200721
Reward Management
Learning guide
Quarter 4, 2014
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | CONTENTS
Contents
SECTION THREE
SECTION ONE
ABOUT REWARD MANAGEMENT
1
TEACHING ACTIVITIES
Contacts
1
Schedule of activities
Unit overview
1
Student feedback
2
13
SECTION FOUR
LEARNING RESOURCES
SECTION TWO
13
14
Overview of learning resources and assessment
14
ASSESSMENT INFORMATION
3
Essential reading
14
Learning outcomes
3
Referencing requirements
15
Assessment summary
3
Librarian
15
Assessment 1: Case Study (30%)
4
Other resources that might help with university life
15
Overview
4
Details
4
SECTION FIVE
Marking criteria and standards
5
YOU AND THIS UNIT
7
SGSM Client Services
17
Overview
7
Enrolment changes
17
Details
7
Teaching staff
17
Marking criteria and standards
8
What is expected of you
17
Assessment 2: Essay (50%)
Assessment 3: Analysis of Reward Negotiation (20%)
17
9
Attendance and workload
17
Overview
9
Special requirements
18
Details
9
Marking criteria and standards
10
General submission requirements
12
Assignment cover sheet
12
Turnitin
12
Late submission
12
Extension of due date for submission
12
Key policies
19
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION ONE
About Reward Management
Contacts
Below is a list of contacts for this unit. Please liaise directly with your lecturer/unit coordinator
regarding appropriate consultation times. It is usually best to make contact with these staff via
email.
Unit
Coordinator
Dr Ben Imbun
Building ED,G.51 Parramatta campus
& Teaching
Academic
Phone: 9685 9562
Director,
Postgraduate
Education
Dr Laurel Jackson
100 George Street, Parramatta City campus
Phone: 9685 9197
Administration
Email: la.jackson@uws.edu.au
SGSM Client Services
Ground floor, 100 George Street, Parramatta City campus
Phone: (02) 9685 9801
Liaison
librarian
Email: b.imbun@uws.edu.au
Email: sgsmclientservices@uws.edu.au
Paul Jewell
Business Librarian, Parramatta campus
Phone: 9685 9358
Email: p.jewell@uws.edu.au
Unit overview
Welcome to Reward Management. This unit enables employment relations professionals to
deploy advanced practitioner skills in specific workplace and institutional contexts. The
management and the negotiation of reward are emphasised. Innovations such as str ategic and
“total reward” strategies are critically examined. These innovations relate to the key issues of
market-imperatives and fairness, including the balance between collective and individually determined reward and reward strategies related to perfor mance.
This unit will enhance your existing skills and knowledge in employment relations through its
focus on reward management; reward management is a core activity in human resource
management and industrial relations. Typical practices include reward p ackaging, reward
negotiation (collective and individual), reward planning, interpreting the impact of regulation on
reward practice, devising grading systems, defining and determining reward progression,
designing reward in globalised environments, and across country borders. Our objective is that
you develop knowledge of contrasting approaches to these activities and be able to
differentiate between different reward management strategies.
This learning guide supplements the unit outline and is designed to assist you in the unit. It
focuses each week on what you need to do to prepare effectively for seminars as well as the
various assessment tasks throughout the unit. Each week consul t the relevant section of this
learning guide as you plan your work. The learning guide highlights the focus for each week’s
1
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2013 | SECTION ONE
learning and teaching each week, as too essential reading. Our objective is to use the four
hour seminar in a creative and productive way, through a balance between seminar stimulus
material, seminar discussion, seminar presentation, and assessment preparation and
consultation.
Student feedback
Student feedback pays a vital role in improving the quality and educational effectiveness of
UWS units and in ensuring academic staff keep in touch with student needs. At the end of the
quarter you will be given the opportunity to complete a Student Feedback on Unit (SFU)
questionnaire to assess the unit. If requested by your unit coordinator, you may also have the
opportunity to complete a Student Feedback on Teaching (SFT) questionnaire to provide
feedback for individual teaching staff.
For further information on student feedback and to view examples of the questionnaires, go to
http://www.uws.edu.au/opq/planning_and_quality/surveys .
Recent changes made to the unit on the basis of student feedback include the availability of
stimulus material for the Assessment 3 and an increased capacity for students to discuss
context and organisation scenarios in the essay.
2
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Assessment information
Learning outcomes
Learning outcomes for this unit are outlined in the below table. Upon completion of this unit,
students will be able to:
1.
Contrast, analyse and utilise the research literature to facilitate the analysis of
reward management.
2.
Apply multidisciplinary and competing stakeholder perspectives in debates and
analysis of contemporary reward management .
3.
Critically analyse reward management debates and evaluate alternative policy
prescriptions.
4.
Apply advanced reward practitioner skills in both workplace and institutional
settings, in reward design and the negotiation of reward .
5.
Analyse the negotiation of reward and the dynamics of disputes that arise within
reward management.
Assessment summary
ASSESSMENT
NUMBER
ASSESSMENT ITEM AND DUE DATE
1.
Case study (Individual)(1,500 words)
Due: Session 5 (23 October 2014)
2.
Essay (3,000 words)
Due: Session 10 (27 November 2014)
3.
Analysis of reward negotiation (group) (30minute presentation)
LEARNING
OUTCOMES
VALUE
(/100)
4
30%
1-3
50%
5
20%
Due: As scheduled
Final marks and grades are subject to confirmation by the School Assessment Committees
which may scale, modify or otherwise amend the marks and grades for the unit, as may be
required by University policies.
To successfully complete this unit, students must:

