GULF COLLEGE – MUSCAT – SULTANATE OF OMAN UNDERGRADUATE BUSINESS PROGRAMME ACADEMIC YEAR: 2015 – 2016 SECOND SEMESTER FRONT COVER ASSIGNMENT Module Title: Managing and Leading Change Module Code: BSB10178-6 Method of Assessment : Individual Case Study & Critical Review of Refereed Journal Weighting: Individual Case Study 60% Critical Review 40% Module Credits: 15 Level: 6 Teaching block: 1 Morning/Evening Session: Both Examiner : Dr. Rowena A. Lunar Additional Information (if any): Module Name : Managing and Leading Change Module Code : BSB10178-6 Module Leader : Dr. Rowena A. Lunar Weighting : Case-Based Assignment (60%) Critical Review (40%) Submission Date : ___________________________ You should hand in one copy of your assignment by the time and date mentioned above to the appropriate 'hand-in location' at the Gulf College. Fill in the front cover (staple together with your assignment). MAKE SURE that you fill in all the relevant details on this form. An acknowledgment will be given to you upon receiving your assignment. This is your receipt, keep it. You can submit work by post, but you must send it recorded delivery, it must be postmarked two days before the deadline date and a copy must be kept by you in case it is lost in the post. Faxed assignments will not be accepted. Assignments must be submitted by the due date. The only circumstance in which assignments can be submitted late is if an extenuating circumstances form is submitted at the same time. In these circumstances, if you wish to request a late submission beyond the coursework submission deadline, you should complete the extenuating circumstances application and submit it with your late submission of work of the Faculty Office within, at the latest five working days of the original deadline for submission. Maximum Word Length: Case-Based Assignment (60%) 2,000 words and Article Critique (40%) 800 words State the number of words used at the end of your assignment. You may include diagrams, figures etc. without word penalty. A sliding scale of penalties for excess length will be imposed according to the amount by which the limit has been exceeded. 1-10% excess no penalty 11-20% excess 10% reduction in the mark 21-30% excess 20% reduction in the mark 31%+ excess the work will be capped at a pass i.e. 40%. NB. None of the above penalties will be used to change a student mark which is above the pass mark, to one that is below the pass mark. Therefore the maximum penalty for exceeding the word limit will be a reduction to a pass grade. Passing requirement 0 – 39% Fail 40% + Pass 70% + First Class This assignment should meet the following learning outcomes: 1. Develop and articulate a critical knowledge understanding and analysis of change and the management of change situations. 2. Demonstrate the ability to apply relevant change theory to practice using appropriate techniques of inquiry. 3. Analyse and critically evaluate aspects of change and leadership theory and practice under investigation. 4. Effectively communicate an appropriate solution to a particular change management and leadership case under investigation. Assessment Details: Assessment 1: Case-Based Assignment (2,000 words- 60%) Assessment Tasks: 1. Introduction – provide a concise discussion on the definition and concepts of change management; background of the case; and objectives of the assignment. 2. Content and Analysis 2.1 If you were a change agent, critically analyse and evaluate the type of change that was initiated by the CEO of Australian coal mine. As a change agent, decide which theory of change and leadership theory can be adopted to drive success in the case situation. 2.2 Critically explain and analyse the miners' general views that initiated change as: a. Threat to their occupational community b. Varied forces of implications for change resistance. 2.3 Prepare an Communication Plan for continuous change management for both employees and managerial performance at the Australian coal mine. Present the plan in tabular form with textual explanation. (Follow the format specified in Annex A) ANNEX A What to Communicate Purpose Frequency/ Duration Communicate to Communication Method Team Stakeholders 3. At least 15 references not older than 2006 from varied sources. Case: Resistance to Threatened Identities: Unexpected Reactions to Orthodox Change by Peter Maclean and Patrick Dawson A case study analysis of the introduction of a new system for appraising worker performance in an Australian coal mine is used to explore resistance and change. The change was initiated by the chief executive officer, who decided, without consultation that a performance management system would be introduced for all underground coal miners and gave directions to middle managers to implement the change. A senior HR Manager at one of the collieries was co-opted to direct the implementation of the project throughout the division. He canvassed the views of mine managers on the topic and then conducted a search in other industries for a performance management system that he could appropriate for service at the coal mines within his jurisdiction. An appraisal system in use in a steel works in another city in Australia became the template from which he selected rating categories and descriptors for use at all the multinational's collieries, including Glenrothes, featured in this case. In