Unit Outline*
MGMT8508
Organisational Behaviour and Leadership
Semester 2, 2011
Crawley
Associate Professor Kerrie Unsworth
Business School
www.business.uwa.edu.au
* This Unit Outline should be read in conjunction with the Business School Unit Outline
Supplement available on the Current Students web site http://www.business.uwa.edu.au/students
MGMT8508/Crawley/KU/27.06.11.
All material reproduced herein has been copied in accordance with and pursuant to a statutory licence
administered by Copyright Agency Limited (CAL), granted to the University of Western Australia pursuant to
Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).
Copying of this material by students, except for fair dealing purposes under the Copyright Act, is prohibited.
For the purposes of this fair dealing exception, students should be aware that the rule allowing copying, for fair
dealing purposes, of 10% of the work, or one chapter/article, applies to the original work from which the
excerpt in this course material was taken, and not to the course material itself.
© The University of Western Australia 2011
2
UNIT DESCRIPTION
Introduction
Welcome to MGMT8508! Organisational Behaviour is a social science discipline concerned with
understanding the behaviour of individuals and groups in organisations. This unit will focus on
leadership as a way of introducing you to the concepts, theories and applications of the study of
organisational behaviour – in other words, it is about leading people at work.
OB is a passion for me. This is because organisations are composed of people. The study of human
behaviour is, therefore, fundamental to understanding organisations and organisational effectiveness.
This also means that OB is a foundation for further studies in business as well as engineering,
education, the arts, and physical and health sciences. Not only is an understanding of human
behaviour fascinating, it can also help with your life outside the workplace. This unit is concerned
with learning how an understanding of human behaviour can help improve organisational, managerial
and personal effectiveness, and guides you in understanding, integrating, and applying knowledge on
why people act the way they do.
More specifically, in this unit, we focus upon two main theories of leadership – authentic leadership
and full-range leadership. These two theories are currently the most widely-recognised approaches
to understanding leadership, however, when necessary, we will incorporate other theories into our
understanding. We’ll use these theories to provide a framework for understanding the wider people
issues that exist within an organisation. This includes understanding and motivating individuals, dealing
with stress, communicating effectively, gaining power and influence, developing and managing teams,
and designing motivating jobs and organisational cultures. Throughout the unit, you will be working
towards the development of your own skills as a leader.
Unit content
As a member of an organisation, whether you’re an HR manager, an accountant, a copy-editor, an
engineer, or any other type of employee, you will be working with others. Moreover, you will likely
need to show leadership of yourself and of others. In MGMT8508, you will be learning about
“people” issues. Even if you are not yet a manager, the knowledge and skills that you will get in this
unit will help both in the workplace and in your wider dealings with people in all facets of your life.
3
The goal of the unit
MGMT8508 is a compulsory unit for those completing an MCom and is an elective for many other
Masters Courses. The goal is to use both evidence-based management and self-reflection to develop
your leadership skills and ability to deal with people at work. You will be using this knowledge
continually as you move through the Masters because all aspects of organisations have to deal with
people at work – for example, implementing change requires an understanding of how to inspire and
challenge people; determining a strategy requires an understanding of how to motivate people;
developing appropriate HR practices requires an understanding of how to design jobs and how
people learn; and so on.
Learning outcomes
On completion of this unit, you should be able to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Demonstrate an understanding of current leadership theories.
Understand organisational behaviour theories and concepts in the areas listed in the schedule
of topics.
Master the language and basic technical terms of the organisational behaviour discipline.
Interpret organisational problems in terms of leadership, individual, interpersonal, and group
processes.
Analyse organisational problems using a number of established theoretical frameworks.
Create solutions to leadership problems through the application of organisational behaviour
principles.
Create an action plan for developing your own leadership skills.
Educational principles and graduate attributes
In this unit, you will be encouraged and facilitated to develop the ability and desire to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Master the concepts and techniques of organisational behaviour at internationally-recognised
levels and standards for Masters level;
Acquire the skills required to learn, and to continue through life to learn, from a variety of
sources and experiences in the seminars;
Adapt acquired knowledge to new situations through reflection journals;
Communicate in English clearly, concisely and logically;
Think and reason logically and creatively through both the seminar exercises and the
assignments;
Undertake problem identification, analysis and solution;
Question accepted wisdom and be open to new ideas and possibilities;
Acquire mature judgement and responsibility in ethical, moral, social, and practical, as well as
academic matters; and
Work independently and in a team.
