals. Indeed, as I demonstrate in Section One, by drawing on Rosen (1988), Clegg et al
    (2008) and others, managers of modern corporations are explicitly encouraged to design the
    workplace and motivate employees so that these employees find satisfaction and enjoyment at
    work. However, work is also a source of dissatisfaction and suffering too and I draw upon Jackall
    (1988), Knights and Roberts (1982), and Morgan (2006) in Section Two to show the anxiety,
    subordination and domination that may also describe the experience of work for managerial and
    non-managerial employees alike. Rather than leave the question here, in Section Three I attempt
    to explore, conceptually, why work produces such experiences and emotions for individuals.
    Drawing upon Jackson and Carter (2000) and O’Doherty (2006), I consider the strong link
    between work and personal identity. Summarising my overall arguments in the Conclusion I
    illustrate, with the example of Ackroyd and Crowdy (1990), just how complex the relationship
    between identity, work, and an individual’s striving for satisfaction and personal meaning can be.
    Example 2:
    In this essay, I am going to argue that it is important to study management and organisation
    critically for two key reasons. First, it is important to do so because the scope and reach of
    management and organisation is such that it affects all aspects of our social, economic and
    cultural life. Second, because the controls that exist at present in large commercial organisations
    may not be sufficient to prevent negative effects occurring in each of these contexts. In Section
    One I shall demonstrate the first point with reference both to the role of management and
    organisation in the current global economic crisis and also through discussing the writings of
    Morgan (2006) and Klein (2001), explore the effects and outcomes of corporate power in
    different spheres. In Section Two, I shall use Milgram’s (1974) experiments on obedience and
    authority and Jackall’s (1988) study of corporate management, to argue that there are processes
    at work in large organisations that can inhibit employees, and even senior managers, from
    reflecting upon and being responsible for their organisation’s behaviour. These two points, I
    suggest, make it imperative that we look critically at management and organisation. In the final
    section of this essay, I shall consider just what ‘looking critically’ means. I will argue, in
    opposition to Parker (2002), that being critical in this context is not the same as being ‘against
    management’, but is instead a commitment to better organisation and better management, a
    commitment to an idea of organisation where its powerful potential, as envisaged by Knights
    and Roberts (1982), is realised.
    Guidelines for submitting assessments using ‘Turnitin’
    Your essays must be submitted electronically using the ‘Turnitin’ program on UTSOnline
    (under the assignment tab on the MPO page) by 9pm on the due date. Essays submitted
    late will lose an automatic 10 marks per day.
    13
    Turnitin will also produce a plagiarism report that will be available to your tutor when
    they mark your work. The report will indicate any passages in your essay that are not
    original. You are welcome to submit earlier versions of your essay to Turnitin to help you
    to modify your essay. The second time you submit your essay to the system, however, it
    will be at least 24 hours before Turinitin will give you your report.
    As a guide, if your overall Turnitin score is over 25%, please ensure that you revise your
    essay. If you do not revise, you could face severe penalties and may be referred to the
    Dean of Teaching and Learning.
    You must not submit anybody else’s essays except your own to Turnitin for any reason.
    Also, please do not, under any circumstances, think that you can present somebody
    else’s unreferenced writing in your essay as your own – whether this is from previous
    student’s essays, material you have found on the web, or elsewhere. The penalties for
    plagiarism are extremely severe and all cases will be referred to the Dean of Teaching
    and Learning.
    GRADING ASSESSMENT
    Your assignments will be graded according to the criterion indicated in the marking rubrics on
    pages 15-18 below. When assessing your essays, each of the criteria considered - along with your
    understanding of the subject, lectures and readings, and your ability for critical, questioning
    thought.
    In addition to the above instructions and guidelines, your tutors will talk you through the process
    of assessment and will provide feedback on your two assessment submissions.