Achieve a minimum of 50 marks.

Complete all assessment items (including making a satisfactory contribution to group
work).
3
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Assessment 1: Case study (Individual) (30%)
Overview
This assessment is an individual case study. The response should be written in essay style.
The case study addresses different stakeholder perspectives on the regulation and negotiation
of reward, an issue that we address primarily in Session 2 but also throughout the unit.
Australian regulation provides that the Fair Work Commission is required to review modern
award minimum wages and to make a national minimum wage order. This work is conducted
by the Minimum Wage Panel. The Panel is required to conduct an annual wage review in each
financial year. Any determination made varying mini mum wages in modern awards in the
review must come into operation on 1 July in the next financial year, unless there are
exceptional circumstances.
The Fair Work Act sets out some important process requirements for the review. They include
provision of a reasonable opportunity to all persons and bodies to make written submissions,
publication of the written submissions and a reasonable opportunity for submissions to be
made in reply.
Traditionally these submissions reflect stakeholder views as to the rel evance of minimum wage
regulation.
The Minimum Wage Panel has conducted its annual wage review for 2013-14. Submissions to
the 2013-2014 review can be found at https://www.fwc.gov.au/awards-andagreements/minimum-wages-conditions/annual-wage-reviews/annual-wage-review-2013-14
The decision can be found at https://www.fwc.gov.au/awards-and-agreements/minimumwages-conditions/annual-wage-reviews/annual-wage-review-2013-14-1
Key submissions and the decision have also been uploaded to the vUWS site.
Details
In this case study you are required to select, read and analyse the following stakeholder
submissions:

Australian Council of Trade Unions (pp. 1-22, 88-112)
Employer organisations:

Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (pp. 4-6, 54-74)

Australian Business Industrial (pp. 1- 4)

Australian Industry Group (pp. 25-38, 41-49)