essence, what was implemented was not a complete performance management system but rather a simple appraisal rating scheme without any direct links to pay, performance, or other HRM-related outcomes. Employee Resistance to a Managerially Imposed Performance Appraisal System Unexpectedly, vehement resistance from coal miners occurred even before the first round of appraisals. Miners refused to participate in the appraisal process until forced to do so by the Industrial Relations Commission, which ruled that performance appraisal was a legitimate managerial prerogative. Miners then insisted on their right to have a union official accompany them during their performance review meetings. Management responded by insisting that an HR Manager accompany the reviewer at these meetings. Review meetings averaged over two hours in length as miners argued over their scores on each of the performance criteria. There were massive resource implications, and disruptions to shift crews and productivity in general, in having four men tied up in every single protracted review. The introduction of comparative performance ratings was followed by shock waves after the first round of performance reviews. Workforce morale plummeted and performance slumped. Relationships among all of the parties involved in the appraisal process were severely strained. Above-ground managers over time came to realise that they were fighting a battle in which performance was the loser, but they could not understand why an orthodox HRM practice should cause such difficulties. Miners fought against each stage of the implementation process. For example, the impasse between managers and miners occasioned some 10 appearances before the Industrial Relations Commission, where the parties needed outside legal intervention over even the minutiae of the wording of the performance review categories. The company was faced with a dilemma. Why, in the absence of the traditional HR levers of positive or punitive consequences, were miners so passionately opposed to performance reviews? What forces – historical, contextual, political or otherwise – were driving such resistance? Why did employee morale deteriorate after the intervention? The apparent "irrationality" of blue-collar worker response to appraisal clearly raised questions about what managers believed was a legitimate HRM intervention strategy. Essentially, the new performance management system assigned ratings that were at odds with individual and group expectations and demonstrated little understanding of the occupational culture and shared work practices of miners. Miners were offended at being brought into a review meeting where pre-set scores were placed before them. Raters had received instructions that they were not to negotiate over scores and as a result, heated arguments broke out over the ratings, but at the end of the day the miners were excluded from influencing the final score. This they deeply resented, as the following miner's comments illustrate: The problem I had with it (the rating process) was that before you went into that room they had already worked out what you were (your score). That's the biggest issue I had with it. You were rated before you go in there and no matter what you say, they are not changing your rating! (Longwall operator 3). Some of the stories that emerged position miners as the victims of a long history of managerial injustice. One such example from an old-timer demonstrates this mode of storytelling. Here the miner bemoans the erosion of working conditions which they had fought so hard to win, yet claims the real problem is lack of a managerial respect for their workers. I think the coal mining industry, compared to what we used to have, has been already wrecked. We fought and went on strike to get the conditions we have now – hours, conditions and so on. (Now) they're taking it all back (from us). The violation miners describe is not just that conditions are being encoded. More importantly, in the context of this interview, miners feel the appraisal process confirms their fears that they are being used and abused. They position themselves as the "city rags "of management, rather than as dignified miners who are respected and appreciated. In this account, considerable identity work is being performed to redress what they see as the undermining of their worth by the appraisal process. Not only miners feel that their pays and benefits were being encoded. Some miners expressed concerns with safety. Recounting sources of ratings rewarded workers who cut corners with safety. Recounting stories of rating injustices involving safety breaches was an effective discursive device in garnering workmate and union support: We got some blokes – we got one fella there – you got no idea how he works, but he's downright dangerous! They are saying, "hey look at all the work he's doing", but they, he hasn't killed himself, let alone anyone else, that's a miracle! He cuts all the corners and they love him! (Interview 47, longwall miner 11). The appeal to safety concerns in this account also serves as a legitimating device. These "war stories" told by miners served a number of purposes: they positioned miners as undeserving victims; they help make sense of what, to miners, was an intrinsically flawed system; and they apportioned blame away from themselves towards a (sometimes) malevolent