    Grade categories
    High Distinction 85 per cent and above
    Distinction 75 per cent to 84 per cent
    Credit 65 per cent to 74 per cent
    Pass 50 per cent to 64 per cent
    Fail (Z) Less than 50 per cent
    Please see the UTS Guide to Writing Assignments for full details on these grade categories. All
    forms of assessment must be attempted and an overall mark of 50% or more must be achieved
    to pass this course.
    EXTENSIONS AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS
    14
    Essays submitted after the due time/date will incur late penalties as listed below. Late
    submissions will not incur the late penalties listed, only if the tutor or Subject Coordinator has
    granted a formal extension of time. This extension should be approved BEFORE the submission
    deadline where possible and will only be approved in exceptional circumstances (normally on
    grounds of ill health or misadventure). Work submitted more than 5 days after the stated
    submission date will not be accepted for assessment unless the Subject Coordinator, on receipt
    of a Special Consideration form, has granted a formal extension of time.
    Late Penalties
    Depending on the circumstances, the Subject Coordinator may apply the following penalties:
    • Up to 1 day late (after the specified deadline) 10% late reduction
    • Up to 2 days late: 20% late reduction
    • Up to 3 days late: 30% late reduction
    • Up to 4 days late: 40% late reduction
    • Up to 5 days late: 50% late reduction
    • Over 5 days late: NOT ACCEPTED
    The 10% per day penalty is applied to the mark that would have been received if the submission
    had been on time. Any work submitted after 5 days would need a Special Consideration
    document to be accepted for assessment. Students cannot expect to receive verbal or written
    feedback for late work.
    Applying for extensions
    If you are unable to submit your assignment on time due to illness or misadventure, and require
    an extension of less than one week, you should submit your supporting documentation and
    request an extension by emailing your tutor well before the hand-in deadline of the essay. If you
    require more than a one-week extension, please submit an application for ‘Special
    Consideration’ with relevant supporting documentation attached, prior to the due date of the
    assessment.
    The extension application form is available through the Student Administration Offices or may be
    downloaded at: http://www.sau.uts.edu.au/forms/index.html
    REMARKING
    To maintain consistency between the tutorials, the coordinators moderate the marks prior to
    releasing the marked scripts back to the students. However, if you have concerns regarding your
    marked assessment, please email your tutor for an appointment to discuss your concerns.
    Before meeting with your tutor, you must email your tutor a detailed request explaining
    precisely which criteria of the grading sheet and elements of feedback you disagree with or have
    15
    questions on. Your tutors will not be able to discuss your concerns unless such a document has
    been submitted to them.
    If you are unable to come to an agreement about your final assessment mark with your tutor,
    then you may request an appointment with the co-coordinator, Ace Simpson, to assess your
    mark. Please be aware that remarking your assessment may result in, 1) retaining the same
    mark, 2) increasing the mark or 3) reducing the mark.
    16
    21129 MANAGING PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS
    ASSIGNMENT 1 MARKING RUBRIC
    Performance
    Area/
    Weighting
    Unsatisfactory
    Limited Proficiency
    Average Proficiency Proficient
    Highly Proficient
    Argument
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    The topic, main argument & ideas are
    not clear.
    There is one argument. Main ideas are
    somewhat clear but are not well
    developed or supported.
    There is one generally well-focused
    argument. Main ideas are somewhat
    clear & developed with the support of
    detailed information.
    There is one clear, well-focused
    argument. Main ideas are mostly clear
    & developed with the support of
    detailed information.
    There is one clear, well-focused
    argument. Main ideas are clear & are
    developed with well-supported, detailed
    & accurate information.
    Organisation &
    Structure
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    Poorly organized OR demonstrates
    serious problems with progression of
    ideas. There is no clear introduction,
    structure, or conclusion. Report
    structure may have been used.
    Essay structure is used. Introduction
    states the main topic. A conclusion is
    included. Some signs of logical
    organization. May have abrupt or
    illogical shifts & ineffective flow of
    ideas.
    Essay structure is used. Introduction
    states the main argument & provides an
    overview of the paper. The body is
    generally on topic. A conclusion is
    included. Organisation supports
    argument & purpose; sequence of
    ideas could be improved.