Note: You are required also to read the decision of the Minimum Wage Panel (pp. 1-27,
146-148).
Having analysed these documents please answer the following question.
4
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Question
What do the submissions of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) and
employer organizations reveal about their approach to minimum wage
determination?
To what extent were these views reflected in the 201 3-2014 Minimum Wage
Review decision of Fair Work Commission.
In your view, how do the respective stakeholder approaches to minimum wage
determination align with contemporary reward management?
The key focus in this assessment is for students to discursively appraise the approach of
particular stakeholders, as well as Fair Work Commission to reward management. It is
anticipated that students will use the scholarly literature also to assist their understanding of,
and approach to contemporary reward management.
Students will find references on contemporary reward management identified in the resources
listed in this learning guide, in addition to those identified for Session 4.
We will discuss the submissions of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Australian Industry Group, Australian Business Industrial and the Australian Council of Trade
Unions and the decision of Fair Work Commission in Session 2 and 3.
Students should utilise a minimum of four references. These references are in addition to the
Fair Work Commission decision and the submissions by the Australian Chamber of Commerce
and Industry, Australian Industry Group, Australian Business Industrial and the Australian
Council of Trade Unions. Students are not confined to the references listed in this Learning
Guide and are encouraged to identify their own material.
Marking criteria and standards
CRITERIA
FAIL
PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
Unsatisfactory
performance
Just satisfactory
performance
Good quality
showing more
than satisfactory
performance
Superior quality
demonstrating
independent
thinking
HIGH
DISTINCTION
Quality of
research.
Research based
only on a few or
irrelevant
secondary
sources.
Research based
on few but
relevant
secondary
sources mostly
emphasising a
single
perspective.
Meets minimum
criteria of four
references.
Research based
on adequate
number of
relevant
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives in
general terms.
Research based
on important
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives.
Research is well
beyond minimum
requirements.
Research based
on important
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives.
Research is
significantly
beyond
minimum
requirements.
Knowledge of
/application of
important themes
and concepts
concerning
stakeholder
perspectives on
minimum wage
regulation and
contemporary
reward
management.
Lack of
understanding
of themes and
concepts or just
mentioning the
terms without
showing
understanding.
Use of terms
shows some
comprehension
important
themes and
concepts but
only a generalist
understanding.
Using implicitly
the language of
important
themes and
concepts, with a
good
understanding.
Discussing
important themes
and concepts and
using this
discussion for the
analysis of the
issues.
Excellent
integration of
literature
through a
discussion of
important
themes and
concepts
including
insights to
contrasting
approaches.
Outstanding
quality showing
creativity and
originality
5
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
CRITERIA
FAIL
PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
Unsatisfactory
performance
Just satisfactory
performance
Good quality
showing more
than satisfactory
performance
Superior quality
demonstrating
independent
thinking
Level/relevance of
analysis
concerning the
integration of
stakeholder
perspectives by
Fair Work
Commission and
the
responsiveness of
the decision to the
requirements of
contemporary
reward
management.
Analysis mostly
absent;
emphasis is on
descriptive
writing. Evident
is analysis is
poorly related to
the question.
Identifying
different
perspectives;
describing them
adequately but
not relating
them. Analysis
is only generally
related to the
question but
with key
omissions.
Identifying
different
perspectives;
discussing them
and identifying
the differences
between them.
Analysis of the
integration of
stakeholder
perspectives
and outcomes
for
contemporary
reward
management
(CRM) is well
related to the
question.
Discussing
different
perspectives
critically
integrating the
relations between
them and
extracting
implications from
differences and
similarities.
Analysis of the
integration of
stakeholder
perspectives and
outcomes for CRM
is acutely directed
to the question.
Discussing
different
perspectives,
critically
integrating the
relations
between them
and extracting
implications
from differences
and similarities,
inferring
nuances and
contradictions.
Analysis of the
integration of
stakeholder
perspectives
and outcomes
for CRM is
acutely directed
to the question,
leading to a
consistent level
of in-depth
understanding.
Quality of
discussion/
argument.
No discussion
or argument.
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
convincing use
of arguments to
substantiate
points,
integrating
different
perspectives.
Communication of
ideas through the
organisation,
structure and logic
of argument.
Incomprehensible, poorly
structured;
fragmented
ideas;
disconnected
paragraphs that
do not follow a
clear argument.
Relatively
coherent
argument,
manages to
communicate
the ideas but
difficult to
understand links
between
paragraphs.
There is a clear
structure with
coherence in the
presentation of
ideas producing
a satisfactory
and
comprehensive
argument.
There is a 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 (sound
sentence
structure,
grammar and
spelling).
Incomprehensible due to
poor written
language
competence or
careless writing.
Satisfactory but
with difficulti es
in
communicating
ideas due to
careless writing
and lack of
proof-reading.
Some language
mistakes but
good
communication
of ideas,
basically well
written.
Very well written
with few minor
mistakes due to
distractions.
Excellent writing
which
demonstrates
careful revision
to avoid minor
mistakes.
Referencing.
Inadequate, inappropriate or inaccurate referencing that does not conform to the conventions of
Harvard Referencing may result in the essay receiving a fail grade overall and the possibility of
academic misconduct. Marks may be deducted for poor referencing technique but marks will not
be awarded for appropriate referencing technique.
Mark range (/30)
0-14.5
15-19.0
19.5-22.0
22.5-25.0
HIGH
DISTINCTION
Outstanding
quality showing
creativity and
originality
25.5-30
6
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Assessment 2: Essay (50%)
Overview
This essay takes up issues raised in Session 4 and explored further in Sessions 5 and
Sessions 6.
It asks students to critically assess challenges inherent in reward management. These
challenges which include the financial crisis, the international outsourcing of jobs andthe
