Assessment 1: Individual Essay (20%)

Assessment 1: Individual Essay (20%)

Overview

Enterprise leadership encourages managers and leaders to focus on complete organisational outcomes that maintain and improve overall performance. While enterprise leaders are well known for their ability to build organisations from the ground up, organisational success is often dependent on the leadership approach they adopt. Traditionally, the enterprise leaders primary goal was to generate wealth for shareholders by adopting top-down methods of managing and leading. However, in the current business climate of a post-pandemic era, many challenges within internal and external environments have identified the need for enterprise leaders to consider new ways of managing and leading, creating a shift toward a more ethical approach. As stated in the week 4 lecture: Ethical Leadership, ethical leaders are individuals whose behaviours, values and motives influence the ethical behaviours of others.

Details

In your response to the research question below, you must:

Write a 1,000-word (+/- 10%) academic essay addressing the research questionUse a minimum of three academic sources from the readings and online material in Modules 1 to 4 on the Enterprise Leadership vUWS siteAssessment question What is the purpose of enterprise leadership in organisations?

Critically discuss, with reference to the Week 1 4 readings and online materials.

To answer this question, you mustinclude in-text citations and a reference list at the end of the essay.Your reference list must adhere to the Harvard WesternSydU referencing guidelines (found on the WSU library website).

Essay format (template)

The essay should have a clear structure which includes:

An introduction that:

Includes a few general statements supported by the mandatory readings (in-text citations) about the topic to clarify your interpretation of the question.

Includes a thesis statement that presents your position on the topic; and

Outlines the main points that support your position.

A body that:

Includes a series of logically developed arguments that support your position and

Ensures that each argument and/or sub-argument is supported by the mandatory readings (in-text citations and examples from the readings).

A conclusion that:

Summarises the main points discussed in the body of the essay;Restates the thesis statement; and

Includes a final comment that does not introduce any new ideas.

Cohesive text that aids with the logical flow of the arguments presented.

A reference list which is in alphabetical order by authors last name and includes only the resources that are used in the body of the text (i.e. in-text citations)

Minimum of 3 scholarly references must be used.

A cover sheet for this assessment is optional.

A penalty of 10% per day will apply to any late irrespective of the time of day.

This assessment will evaluate what students have learnt from ULO 1, 2 and 4.

Formatting your essay:

Font: Times Roman

Text Size: 12pt

Line Spacing: 1.5

Word Count: 1,000 words (plus or minus 10% of word count, in-text citations and reference list are not included in the word count).

Essay Paragraphs

Each paragraph in your essay should have a clear structure. Consider the following when structuring your paragraphs:

Include a topic sentence for your paragraphExplain why the paragraph is importantGive evidenceExplain or interpret your evidenceConclude your paragraphProvide a linking sentence for the next paragraphIt is important that your paragraphs are cohesive and consistent with the topic of your essay. Students are advised to spend some time planning your essay before writing your first draft. This will ensure a better outcome overall.

Due Date

This assessment is due on Sunday 27 August 2023 (Week 5) by 11:59 pm.

IMPORTANT

Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is not permitted in this assessment task without appropriate acknowledgement.Seeadvice on acknowledging the use of generative AIon the Library web page.

Working with another person or technology in order to gain an unfair advantage in assessment or improperly obtaining answers from a third party including generative AI to questions in an examination or other form of assessment may lead to sanctionsunder theStudent Misconduct Rule.Use of generative AI tools may be detected.Moreinformation is available on the Library web page.

Marking criteria and standards

CRITERIA F

UNSATISFACTORY

0-49% P

SATISFACTORY

50%-64% C

QUITE GOOD

65%-74% D

SUPERIOR QUALITY

75%-84% HD

OUTSTANDING QUALITY

85%-100%

Application of concepts

(25%) Little understanding of concepts or just mentioning terms without exhibiting understanding Uses terms relevant to the question but shows only a generalist understanding of concepts. Uses concepts with good understanding; makes links with the issues involved. Accomplished discussion of relevant concepts, with insightful use of concepts in analysis. Excellent integration of concepts through discussion of their value, limitations or relevance.

Substantiation of arguments and overall quality of discussion

(25%) Little discussion or argument; simply stating/restating without explanation. Poor use of argument; unconvincing explanations to substantiate points discussed. Minimal but convincing use of argument to substantiate the points under discussion. Relevant and convincing use of arguments to substantiate the points under discussion. Relevant and convincing use of arguments to substantiate points; integrating different perspectives.

Critical thinking and analysis

(25%) Poor attempt to be analytical or critical; strong tendency to be descriptive. Evidence of some attempt to be analytical or critical; but with poor interpretations. Clear evidence of analysis and critical thinking; with some interpretation of relevant issues. Very clear evidence of analysis and critical thinking, producing insightful interpretations of issues under consideration. Very clear evidence of analysis and critical thinking, with insightful and in-depth interpretations of issues under consideration; considers alternatives perspectives with creative interpretations

Identified in-text and referenced mandatory sources accurately(10%) Very little or no referencing, mainly incorrect referencing. Reference list missing/absent. Some attempt to consistently in-text cite sources and includes reference list. Does not consistently follow Harvard WSU referencing guidelines. Identified in-text and referenced all sources. Displays a good understanding of Harvard WSU referencing guidelines. Identified in-text and referenced all sources and displays a very good understanding of Harvard WSU referencing guidelines. Identified in-text and referenced accurately all sources. Includes additional readings. Displays an excellent understanding of Harvard WSU referencing guidelines.

Communication of ideas through the organisation, structure and logic of argument

(10%) Poorly structured; confused or fragmented ideas. Relatively coherent argument; manages to communicate ideas but lacking clear structure. Clear structure with coherent presentation of ideas, producing satisfactory argument. Clear structure with coherent presentation of ideas and comprehensive, well sustained argument. A sustained, coherent and logical argument; able to synthesise and integrate complex ideas.

Clarity of expression (sentence structure, grammar and spelling)

(5%) Incomprehensible due to poor written expression. Satisfactory but with difficulties in communicating ideas. Good communication of ideas; basically, well written but with some language mistakes affecting clarity. Very well written, with an accomplished writing style but with some errors of grammar and/or expression. Excellent writing with very clear accomplished writing style; demonstrates careful revision.