    Essay structure is mostly used.
    Introduction states the main argument
    & provides an overview of the essay
    including the conclusion. Information in
    the body is mostly relevant & logically
    considers different perspectives with
    effective transitions. The conclusion
    synthesizes the different perspectives
    to draw a final conclusion.
    Essay structure used. Introduction
    states the main argument & provides an
    overview of the essay including the
    conclusion. The information in the body
    is relevant & logically considers
    different perspectives with effective
    transitions. The conclusion synthesizes
    the different perspectives to draw a final
    conclusion.
    Critique
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    Insufficient reasoning & simplistic
    analysis of complex issues, possibly
    assumes managerialist conclusions,
    lack of counterfactual thinking.
    Some connections between main ideas,
    limited clarity & complexity of thought,
    possibly assumes managerialist
    conclusions, lack of counter factual
    thinking.
    Adequately demonstrates reasonable
    relationships among ideas,
    demonstrates some counter factual
    thinking.
    Generally evaluates information
    gathered, questions taken-for-granted
    (especially managerialist) assumptions,
    demonstrates relationships amongst
    ideas, considers various (stakeholder)
    perspectives.
    Skillfully evaluates information
    gathered, questions taken-for-granted
    (especially managerialist) assumptions,
    demonstrates relationships amongst
    ideas, considers various (stakeholder)
    perspectives
    Understanding
    & Content
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    Unsatisfactory understanding &
    engagement with course materials.
    Content unclear; lapses in coherence
    OR has no relation to writing task;
    offers simplistic, undeveloped support
    for ideas. Poor use of primary &
    secondary sources.
    Poor understanding & engagement with
    course materials. Use of course content
    is somewhat vague OR only loosely
    related to the writing task; at times may
    be off topic OR too broad with limited
    support. Poor use of primary &
    secondary sources.
    Satisfactory understanding &
    engagement with course materials. Use
    of course content is mostly accurate &
    fairly clear; demonstrates solid but less
    accurate reasoning; contains some
    appropriate details and/or examples.
    Good use of primary & secondary
    sources.
    Generally sound understanding &
    engagement with course materials. Use
    of course content is accurate, focused,
    & consistent; exhibits control in
    development of ideas; unified with a
    fresh insight. Excellent use of primary
    & secondary sources.
    Excellent understanding & engagement
    with course materials. Use of course
    content is accurate, focused, &
    consistent; exhibits control in
    development of ideas; unified with a
    fresh insight. Excellent use of primary
    & secondary sources.
    Academic
    English
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    Sentences sound awkward, are
    distractingly repetitive, or are difficult
    to understand. Paragraphs are poorly
    structured & hence are often too short
    or too long. Numerous errors in
    grammar, &/or spelling that interfere
    with understanding.
    Sentences are generally well
    constructed, but have a similar
    structure &/or length. Paragraphs are
    generally well structured. The author
    makes several errors in grammar,
    syntax, mechanics, &/or spelling that
    interfere with understanding.
    Sentences are generally well
    constructed & have varied structure &
    length. Paragraphs are generally well
    structured. The author makes a few
    errors in grammar, syntax, mechanics,
    &/or spelling, but they do not interfere
    with understanding.
    Sentences are mostly well constructed
    & have varied structure & length.
    Paragraphs are well structured with
    topic, supporting & concluding
    sentences. The author makes no errors
    in grammar, mechanics, &/or spelling.
    All sentences are well constructed &
    have varied structure & length.
    Paragraphs are well structured with
    topic, supporting & concluding
    sentences. The author makes no errors
    in grammar, mechanics, &/or spelling.
    17
    References
    9%
    2.25 Marks
    Essay is not referenced according to
    Harvard UTS conventions, possibly
    footnotes are used instead.
    Essay is mostly referenced according to
    Harvard UTS conventions: (i.e.) many
    mistakes with in-text citations.