emergence of a service economy, have forced organisations to look at their asset bases,
including reward management much more carefully. The literature is filled with debates of how
organisations should effectively manage reward management in order to achieve optimal
organisation performance. Some authors see the reward strategy management in very direct
terms; other authors see the management as more complex. Human Resource Management
including reward management may facilitate strategic options and outcomes for the
organization. However, effective reward management require a knowledge of current theory
and specific practices.
These challenges are complex ones and encompass how practitioners, organisations and
scholars manage the effectiveness of particular practices and approaches. Our interest lies
with reward management. The reward management literature is becoming increasingly
reflective. There is an emerging critique concerning contemporary reward management.
The assessment requires that you read the literature carefully but that you critically appraise
the different viewpoints you encounter.
We will establish a work program for Sessions 7 for students to consult with the Unit
Coordinator about the progress in their readings and their develop ment work in preparing for
the essay. This will be through the supply of a one week outline as per a template that will be
made available on vUWS.
Details
Through discussion and analysis students are required to identify the key elements of a reward
management strategy in a given organisation. Students are able to identify the scale of
organisation, the industry and national context. The discussion should id entify the ways in
which the selected strategy addresses the complexity of reward management as it pertains to
the organisation (employer), individual (worker) and society.
It is anticipated that the discussion will assess the issues that are prevalent in the literature
discussed in Weeks 5 and 6. For example, your discussion may reflect on, and address the
weaknesses in reward strategy identified by Cox, Brown and Reilly (2010). Equally you may
address the implications for reward management raised by Arms trong, Brown and Reilly (2011)
in their discussion of the need for evidence -based approaches.
Students should utilise a minimum of 10 references. The readings identified for Session 5 are
a good starting point. Students are not confined to the references listed in this learning guide
and are encouraged to identify their own material
7
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Marking criteria and standards
CRITERIA
FAIL
PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
Unsatisfactory
performance
Just satisfactory
performance
Good quality
showing more
than satisfactory
performance
Superior quality
demonstrating
independent
thinking
HIGH
DISTINCTION
Quality of
research.
Research based
only on a few or
irrelevant
secondary
sources.
Research based
on few but
relevant
secondary
sources mostly
emphasising a
single
perspective.
Meets minimum
criteria of ten
references.
Research based
on adequate
number of
relevant
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives in
general terms.
Research based
on important
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives.
Research is well
beyond minimum
requirements.
Research based
on important
secondary
sources
representing all
perspectives.
Research is
significantly
beyond minimum
requirements.
Knowledge of
/application of
important themes
and concepts
conceding the
expectations of
reward
management, and
the construction of
reward strategy.
Lack of
understanding
of important
themes and
concepts or just
mentioning the
terms without
showing
understanding.
Use of terms
shows some
comprehension
of important
themes and
concepts but
only a generalist
understanding.
Using implicitly
the language of
important
themes and
concepts, with a
good
understanding.
Discussing
important themes
and concepts and
using this
discussion for the
analysis of the
issues.
Excellent
integration of
literature through
a discussion of
important themes
and concepts that
is key to the
analysis.
Level/relevance of
analysis
concerning the
strategies and
measures that will
facilitate effective
reward
management.
Analysis mostly
absent;
emphasis is on
descriptive
writing. Evident
is analysis is
poorly related to
the question.
Identifying
different
perspectives;
describing them
adequately but
not relating
them. Analysis
is only generally
related to the
question and
with key
omissions.
Identifying
different
perspectives;
discussing them
and identifying
the differences
between them.
Analysis of
strategies and
measures that
will facilitate
effective reward
management is
well related to
the question.
Discussing
different
perspectives
critically
integrating the
relations between
them and
extracting
implications from
differences and
similarities.
Analysis of
strategies and
measures that will
facilitate effective
reward
management is
acutely directed to
the question.
Discussing
different
perspectives,
critically
integrating the
relations between
them and
extracting
implications from
differences and
similarities,
inferring, nuances
and
contradictions.
Analysis of
strategies and
measures that will
facilitate effective
reward
management is
acutely directed to
the question,
leading to a
consistent level of
in-depth
understanding.
Quality of
discussion/
argument.
No discussion
or argument.
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
convincing use of
arguments to
substantiate
points, integrating
different
perspectives.
Outstanding
quality showing
creativity and
originality
8
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
CRITERIA
FAIL
PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
Unsatisfactory
performance
Just satisfactory
performance
Good quality
showing more
than satisfactory
performance
Superior quality
demonstrating
independent
thinking
HIGH
DISTINCTION
Communication of
ideas through the
organisation,
structure and logic
of argument.
Incomprehensible, poorly
structured;
fragmented
ideas;
disconnected
paragraphs that
do not follow a
clear argument.
Relatively
coherent
argument,
manages to
communicate
the ideas but
difficult to
understand links
between
paragraphs.
There is a clear
structure with
coherence in the
presentation of
ideas producing
a satisfactory
and
comprehensive
argument.
There is a 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 (sound
sentence
structure,
grammar and
spelling).
Incomprehensible due to
poor written
language
competence or
careless writing.
Satisfactory but
with difficulties
in
communicating
ideas due to
careless writing
and lack of
proof-reading.
Some language
mistakes but
good
communication
of ideas,
basically well
written.
Very well written
with few minor
mistakes due to
distractions.
Excellent writing
which
demonstrates
careful revision to
avoid minor
mistakes.
Outstanding
quality showing
creativity and
originality
Assessment 3: Analysis of reward negotiation
(20%)(Group)
Overview