4
TEACHING AND LEARNING RESPONSIBILITIES
Teaching and learning strategies
LEARN, APPLY, USE!
The learning outcomes of this unit, as outlined above, are reflected in the teaching and learning
strategies used. The workshops integrate both lectures and activities. In particular, in the workshops
we will define areas, outline key theories and research in organisational behaviour, contrast
alternative perspectives and identify points of debate. Exercises within the workshop build on the
theoretical material and draw upon your own knowledge and experiences. Experiential activities,
case study analyses and participative discussions are used to develop your critical thinking skills,
creativity and confidence in public speaking.
You are expected to participate in the activities, discussions and debates. You will be encouraged to
ask questions at every opportunity.
Everyone involved in the unit, both teachers and students, is expected to show a commitment to
professionalism, social responsibility and ethical practice. Participants are also expected to show a
sensitivity and commitment to a better understanding of cultural, gender-related, and international
issues.
Teaching and learning evaluation
You may be asked to complete two evaluations during this unit. The Student Perception of Teaching
(SPOT) and the Students’ Unit Reflective Feedback (SURF). The SPOT is optional and is an evaluation
of the lecturer and the unit. The SURF is completed online and is a university wide survey and deals
only with the unit. You will receive an email from the SURF office inviting you to complete the SURF
when it is activated. We encourage you to complete the forms as your feedback is extremely
important and can be used to make changes to the unit or lecturing style when appropriate.
Attendance
Participation in class, whether it be listening to a lecture or getting involved in other activities, is an
important part of the learning process, therefore it is important that you attend classes. More
formally, the University regulations state that ‘to complete a course or unit students shall attend
prescribed classes, lectures, seminars and tutorials’. Where a student, due to exceptional
circumstances, is unable to attend a scheduled class, they are required to obtain prior approval of the
unit coordinator to be absent from that class. Any student absent from class without having had such
absence approved by the unit coordinator may be referred to the faculty for advice and may be
required to withdraw from the unit.
5
CONTACT DETAILS
We strongly advise students to regularly access their student email accounts. Important information
regarding the unit is often communicated by email and will not be automatically forwarded to private
email addresses.
Unit coordinator/lecturer
Name: Associate Professor Kerrie Unsworth
Email: kerrie.unsworth@uwa.edu.au
Phone: 6488 7224
Consultation hours: Friday,10.00am - 12.00pm
Lecture times: Friday, 2.00pm - 5.00pm
Lecture venue: BUSN:G42 Michael Chaney Case Study Room
TEXTBOOK(S) AND RESOURCES
Unit website
Unit materials, announcements and grades will be recorded on the unit website on WebCT. Go to
http://www.webct.uwa.edu.au to log-on.
Recommended/required readings
No textbook is required for this unit.
Your required and recommended readings will be available through the library on Course Materials
Online (CMO). Those that are highlighted in bold below are required readings.
Week One
1. Griffin, M. A., Neal, A., & Parker, S. K. (2007). A new model of work role performance:
Positive behavior in uncertain and interdependent contexts. Academy of Management Journal,
50, 327-347.
2. Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic
well-being: Understanding leader–follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 373-394.
3. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 9–32.
4. Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning
to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 19–31.
6
5. Judge, T.A., & Piccolo, R.F. (2004). Transformational and transactional
leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89, 755–768.
Week Three
6. Maurer, T. J. (2002). Employee learning and developmental orientation: Toward
an integrative model of involvement in continuous learning. Human Resource
Development Journal, 1, 9–44.
7. Jablonsky, S. F., & DeVries, D. L. (1972). Operant Conditioning Principles
Extrapolated to the Theory of Management. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 7, 340-358.
8. Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the
Literatures. Organization Science, 2, 88-115.
Week Four
9. Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Personality and
leadership: A qualitative and quantitative review. Journal of Applied Psychology,
87, 765–780.
10. Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., & Piotrowski, M. (2002). Personality and job
performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among sales
representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 43-51.
Week Five
11. Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broadenand-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56, 218- 226.
