Assessment Instruction and guidelines

Assessment Instruction and guidelines

The assignment is to write an individual essay, accounting for 35% of the grade. The essay should be around 2,500 words +/-10% with some flexibility. Chicago 17B referencing should be used with accurate citations. The focus is on reflection on analyzing personal strengths and weaknesses as a manager within the Quinn Competing Values Framework (CVF); both quadrants and competencies within the quadrants. You do not need to provide a critical analysis of their strengths and weaknesses against every competency only those considered relevant in undertaking the critical analysis. This is a scholarly reflection as such, the analysis and discussion must be supported with reference to the literature. The essay should discuss competencies, drawing on academic references from 10 peer-reviewed sources. While other sources like articles from McKenzie, Forbes, Boston Consulting, Harvard Business Review, etc., can be used but it should not be counted among the 10 peer-reviewed references.

The goal is to examine managerial skills, such as conflict resolution, negotiations, team management, and goal setting, rooted in literature and personal experiences. The paper should maintain a similarity index below 10%. It is important to have a well-organized literature search and referencing and more emphasis should be given to it. The essay should not just tell stories but should integrate literature and models to provide a comprehensive understanding of managerial competencies. The essay should integrate both first-person narrative and third-person analysis, discussing how one's strengths and weaknesses align with the managerial competencies outlined in the literature with a clear argument. Additionally, it should avoid excessive focus on the validity and reliability of measurement instruments, and instead, concentrate on practical application and reflection. The structure should include an introduction, personal background, inherent strengths, competencies to develop, and a conclusion. The rubric is crucial for guidance.

-58293026098500The Quinn Competency framework

MGMT5023: ASSESSMENT 1 RUBRIC

Category Fail < 50 Pass 50 - 59 Credit 60-69 Distinction 70-79 HD 80 -100 Mark

Identification of

issues (Discipline

Knowledge and

Skills Standard) Inadequately identifies and analyses key concepts. Where applicable, does not identify relevant models/instruments Identifies and analyses the most significant key concepts. Where applicable, identifies relevant models/instruments Identifies and analyses key concepts with adequate reference to the interrelationships amongst them. Where applicable, identifies relevant models/instruments Identifies and analyses complex interrelationships among the key concepts. Where applicable, discusses application of relevant models/instruments. Identifies and analyses deep and complex interrelationships among the key concepts. Where applicable, identifies expanded application of relevant models/instruments 25%

Content Development Did not use adequate appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas within the context of the discipline Uses some appropriate and relevant content to develop ideas within the context of the discipline. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas within the context of the discipline. Uses appropriate and relevant content to fully explore ideas within the context of the discipline. Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate persuasive mastery of the subject. 25%

Critical Thinking:

Summary and Conclusions

Clear The evaluations are vague.

Conclusions are not logically supported by the evidence and/or process of analysis. The evaluations are sound, generally clear and relevant.

Few conclusions are generally supported by the evidence and/or the process of analysis. Thee valuations are competent and relevant.

Conclusions are generally supported by the evidence and/or the process of analysis The evaluations are proficient relevant, specific and organised.

Most conclusions are logically supported by the evidence and/or the process of analysis. The evaluations are excellent, comprehensive, relevant and organised.

All conclusions are logically supported by the evidence and/or the process of analysis. 25%

Written Communication and Sources and Evidence Inconsistent use of sources and data to analyse and support discussion and analysis.

Poor referencing and writing format Demonstrates some use of relevant and accurate sources and data to analyse and support discussion. Inconsistent referencing accuracy and writing format Consistent use of relevant and accurate sources and data to analyse and support discussion. Referencing accuracy and writing format is consistent. Skilful use of a range of relevant and accurate sources and data to analyse and support discussion. High standard of referencing accuracy and writing format. Skilful use of high quality, relevant and accurate sources and data to analyse and support discussion. High standard of referencing accuracy and writing format. 25