Note:
This assessment is a group presentation.
There will be group presentations scheduled from Session 6 onwards (with the exception of
Week 8). These will be finalised with the unit coordinator by Session 4 but groups may
nominate their topic to the unit coordinator in Sessions 2 and 3. The unit coordinator will
negotiate the timing of presentations with groups. It is anticipated that groups will comprise
four students but this may be revised depending on the number of students in the class. It is
anticipated further that there will be a two case studies per week.
Details
Students are required to present an analysis of a reward negotiation, the introduction of a new
or revised reward management practice or a contemporary reward practic e requiring
negotiation and implementation. This presentation should be 30 minutes in duration (excluding
questions). Groups should not incorporate class discussion directly into their presentation but
present material that will provoke class discussion at their conclusion. A member of the class
will be appointed to the role of discussant for each presentation – discussants can direct
questions to the presenting group, and facilitate the exchange of questions/discussion themes
from the class.
For each week of presentation (6, 7, 9, 10) two relevant case studies have been chosen for
students to consider. These case studies are fictional and are taken from the Harvard
Business Review. The follow the format of presenting a problematic through a fictional case
study and then asking experts to comment on the problematic as examined thought the case
study. The problematic is linked to the issue examined in each week’s seminar.
9
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO

Note: Students may choose an alternative case study if they wish. In these instances the
case study should be linked to the issue examined in each week’s seminar – indeed this is
encouraged. If the matter is a reward negotiation it can be an individual or collec tive
negotiation. The reward negotiation or reward management practice may have been reported
in the academic or popular literature. This popular literature may include the popular media.
The negotiation can be drawn from any country.
In presenting their analysis of the reward negotiation or reward management practice it will be
anticipated that the presentation will address:

A summary of the key features of the case study and the problematic concerning reward
management it presents. This summary should take no longer than five minutes of the
presentation).

A synopsis of the advice provided by the expert opinions cited by the case studies (this
is not required where students have sourced their own case study),

The most important issues in the case study c oncerning reward management. These
should be related to the theme of each week’s seminar.

The extent to which the case study reflects or challenges prevailing research related to
the theme of each week’s seminar. Students are encouraged to go beyond the literature
identified for each week’s seminar.

A critique of the outcomes presented by the case study and/or expert opinion.
CHOICE OF CASE STUDIES
Week 6:
Managing
reward
strategy
Only two of these case studies can be selected:
1992, ‘The case of the unpopular pay plan’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 70,
no. 1, pp. 14-23.
1996, ‘Growing pains’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 20-36.
2003, ‘The best laid incentive plans’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 81 no. 1,
pp. 27-37.
Week 7: Ethics
and reward
management
2001, ‘When salaries aren’t secret’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 79, no. 5,
pp. 37-49.
Week 9:
Globalisation
and reward
management
2010, ‘Setting up shop in a political hot spot’, Harvard Business Review , vol.
88, no. 10, pp. 141-145.
Week 10:
Executive
remuneration
2003, ‘In a world of pay’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 31-40.
Spare case
study
2011, ‘The gentlemen’s three’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 89, no. 7, pp.
157-161.
2012, ‘Bonuses in bad times’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 90, no. 7, pp. 153157.
2012, ‘Play it safe at home, or take a risk abroad’, Harvard Business Review ,
vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 145-149.
A second case study, if required, will be made available through vUWS.