12. Hobfoll, S.E. (1989). Conservation of resources: a new attempt at
conceptualizing stress. American.Psychologist, 44, 513–524.
13. Van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999). The job demand- control(-support) model
and psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work
and Stress, 13, 87–114.
14. Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J. I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of
work stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 314–334.
15. Ivancevich, J.M., Matteson, M.T., Freedman, S.M., & Phillips, J. S. (1990).
Worksite stress management interventions. American Psychologist, 45, 252-261.
16. Pennebaker, J. W. (1997). Writing about emotional experiences as a therapeutic process.
Psychological. Science, 8, 162–166.
Week Six
17. Gagne´, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362.
18. Grant, A. M. (2008). The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational
mechanisms, and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 108–124.
7
19. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2004). What should we do about motivation
theory? Six recommendations for the twenty-first century. Academy of
Management Review, 29: 388–403.
Week Seven
20. Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social Influence: Compliance and
Conformity, Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621.
21. Farmer, S.M., Maslyn, J. M., Fedor, D. B., & Goodman, J. S. (1997). Putting upward influence
strategies in context. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 17–42.
Week Eight
22. Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. 2001. The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal
study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management
Journal, 44, 238–251.
23. Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. (2007). An Integrated Model of
Organizational Trust: Past, Present, and Future, Academy of Management Review, 32,
344-354.
24. Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of
organizational trust. Academy of Management Review. 20, 709–734.
Week Nine
25. Burke, S. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What
type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 17,
288-307.
26. Mathieu, J. E., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness
1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future.
Journal of Management, 34, 410-476.
27. West, M.A., Borrill, C.S., & Unsworth, K.L. (1998). Team effectiveness in organizations. In C.
Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Reprinted in C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.),
Organizational Psychology and Development: A Reader for Students and Practitioners.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Week Thirteen
28. Bono, J. E., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Self-concordance at work: Toward
understanding the motivational effects of transformational leaders. Academy of
Management Journal, 46, 554–571.
29. Steward, G. L., Courtright, S. H., & Manz, C. C. (2010). Self-Leadership: A multilevel review.
Journal of Management, 37, 1-38.
30. Manz, C. C. (1986). Self-leadership: Toward an expanded theory of self-influence
processes in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 11, 585-600.
8
UNIT SCHEDULE
Week
Date
Topic
1
5 Aug
Introduction & leadership
2
12 Aug
NO WORKSHOP – case study analysis
3
19 Aug
Transactional leadership: Learning and behaviour modification
26 Aug
Authentic leadership & individualised consideration: Perception,
& individual differences
4
Initial case study presentations
Authentic leadership & individualised consideration: Stress &
cognitive biases
5
2 Sept
6
9 Sept
7
16 Sept
Idealised influence: Power & influence
8
23 Sept
Leading relationships: Trust, support, conflict & bullying
(Inspirational motivation: Motivation & intrinsic motivation)
Analysis of Chicken Run and debates
MID-SEMESTER BREAK
(Leading teams)
9
7 Oct
10
14 Oct
Team case study presentations
11
21 Oct
Team case study presentations
12
28 Oct
PUBLIC HOLIDAY
13
4 Nov
Class simulation
Leading yourself: Self-leadership and skills transfer
Learnings and reflections: Analyse yourself as a case
9
ASSESSMENT MECHANISM
The purpose of assessment
There are a number of reasons for having assessable tasks as part of an academic program. The
assessable tasks are designed to encourage you to explore and understand the subject more fully.
The fact that we grade your work provides you an indication of how much you have achieved.
Providing feedback on your work also serves as part of the learning process.
Assessment mechanism summary
Component
Weight
Due date
Participation in classes
10%
Each week of workshops
Team case study analysis:
Initial presentation
5%
Week 4
Team case study analysis:
Final presentation
15%
Week 10 or week 11
Literature review
30%
12pm, 7 October
Final exam
40%
During final exam period
Note 1:
Note 2:
Results may be subject to scaling and standardisation under faculty policy and are not
necessarily the sum of the component parts.
Your assessed work may also be used for quality assurance purposes, such as to assess
the level of achievement of learning outcomes as required for accreditation and audit
purposes. The findings may be used to inform changes aimed at improving the quality of
Business School programs. All material used for such processes will be treated as
confidential, and the outcome will not affect your grade for the unit.