    Reference list is incomplete/improperly
    formatted. Possibly some references
    missing from list.
    Essay is generally referenced
    according to Harvard UTS conventions:
    (i.e.) several mistakes with in-text
    citations indicating confusion regarding
    providing of page numbers, citing of
    secondary sources, when to use (and
    or &) etc. Reference list is complete,
    properly formatted & presented
    alphabetically with a handing indent.
    Essay is mostly referenced according to
    Harvard UTS conventions: (i.e.) In-text
    citations are placed in parentheses
    after the sentence or part thereof that
    they support; page numbers are only
    provided for direct quotes; long quotes
    (30 words) are presented as a separate
    indented paragraph. Reference list is
    complete, properly formatted &
    presented alphabetically with a hanging
    indent.
    Essay is referenced according to
    Harvard UTS conventions: (i.e.) In-text
    citations are placed in parentheses
    after the sentence or part thereof that
    they support; page numbers are only
    provided for direct quotes; long quotes
    (30 words) are presented as a separate
    indented paragraph. Reference list is
    complete, properly formatted &
    presented alphabetically with a hanging
    indent.
    Formatting
    7%
    1.75 Marks
    Essay looks untidy & does not follow
    formatting guidelines.
    Essay looks fairly neat, but violates
    many assignment formatting guidelines.
    Essay looks neat, but violates a few of
    the assignment formatting guidelines.
    Essay is neat, professional & mostly
    respects the assessment formatting
    guidelines: within the word limit, printed
    on single sided A4 paper, has essay
    question reproduced at top of first page,
    left aligned text, 12 point font, double
    spacing, 4 cm margins, numbered
    pages.
    Essay is neat, professional & strictly
    respects the assessment formatting
    guidelines: within the word limit, printed
    on single sided A4 paper, has essay
    question reproduced at top of first page,
    left aligned text, 12 point font, double
    spacing, 2 to 4 cm margins, numbered
    pages.
    Presentation
    40%
    10 Marks
    Essay looks untidy & does not follow
    formatting guidelines.
    Essay looks fairly neat, but violates
    many assignment formatting guidelines.
    Essay looks neat, but violates a few of
    the assignment formatting guidelines.
    Essay is neat, professional & mostly
    respects the assessment formatting
    guidelines: within the word limit, printed
    on single sided A4 paper, has essay
    question reproduced at top of first page,
    left aligned text, 12 point font, double
    spacing, 4 cm margins, numbered
    pages.
    Total: 100% (Grade out of 25)
    18
    21129 MANAGING PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONS
    ASSIGNMENT 2 MARKING RUBRIC
    Performance
    Area/
    Weighting
    Unsatisfactory
    Limited Proficiency
    Average Proficiency Proficient
    Highly Proficient
    Argument
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    The topic, main argument &
    ideas are not clear, or minimal
    connection to ideas in essay
    1, or over reliance on material
    from essay 1.
    There is one argument. Main ideas
    are somewhat clear & developed
    from essay 1 but are not well
    developed or supported.
    There is one generally well-focused
    argument. Main ideas are somewhat
    clear & developed with the support of
    detailed information.
    There is one clear, well-focused
    argument. Main ideas are mostly
    clear & developed with the support
    of detailed information.
    There is one clear, well-focused argument
    developed & built upon from essay 1. Main
    ideas are clearly developed with wellsupported,
    detailed & accurate information.
    Organisation
    & Structure
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    Poorly organized OR
    demonstrates serious
    problems with progression of
    ideas. There is no clear
    introduction, structure, or
    conclusion. Report structure
    may have been used.
    Essay structure is used. Introduction
    states the main topic. A conclusion is
    included. Some signs of logical
    organisation. May have abrupt or
    illogical shifts & ineffective flow of
    ideas.
    Essay structure is generally used.
    Introduction states the main argument
    & provides an overview of the paper.
    The body is generally on topic. A
    conclusion is included. Organisation
    supports argument & purpose;
    sequence of ideas could be improved.