Note: Links to the above case studies can be found in the ‘Readings and Resources’
link with in the unit vUWS site .
10
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
Marking criteria and standards
CRITERIA
Organisation of
presentation
Identification and
understanding of key
themes linking case
study to these
themes
Understanding of the
extent to which the
case study reflects
or challenges
existing research
Critique of the
outcomes of the case
study/ expert opinion
Fail =
Unsatisfactory
performance
Identifies and
understands very few
of the thematic
issues. Case study is
poorly linked to
these themes.
Incomplete research
and links to the
material relied.
0-9.5
Order is confusing;
ideas and details not
shaped. Hard to
follow the flow of
ideas. Poor use of
presentation aids.
Poor time
management.
Presentation fails to
critique the
outcomes of the case
study/expert opinion
Pass = Just
satisfactory
performance
Order of
presentation mostly
makes sense.
10-12.5
Acceptable use of
presentation aids.
Kept approximately
to time limits.
Identifies and
understands some of
the key themes.
Case study is linked
to these themes but
with omissions.
Limited research and
satisfactory
understanding of the
material relied upon.
Presentation offers
limited critique of the
outcomes of the case
study/expert opinion.
Credit = Good
quality showing
more than
satisfactory
performance
Order of
presentation makes
sense. Obvious
cohesion Most
details correct.
Presentation aids
are clear and well
utilised. Kept to time
limits.
Identifies and
understands most of
the key themes.
Complexities in the
case study are
acknowledged and
there are limited
omissions.
Good research and
credible
understanding of the
material relied upon.
Presentation offers a
robust critique of the
outcomes of the case
study/expert opinion
Clear direction and
moves seminar
participants through
presentation.
Creative use of
presentation aids.
Very good time
management
throughout.
Identifies and
understands all of
the key themes.
Complexities in the
case study are
acknowledged and
addressed. There
are very few
omissions
Excellent research
into the issues with
clear, insightful
understanding of the
material relied upon.
Presentation offers a
compelling critique
of the outcomes of
the case
study/expert opinion.
Exemplary
consistency, flow
and effectiveness of
presentation.
Excellent
understanding of all
relevant themes.
Complexities in the
case study and their
linkage to key
themes are integral
to the presentation.
Research of
outstanding quality,
comprehensive and
insightful
understanding of the
material relied upon.
Presentation offers a
compelling and
comprehensive
critique of the
outcomes of the case
study/expert opinion.
13.0-14.5
Distinction =
Superior quality
demonstrating
independent
thinking
15.0-16.5
High Distinction
= Outstanding
quality showing
creativity and
originality
17.0-20.0
Arguments build
logically. Conclusion
provokes thought.
Presentation aids
augment and extend
the presentation in
unique and creative
ways. Excellent time
management
throughout.
11
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION TWO
General submission requirements
Assignment cover sheet
All assessments must be handed to the lecturer at the commencement of the class on the due
date. All assignments are to be submitted with an Assignment Cover Sheet.

Note: Assignment cover sheets and the evaluation form can be located on vUWS.