Assessment components
Assessment 1 – Participation in Classes
This unit is based around active learning and skill-building. As such you can’t fall asleep during class!
Your participation is vital both for your own learning and for the learning of your classmates.
Evaluation Criteria
Students will receive a grade for the quantity, quality and respectfulness of their contribution to the
workshop discussions.
Grade
0
1 – 5.5
6 – 6.5
Criteria
Non-attendance or disruptive
Present, not disruptive
Infrequent involvement in discussion.
Tries to respond when called upon but offers little
Demonstrates adequate preparation
Knows basic material, case or reading facts but doesn’t show evidence
of analysis or interpretation.
Offers straightforward information without elaboration when called
upon by the instructor.
Demonstrates sporadic involvement.
10
7 – 7.5
8 - 10
Demonstrates good preparation
Knows readings and facts well and has thought through implications.
Offers interpretations and analysis of issues (more than just facts) to
class.
Contributes well to discussion in an ongoing way and questions the
conrubtions made by other students in a constructive way.
Offers and supports suggestions that may b counter to the majority
opinion.
Demonstrates consistent ongoing involvement.
Demonstrates excellent preparation
Has thought through topic concepts and issues exceptionally well
relating them to other material (including readings, course handout,
discussions and experiences).
Offers analysis, synthesis and evaluation of issues discussed.
Connects discussions to develop new approaches that take the class
further into a particular issue.
Responds thoughtfully to other students’ comments and contributes to
cooperative argument building.
Demonstrates ongoing very active involvement.
Assessment 2 – Team Case Study Analysis
•
Description
o In week one you will be allocated into teams of 4-5 students. Each team will receive a
different case study to analyse and will decide upon the timing of your final
presentation. During week two you will conduct an initial investigation into your case
study.
o
The first presentation, conducted in week 4, will describe to the rest of the class the
context of the case (who and what are the key people, who and what is the
organisation), and the key issues within the case. It is to be no longer than 5 minutes.
Marking criteria for this assessment revolves mainly around presentation skills of the
team as a whole.
o
The second presentation, conducted in week 11 or week 12, is to describe the full
case analysis. It is to be no longer than 20 minutes (and may easily fit within 15
minutes). The team must also lead a 5 minute discussion with the class on the issues
raised. Marking criteria for this assessment includes both the case analysis and
presentation skills.
o
For both presentations it is expected that:
All team members must participate in the presentation.
Visual aids will be used.
Time will be managed appropriately.
o
The online tool SPARKPLUS will be used to assess individual contributions to
team/group work. You will be required to provide feedback to, and receive feedback
from, your team members. Based on a series of answers from each team member
SPARKPLUS automatically produces two weighting factors: your SPA and SAPA. These
weightings will be used to adjust individual marks to make teamwork fairer. More
information about SPARKPLUS will be provided during class.
11
Presentation Skills Rubric
Content
Criteria
•
•
•
Presentation and Delivery
Organisation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Good
Demonstrated mastery of the content
knowledge integral to an effective business
presentation:
Introduces the presentation in an interesting Topic was introduced in an interesting way and
the purpose of the presentation was explained
way and makes the purpose clear.
in detail.
Demonstrates comprehensive understanding
Presentation showed a very good
of the topic.
understanding of the topic.
Stays focussed on the topic and information
Information was well evidenced and always
presented is well evidenced.
relevant.
Concludes with an effective summary and
Presentation was summed up clearly and
emphasis of the key points.
effectively, with key points emphasised.
Demonstrates presentation was well
prepared and rehearsed.
Organises information logically and clearly
explains ideas.
Adheres to the allocated time limit.
Demonstrates effective speaking skills
(clarity, pace, volume).
Makes appropriate use of vocabulary and
body language.
Uses effective techniques to engage and
involve the audience.
Makes effective use of visual aids and
multimedia.
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Demonstrated basic content knowledge Failed to demonstrate adequate knowledge
integral to a business presentation:
integral to a business presentation:
• Topic was introduced and the purpose of
the talk was clear.
• Presentation showed a good understanding
of the topic.
• Information had some detail and was
mostly relevant.
• Presentation was summed up clearly.