    Essay structure is mostly used.
    Introduction states the main
    argument & provides an overview
    of the essay including the
    conclusion. The information in the
    body is mostly relevant & logically
    considers different perspectives
    with effective transitions. The
    conclusion synthesizes the
    different perspectives to draw a
    final conclusion.
    Essay structure used. Introduction states
    the main argument & provides an overview
    of the essay including the conclusion. The
    information in the body is relevant &
    logically considers different perspectives
    with effective transitions. The conclusion
    synthesizes the different perspectives to
    draw a final conclusion.
    Critique
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    Insufficient reasoning &
    simplistic analysis of complex
    issues, possibly assumes
    managerialist conclusions,
    lack of counterfactual thinking.
    Some connections between main
    ideas, limited clarity & complexity of
    thought, possibly assumes
    managerialist conclusions, lack of
    counter factual thinking.
    Generally demonstrates reasonable
    relationships among ideas,
    demonstrates some counter factual
    thinking.
    Adequately evaluates information
    gathered, questions taken-forgranted
    (especially managerialist)
    assumptions, demonstrates
    relationships amongst ideas,
    considers various (stakeholder)
    perspectives.
    Skillfully evaluates information gathered,
    questions taken-for-granted (especially
    managerialist) assumptions, demonstrates
    relationships amongst ideas, considers
    various (stakeholder) perspectives
    Understandi
    ng & Content
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    Unsatisfactory understanding
    & engagement with course
    materials. Content unclear;
    lapses in coherence OR has
    no relation to writing task;
    offers simplistic, undeveloped
    support for ideas. Poor use of
    primary & secondary sources.
    Poor understanding & engagement
    with course materials. Use of course
    content is somewhat vague OR only
    loosely related to the writing task; at
    times may be off topic OR too broad
    with limited support. Poor use of
    primary & secondary sources.
    Good general understanding &
    engagement with course materials. Use
    of course content is mostly accurate &
    fairly clear; demonstrates solid but less
    accurate reasoning; contains some
    appropriate details and/or examples.
    Good use of primary & secondary
    sources.
    Mostly sound understanding &
    engagement with course materials.
    Use of course content is accurate,
    focused, & consistent; exhibits
    control in development of ideas;
    unified with a fresh insight.
    Excellent use of primary &
    secondary sources.
    Excellent understanding & engagement with
    course materials. Use of course content is
    accurate, focused, & consistent; exhibits
    control in development of ideas; unified with
    a fresh insight. Excellent use of primary &
    secondary sources.
    Academic
    English
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    Sentences sound awkward,
    are distractingly repetitive, or
    are difficult to understand.
    Paragraphs are poorly
    structured & hence are often
    too short or too long.
    Numerous errors in grammar,
    &/or spelling that interfere with
    understanding.
    Sentences are generally well
    constructed, but have a similar
    structure &/or length. Paragraphs
    are generally well structured. The
    author makes several errors in
    grammar, syntax, mechanics, &/or
    spelling that interfere with
    understanding.
    Sentences are generally well
    constructed & have varied structure &
    length. Paragraphs are generally well
    structured. The author makes a few
    errors in grammar, syntax, mechanics,
    &/or spelling, but they do not interfere
    with understanding.
    Sentences are mostly well
    constructed & have varied
    structure & length. Paragraphs are
    well structured with topic,
    supporting & concluding
    sentences. The author makes no
    errors in grammar, mechanics,
    &/or spelling.
    All sentences are well constructed & have
    varied structure & length. Paragraphs are
    well structured with topic, supporting &
    concluding sentences. The author makes no
    errors in grammar, mechanics, &/or spelling.
    19
    References
    14%
    4.9 Marks
    Essay is not referenced
    according to Harvard UTS
    conventions, possibly
    footnotes are used instead.
    Essay is mostly referenced according
    to Harvard UTS conventions: (i.e.)
    many mistakes with in-text citations.
    Reference list is
    incomplete/improperly formatted.