Note: Students are to keep a copy of all assignments submitted for marking.
Turnitin
The Turnitin plagiarism prevention system is being used with this unit. All assessments must
be submitted via the Turnitin system (unless alternative arrangements are advised by your
lecturer) on or before the due date and time.
Turnitin is a software product that reports on similarities between your paper and other
documents. There is a great deal of information regarding Turnitin including an instructional
guide at: http://library.uws.edu.au/turnitin.php.
Turnitin is used by over 30 universities in Australia and is increa singly seen as an industry
standard. It is an important tool to assist with students with their academic writing by
promoting awareness of plagiarism.
Late submission
A student who submits a late assessment will be penalised by 10 per cent per day up to 10
days i.e. marks equal to 10 per cent of the assignment’s worth will be deducted as a “flat rate”
from the mark awarded. For example, for an assignment with a possible highest mark of 50,
the student’s awarded mark will have five marks deducted per late day. Saturday and Sunday
count as one day each. Assessments will not be accepted after the marked assessment task
has been returned to students who submitted the task on time except where compulsory items
of assessment must be submitted. An assessment submitted at any time after the due time on
the due date will be deemed to be a late submission and late submission penalties will accrue
immediately from the due time and date.
Extension of due date for submission
Normally no extension will be approved. Contact your lecturer before the due date of the
assignment for any extension in extraordinary circumstances only.
Where special consideration is sought for circumstances involving more than three
consecutive days or more than five days within a teaching period, students should complete a
Special Consideration Application, available as an e-form via the UWS website.
12
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION THREE
Teaching activities
Schedule of activities
Quarter 4 teaching begins on Monday, 22 September 2014.
There is one public holiday this quarter which may affect classes. Labour Day falls on Monday,
6 October 2014. Alternative teaching arrangements for any classes affected by this public
holiday will be posted on vUWS.
SESSION
PROGRAM SCHEDULE
WEEKLY ACTIVITIES
1
Unit overview.
Corby (2009).
25 September
Debates in reward management
2.
Reward management and regulation in a
changing world.
Watts (2010).
Employee voice in reward management .
Heery (2009).
Reconceptualising reward management .
Lawler (2005).
5.
Evaluating reward management.
Cox, Brown and Reilly (2010).
23 October
Due: Assessment 1 – Case study due
6.00pm.
6.
Managing reward strategy.
2 October
3.
9 October
4.
16 October
30 October
7.
Ethics and reward management.
Lowry (2006).
Essay workshop.
Supply of one page outline through
template made available on vUWS
Globalisation and reward management.
Friedman (2007).
10.
Executive reward.
Bebchuk and Fried (2006).
27 November
Due: Assessment 2 – Essay due 6.00pm.
6 November
8.
13 November
9.
20 November
13
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FOUR
Learning resources
Overview of learning resources and assessment
The table below outlines how the learning resources can be best used to address the
assessment tasks for this unit.
RESOURCE
ASSESSMENT 1:
CASE STUDY
ASSESSMENTS 2:
ESSAY
ASSESSMENT 3:
ANALYSIS OF REWARD
NEGOTIATION
Teaching staff
There are key, identified
seminars to which will
focus on resources that
are key to the
understanding of the
requirements of the case
study.
The seminars will
include opportunities to
prepare formative
material, and to discuss
the challenging
questions raised by the
essay.
There will be
opportunities in the
seminars at the
commencement of the
quarter for groups to
initiate their work on this
assessment.
Library
View Library’s homepage;
The Library Search Box
is a great library
resource that will help
you find information
relevant to the essay, if
needed:
http://library.uws.edu.au/
Use the identified
journals to locate
material that will form
the basis of your
analysis.
http://library.uws.edu.a
u . seek help from
librarians; and/or SGSMliaison librarian.
Textbook
Read the prescribed
submissions and FWA
decision; raise key
questions in the
seminars.
The learning guide will
identify a subset of
resources that will form
the initial research for
your essay.
It is anticipated that
groups will use a range
of resources prepare for
this assessment; this
may include a range of
practitioner
journals/newsletters and
newspapers.
vUWS
Look to the linkages
between contemporary
reward management and
the issues raised by the
FWA Decision.
Visit vUWS.
If you are uncertain
about this assessment
use the discussion board
provided through vUWS.
Watch for additional
announcements &
information regarding
this essay.
Essential reading
Textbook
There is no prescribed textbook for this unit. A compiled set of readings will be
provided.
14
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FOUR
Recommended
reading
Essential readings for each session are identified within this leaning guide, as
are further readings. The following resources all concern reward management
and have been placed on Open Reserve at the Parramatta campus.
Armstrong, M 2010, Armstrong's handbook of reward managemen t practice:
improving performance through reward , Kogan Page Limited, London.
Armstrong, M, Brown, D & Reilly, P 2010, Evidence-based reward management:
creating measurable business impact from your pay and reward practices ,
Kogan Page Limited, London.
Armstrong, M & Brown, D 2009, Strategic reward: implementing more effective
reward management , Kogan Page, London.
Corby, S, Palmer, S & Lindop, E (eds.) 2009, Rethinking reward , Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Shields, J 2007, Managing employee performance and reward : concepts,
practices, strategies , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Storey, J 2007, Human resource management: a critical text . 3rd edn, Thomson
Learning, London.
White, G & Druker, J (eds.) 2009, Reward management: a critical text, 2nd edn,
Routledge, London.
Online
resources
Refer to the E-Resources page for Management at
http://subjectguides.library.uws.edu.au/management
Referencing requirements
This unit uses Harvard UWS referencing style. Full details and examples are available on the
library website at http://library.uws.edu.au/citing.php
A full range of resources for searching and citing re ferences is available at:
http://library.uws.edu.au/training.phtml
Librarian
For assistance in using library resources, refer to the inside front cover for contact details to
arrange an appointment with your liaison librarian.
Other resources that might help with university life
University life
Find out about life outside the lecture theatre – news and events, services and
facilities, career information and more!
http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/services_and_facilities
E-Learning
Check your vUWS sites regularly for unit announcements and to keep up w ith
online discussions. If you do not have access to vUWS please contact e-learning
on https://vuws.uws.edu.au/
Disability
Service
Students with a disability should visit:
http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/getting_help/disability_
services
15
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FOUR
Course and
unit rules
This site provides information on pre -requisites, co-requisites and other matters
concerning how your course is structured.
http://www.uws.edu.au/currentstudents/current_students/managing_your_study/
enrolment/course_and_unit_rules
The Learning
and Teaching
Unit
The Learning and Teaching Unit provides valuable online resources for
academic writing. Visit the Learning and Teachi ng Unit:
Policies
This site includes the full details of policies that apply to you as a UWS student.
http://www.uws.edu.au/learning_teaching/learning_and_teaching
http://www.uws.edu.au/policies/a -z
16
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FIVE
You and this unit
SGSM Client Services
SGSM Client Services will be your primary contact for all student administrative matters. If you
have concerns regarding enrolment, results, fees then contact the SGSM Client Services team.
Contact details are listed in Section 1 of this le arning guide.
SGSM Client Services also organise a range of academic skills sessions for students which
are free of charge. For details of the sessions, please contact SGSM on
sgsmclientservices@uws.edu.au or 9685 9801.
Enrolment changes
If you do not formally withdraw from a unit on or before the census date you will incur a debt
for the unpaid tuition fee. That debt cannot be transferred or deferred to another quarter.
The timeframe to notify of changes for all units for this quarter is no later than 12 October
2014.
You need to enrol and withdraw from units online via the My Student Records (MySR) site.
Verbal notification will not be accepted. Please notify your unit coordinator if adding/remov ing
a unit.
All withdrawals from units must be done online before the Census date.