Introduction lacked essential information.
Presentation showed limited understanding of
the topic.
Information lacked detail and was sometimes
irrelevant.
An attempt was made to conclude the
presentation.
Demonstrated ability to plan and organise an
effective business presentation:
• Completely prepared and had obviously
rehearsed.
• Information was well organised. Links
between ideas were clear and ideas flowed
logically from one point to the next.
• Adhered to the allocated time limit.
Demonstrated basic ability to plan and
organise a business presentation:
• Pretty well prepared but needed more
rehearsing.
• Information was organised and ideas were
explained.
• Made some attempt to adhere to the
allocated time limit.
Failed to demonstrated the ability to analyse,
synthesise and report:
Lacked preparation and did not appear to have
been rehearsed.
Information lacked detail and was a bit
disjointed.
Made no attempt to adhere to the allocated
time limit.
Demonstrated ability to deliver an effective
business presentation:
Always spoke clearly and with good pace and
volume.
Used appropriate vocabulary and extended the
audience’s vocabulary by defining words likely
to be new to them.
Stood up straight, looked confident and made
eye contact with most people. Invited audience
participation and responded to questions with
little difficulty.
Visual aids/multimedia were carefully
prepared and supported the presentation
effectively by adding impact and interest.
Demonstrated basic ability to deliver a
business presentation:
Spoke clearly and with satisfactory pace and
volume most of the time.
Used appropriate vocabulary but sometimes
used words the audience was probably
unfamiliar with without defining them.
Stood up straight and made eye contact with
some of the audience. Answered most
questions.
Visual aids/multimedia supported the
presentation and reinforced the spoken
message.
Failed to demonstrate the ability to deliver a
business presentation:
Sometimes lacked clarity and was hard to hear.
Vocabulary was mostly appropriate but
sometimes used words and phrases not
understood by the audience.
Poor posture and made little effort to make eye
contact with the audience. Response to
questions indicated a lack of topic knowledge.
Visual aids/multimedia were either not used or
were largely ineffective or appeared to have
been prepared in a hurry.
Case Study Analysis Rubric
HD
Problem
analysis
Problems & Causes
Problems clearly identified and relevant to the constructs being
examined. Causes of these problems explicitly linked to the
theoretical analysis. Each problem clearly linked to overall
analysis of the case.
Use of OB
theory
Critical
analysis
D
More than one theory related
to the construct is described
accurately
and
comprehensively.
Both
theories are used to identify
problems/causes within the
case.
More than one theory related
to the construct is described
accurately
and
comprehensively.
Identification
of
problems/causes within the
case is based predominantly
on one theory.
Critically
reviews
and
analyses the theories. Either
explicitly compares the two
theories or discusses the
validity of the theories.
Critically reviews and analyses
theories discussed.
Either
explicitly
compares
the
theories or discusses the
validity of theory; explicitly
identifies the impact of the
criticisms on the analysis.
Solution & Implementation
Solution
Solutions clearly identified and Solutions clearly identified
development relevant to the problems and and relevant to the problems
causes identified. An integrated and
causes
identified.
solution addressing all or many Solutions are ‘work-able’ and
issues is developed. Solutions based on the theories.
are ‘work-able’ and based on
the theories.
Use of
The theories used to identify problems are used to develop
theory
comprehensive solutions that include all theoretically-relevant
aspects and contingencies.
CR
P
N+, N
Problems clearly identified and
relevant to the construct,
however there are a few obvious
omissions. Most causes of these
problems explicitly linked to the
theoretical analysis.
One theory related to the
construct is described accurately
and comprehensively. The theory
is
used
to
identify
problems/causes within the case.
Some problems identified however
there are some obvious omissions
or some problems not relevant to
the construct.
Few problems identified or
problems not relevant to the
construct being examined.
One theory related to the
construct is described accurately
and comprehensively. The theory is
used to identify problems/causes
within the case, however, there are
some aspects of the theory that
were not considered in the
analysis.
Only some critical analysis shown.
May implicitly compare two
theories in identifying problems
and solutions (or analyses the
validity of one theory).
The theory may not be relevant
or not described accurately or
comprehensively. Problems may
not be analysed using theory.
Some solutions clearly identified,
however many are not relevant to
the problems and causes identified.