    Possibly some references missing
    from list.
    Essay is generally referenced
    according to Harvard UTS conventions:
    (i.e.) several mistakes with in-text
    citations indicating confusion regarding
    providing of page numbers, citing of
    secondary sources, when to use (and
    or &) etc. Reference list is complete,
    properly formatted & presented
    alphabetically with a handing indent.
    Essay is mostly referenced
    according to Harvard UTS
    conventions: (i.e.) In-text citations
    are placed in parentheses after the
    sentence or part thereof that they
    support; page numbers are only
    provided for direct quotes; long
    quotes (30 words) are presented
    as a separate indented paragraph.
    Reference list is complete, properly
    formatted & presented
    alphabetically with a hanging
    indent.
    Essay is referenced according to Harvard
    UTS conventions: (i.e.) In-text citations are
    placed in parentheses after the sentence or
    part thereof that they support; page
    numbers are only provided for direct quotes;
    long quotes (30 words) are presented as a
    separate indented paragraph. Reference list
    is complete, properly formatted & presented
    alphabetically with a hanging indent.
    Formatting &
    presentation
    8%
    2.8 Marks
    Essay looks untidy & does not
    follow formatting guidelines.
    Essay looks fairly neat, but violates
    many assignment formatting
    guidelines.
    Essay looks neat, but violates a few of
    the assignment formatting guidelines.
    Essay is neat, professional &
    mostly respects the assessment
    formatting guidelines: within the
    word limit, printed on single sided
    A4 paper, has essay question
    reproduced at top of first page, left
    aligned text, 12 point font, double
    spacing, 4 cm margins, numbered
    pages.
    Essay is neat & professional & strictly
    respects the assessment formatting
    guidelines: within the word limit, printed on
    single sided A4 paper, has essay question
    reproduced at top of first page, left aligned
    text, 12 point font, double spacing, 2 to 4 cm
    margins, numbered pages.
    Reflections
    on Essay 1
    feedback
    8%
    2.8 Marks
    Minimal reflection &
    application of feedback,
    repeated mistakes from 1st
    essay.
    Overall good reflection & application
    of feedback, some mistakes repeated
    from 1st essay.
    Good reflection & application of
    feedback, correction of many mistakes
    from 1st essay.
    Excellent reflection, application of
    feedback & correction of most
    mistakes from 1st essay.
    Excellent reflection & application of
    feedback, no mistakes repeated from 1st
    essay.
    Total: 100% (Grade out of 35)
    20
    ASSIGNMENT 1 – GROUP COVER SHEET
    21129 –Managing People and Organisations
    The group’s name: _______________________________________________
    Tutor’s name: _______________________________________________
    Class date and time: ______________________________________________
    Please have each member of the team read, complete and sign this form. The team must decide if each
    person contributed fully to the assignment. This includes: attending meetings, providing information as
    requested, completing tasks as expected, contributing equally to the projects outcomes, and so on.
    For example: Let’s say John is a member of the group and he did all the tasks required, contributed
    equally and fairly, then he would be allocated 100% of the marks. If all group members also contributed
    equally, then each person is allocated 100% of the final mark. However, let’s say John hardly turned up,
    rarely responded to the group, and tried to free ride on the groups efforts he would be awarded anywhere
    between 0% to 99% of the final mark depending on how much effort he contributed. The less effort the
    lower the percentage of marks allocated to John. If the rest of the group worked hard they would all
    receive 100% of the mark.
    Team member name and Student ID Role: What did this person
    do? (sections, roles etc.)
    % of final
    mark
    Student’s Signature
    Please note that adherence to the UTS policy on plagiarism and truth in writing is mandatory. By placing
    your name on this sheet you acknowledge that you have read and understood this policy and the penalties
    involved with plagiarism (which include expulsion from the course or from the degree and UTS depending
    on severity of plagiarism).
    21129 MANAGING PEOPLE & ORGANISATIONS ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES & MARKING CRITERIA代写