Note: If you fail to notify Client Services you will be liable for all tuition fees and will
receive a fail-discontinued grade – the onus is on you to correct your enrolment.
Teaching staff
Your unit coordinator will be your primary contact for all matters relating to this unit. If you
have any concerns about the unit, please contact your unit coordinator in the first i nstance. If
you would prefer to speak to someone else you are advised to speak to your Director,
Academic Program. Contact details for the unit coordinator and the Director, Academic
Program can be found in Section 1 of the learning guide.
What is expected of you
Attendance and workload
SGSM has a recommendation that students should attend a minimum of 80 per cent of all
classes in order to pass the unit. Please note that this means 80 per cent of class time, and
not simply signing for 80 per cent of the classes. It is very important to note that at their
discretion, your instructor may deem you have not attended a session if you just sign the class
roll and then leave the class. Please let your lecturer know if you are unable to attend any
session.
17
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FIVE
Students have a responsibility to:
1. Familiarise themselves with the University policies on assessment and examinations.
2. Ensure they read and understand the assessment requirements and note the submission
dates, and seek assistance from the lecturer and/or unit coordinator when needed.
3. Notify relevant staff (e.g. lecturer, unit coordinator, disability adviser) as soon as
possible prior to, or at the beginning of, the teaching session if they wish to have special
requirements accommodated.
4. Submit for assessment their own individual and unassisted work, except as otherwise
permitted, and understand that cheating, plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data
will be severely dealt with.
5. Behave ethically and appropriately, avoiding any action or behav iour which would
unfairly disadvantage or advantage another student.
6. Ensure that they understand the requirements, including timetables, for examinations
and other assessments tasks.
In order to optimise the value of your learning, it is strongly advised to prepare before each
session, enthusiastically participate in each session, and then reflect on each session. The
amount of time spent out of class will vary for each individual, depending on competencies and
proficiency in any area. An approximation is on 130 hours per unit, which is an average of 13
hours per session. Effective learning requires interaction between you, your instructor, and
your peers.
The better prepared you are before each session the greater the learning value from more
focused questions and discussions. In addition, reflecting on what you have learned is an
important process for you to confidently apply your newly learned skills.
Therefore, in order to gain the most learning value from the synergistic relationship between
your support materials and your specific unit material it is highly recommended you follow
these steps for each session:
Before each
session
Read the support materials, notes and answer any given questions or problems.
Pre-read your instructor’s lecture notes f or more detailed comprehension.
Follow any other learning leads from your Instructor including the vUWS site.
During each
session
Enthusiastically participate in the “activities” guided by your instructor.
Contribute to each session with focused questions and discussions.
Attempt any questions and problems shown in your session.
Identify clearly what you know and what you don’t know.
Ask your instructor about any questions or problems from this or any session.
After each
session
Attempt any questions and problems advised by your instructor.
Reflect in action (while doing these questions and problems).
Review the worked solutions to questions and problems.
Reflect on action (after you have done these questions and problems).
Identify clearly what you know and what you don’t know.
Special requirements
There are no essential or special requirements for this unit.
18
200721 REWARD MANAGEMENT (PG)
QUARTER 4, 2014 | SECTION FIVE
Key policies
The University has a number of policies that relate to teaching and learning. Important policies
that affect students include:

Assessment Policy

Code of Conduct

Disability Policy

Email Policy

Examinations Policy

Library Loans Policy

Misconduct – Student Academic Misconduct Policy

Misconduct – Student Non-Academic Misconduct Policy

Occupational Health and Safety Guidelines and Procedures

Occupational Health and Safety Policy

Respect and Inclusion in Learning and Working Policy

Review of Grade Policy

Special Consideration Policy
These policies can be located online at http://policies.uws.edu.au/. There are two policies that
relate to misconduct – academic and non-academic misconduct. Breaches of these policies
can have very serious consequences. It is essential that you are fami liar with these policies
and how to avoid misconduct of any type .
19