Solutions not clearly identified
or not relevant to the problems
and causes identified.
The theories used to identify
problems are used to develop
comprehensive
solutions
that
include
theoretically-relevant
aspects
and
contingencies.
However, there are many aspects
of the theories that are not
considered in the problems or the
solutions.
The theories used to develop
the solution are not relevant to
the construct being examined,
or are not those used in
analysing
the
problem.
Alternatively, no theories are
used in the development of
solutions.
Critically reviews and analyses the
theories, however occurs to a
lesser extent. Either compares
two theories or analyses the
validity of one theory – this
analysis may be implicit at times.
Some solutions clearly identified
and/or some solutions are
relevant to the problems and
causes identified. Alternatively,
solutions may not be ‘work-able’
or not clearly based on the
theories.
The theories used to identify
problems are used to develop
comprehensive solutions that
include
theoretically-relevant
aspects
and
contingencies.
However, there are some aspects
of the theories that are not
considered in the solutions.
No critical comparison of
theories or critical analysis of
the
validity
of
the
theory/theories.
Assessment 3 – Literature Review
•
•
Description
o Each student will individually pick a topic of relevance to the assigned case study.
This might be, for example, rewards as motivators, self-leadership, conflict in
teams, and so on. You MUST email me your topic by week 4 so that I can check it
is appropriate and that you will be able to identify relevant literature (if you do not
check the topic with me then it is possible that it is not relevant or that you are
not capable of finding enough journal articles to fulfil the criteria).
o
Once you have decided on the topic you need to search for high quality evidence
in journal articles to more fully understand the topic.
o
A workbook designed to help you create a literature review will be handed out
during the first week of classes.
Assessment Criteria
o See the rubric overleaf.
o
Please note, although the first two criteria (understanding of constructs and
collection of research evidence) are only awarded 3 marks each, they provide the
foundations for the rest of the assignment – if you do not get these right you
cannot do well in the other criteria.
Criteria
Understanding
constructs
HD
Excellent – demonstrates a
very clear understanding of
constructs. Constructs are
relevant to the assignment
topic and are consistent
throughout the assignment.
Provides
accurate
and
comprehensive definitions.
D
Very good – demonstrates
clear
understanding
of
constructs,
only
minor
problems. Constructs are
relevant to the assignment
topic, and described with only
minor errors in accuracy and
completeness.
CR
Good – understanding may be
implicit, some problems in one
area.
Constructs are relevant to the
assignment topic, and described
with some errors in accuracy
and completeness.
P
Satisfactory – lacking clear
explanation of constructs or
understanding. Not all constructs
are relevant to the assignment
topic, and/or the constructs are
not consistent, and/or some
errors
in
accuracy
and
completeness.
N, N+
Poor
–
did
not
demonstrate
understanding
of
constructs, and/or limited
relevance to assignment
topic,
and/or
many
errors in accuracy or
completeness.
Weighting 3/30
3
2.5
2
1.5
0–1
Collection of Research
Evidence
Excellent – accessed a wide
range of relevant empirical
research papers. Evidence
provided to fully support
assertions made. No more
than a couple of poor quality
or
practitioner-oriented
articles.
Very good – accessed a wide
range of relevant empirical
research papers. Evidence
provided to mostly support
assertions made. No more
than a couple of poor quality
or
practitioner-oriented
articles.
Good – accessed a range of
empirical
research
papers.
Evidence provided to mostly
support assertions made, but
over-reliance on a small number
of articles. No more than a
couple of poor quality or
practitioner-oriented articles.
Satisfactory – accessed enough
empirical research to support
most assertions made, however,
some gaps or problems with
article quality. Review includes
more than a couple of poor
quality and practitioner-oriented
articles.
Poor – not enough
empirical research and
more than half of the
articles are poor quality
or
come
from
practitioner-oriented
journals. Many assertions
made without supporting
evidence.
Weighting 3/30
3
2.5
2
1.5
0–1
Excellent – demonstrates
evaluations of most research
evidence. Goes beyond the
limitations identified in the
articles themselves. Analyses
research in the context of
other pieces of evidence.
Very good –
demonstrates evaluations of
most
research
evidence.
Sometimes goes beyond the
limitations identified in the
articles themselves.
Good
–
demonstrates
judgements and evaluations of
some research evidence.
Satisfactory – discussion of the
research does not go beyond
description.
Poor – little separate
discussion of individual
articles.
Superficial
description
of
the
research.
7
6 – 6.5
5 – 5.5
4 – 4.5
0 – 3.5
Critical
Analysis
Research Evidence
Weighting 7/30
of
of
Strength of
Argument
Integrated
Excellent
–
Integrated
empirical research articles into
an integrated & comprehensive
argument
Very good – Integrated
relevant empirical research
papers into overall argument,
however not full integration of
all articles into argument.
Good – Some integration of
findings into argument, but some
non-integrated articles.
Satisfactory – Primarily a list of
article summaries, only some
integration or cohesive argument
suggested.
Poor – List of article
summaries
only,
little
integration and very little
cohesive
argument
suggested
Weighting 4/30
4
3 – 3.5
2.5
2
0 – 1.5
Conclusions Developed
from Research Evidence
Excellent – Identified complex
relationships
between
constructs. Conclusions clearly
based on the integrated
argument
and
evidence
reviewed
Very good – Identified some
complexity in relationships
between
constructs.
Conclusions clearly based on
the integrated argument and
evidence reviewed
Good
–
Comprehensively
identified relationships between
constructs. Conclusions mainly
based
on
the
integrated
argument
and
evidence
reviewed. Links to analysis may
be implicit.
Satisfactory –
Identified some relationships
between
constructs.
Some
conclusions based on the
integrated argument and evidence
reviewed. Implicit links to
analysis.
Poor –
Few identified relationships
between
constructs.
Conclusions not based on
integrated argument of
analysis.
Weighting 8/30
7-8
6-7
5-6
4-5
0–4
Excellent Well-structured,
argument
flows well
Very professional writing style
Very good –
Well-structured,
minor
problems with argument flow
Well-written, easy to read
Good –
Good structure, some problems
with flow
Some errors in writing style
Satisfactory –
Disjointed structure
Adequate writing style but little
difficult to read
4
3 – 3.5
2.5
2
Poor –
Unsatisfactory
structure,
lacks coherence
Poor writing style, with
many
grammatical
and
editing errors
0 – 1.5
Consistently
accurate
referencing, only minor errors.
Accurate referencing with a few
errors
Several errors in referencing
Many errors
0.5
0.5
0
0
Written Expression
Weighting 4/30
Weighting 1/30
Accurate
throughout
1
referencing
2
Assessment 4 – Final Exam
•
Description
o The final examination will cover the prescribed sections of the textbook, lectures, and
tutorial material from Week 1 to Week 13, inclusive. It may contain both multiple choice
and essay style case-study questions. Further details of the format of the exam will be
provided towards the end of the course.
Students who require special consideration or a deferred examination must make application to the
Sub-Dean of the Faculty, Mr Paul Lloyd through the Student Centre, UWA Business School.
Submission of literature review assignment
Submit your assignment in an electronic format by going to the Uniprint web site
www.uniprint.uwa.edu.au , then click on “Student Assignments” and follow the instructions.
For backup purposes, please also submit your assignment on WebCT. This provides you with a
check that it has been submitted and keeps a record of your submission just in case something
happens to the Uniprint submission.
Late assignments will attract a penalty of 5% per day (including half days and weekends). This
penalty will be waived by the lecturer only in exceptional circumstances. No marks will be
awarded to assignments submitted after other students in the class have had their assignments
returned.
Papers of excessive length will also attract a penalty. The penalty will be 5% for each 300 words,
or part thereof, over the word limit.
Student Guild
Phone: (+61 8) 6488 2295
Facsimile: (+61 8) 6488 1041
E-mail: enquiries@guild.uwa.edu.au
Website: http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au
Charter of Student Rights and Responsibilities
The Charter of Student Rights and Responsibilities outlines the fundamental rights and
responsibilities
of
students
who
undertake
their
education
at
UWA
(refer
http://handbooks.uwa.edu.au/undergraduate/poliproc/policies/StudentRights ).
Appeals against academic assessment
The University provides the opportunity for students to lodge an appeal against assessment results
and/or progress status (refer http://www.secretariat.uwa.edu.au/home/policies/appeals ).