management. They also highlight the injustice of judgments by those deemed as "outside" of the occupational community of miners who work together in the mine. One of the miners, with considerable pleasure told the story of how he had argued with his manager with his appraisal and demanded an increase in his appraisal score. He felt quite heroic when his assertiveness was rewarded: We they printed me this score, and the first time I saw it, and the first time I saw it, I threw it across the table at my boss and said, "You're completely out of touch! This is not correct. This is wrong here what you've got here. You contradict yourself. You say one thing here; (now) look at this (points to document) two pages later. I said "You owe me five points here…He listened to about three of them and he said, "Stop! Stop! I'll give you two." And he liquid papered two in front of me…..and he changed them and said, "is that ok?' And I said, "That will do." I felt like it was a game – the liquid paper thing – "Ok, I'll make you a B". It's bullshit. It's not a proper evaluation. Not by a long shot! (Interview 24, coal clearance electrician 2) The majority of tales at Glenrothes Colliery were in the context of men risking their lives for each other in the difficult conditions underground. Qualities of courage, loyalty and mate ship are what gave meaning to their working lives. These qualities were essential elements in their shared identities as miners. Anger was generated against those who challenged these heroic qualities, especially when the source is a misinformed "tea-sipping management" whose members rarely ventured underground. Reconfiguring Performance: Miners' Reactive Adjustments to Change Consistently, miners at Glenrothes interpreted appraisal as a critical, judgmental message from dominant coalitions of accountants and managerial "others" that they needed to "lit their game." They conversed among themselves about the negatives of the appraisal messages; managers often commented about how miners completely missed the positives in their messages and just dwelt on the negatives. Given the breaches of identity occasioned by the appraisal message, miners employed "war stories" of appraisals as a form of subversion and resistance. One electrician, for example, told the following story about himself: I hate to say this – it's probably being very negative – but I looked at the chaps that scored higher than me (and thought), if that's what they want. I will be more like them, and I have believe it or not – don't put my name to this – but I have slackened off because I realize that's what they want you to work "smarter not harder" so, OK, I will play their little game. This electrician stories himself as the victim of negative appraisal, an undeserving recipient, unfairly criticized for exerting extra effort to get more work done. By simple cause and effect logic, he now constructs himself in a defensive position as one not caring about the work (bad luck!), but at the same he justifies his approach, as revealed by his preamble to the story (I hate to say this and believe it or not….and having to play their little game). On another occasion a miner recounted how he had been "marked down" because he had taken time off twice during the last year due to illness. He was particularly galled because previously he had not taken a day off in four years yet his previous track record was disregarded. In our analyses of miners' stories what is interesting is how what was seen as a fairly orthodox change resulted in unexpected reactions from miners. Managers failed to understand the importance of work practices and the culture in creating and sustaining miner identities and the legitimating of existing relations between managers and workers. The prerogative of managers to manage was used to legitimate managerial action and through endorsement by the Industrial Relations Commission, further isolated miners and generated distrust and resentment. Miners viewed this imposition as an assault on their dignity and an affront to their identities as miners. In their eyes, this formal legitimation of management had broken normative expectations and delegitimized existing working relationships. A clear divide was articulated between 'us' and 'them' and the legitimacy of above-ground managers to rate accomplishments underground was questioned. In other words, whilst the legitimacy of management was formally endorsed it was no longer accepted by miners who questioned their competency and viewed managerial evaluations as subjective, discriminatory, lacking substance (being based on limited understanding of what work individuals actually did) and reeking of favouritism. Miners saw the absurdity of individual ratings in what is essentially an integrated team operation. To provide some members of a crew with good ratings while excluding other members of the same crew performing the same work seemed at odds with the realities of the job. You got the methane drainage blokes – two of them sat on the drilling rig year after year. One done [sic] the driving, the next day the other bloke done the driving, the other bloke done the drilling. And this bloke got an A and he got a C. It was just insane! [Development panel miner #4] Conclusion: Resistance to Change in Context The identities of miners are formed, developed and revised within a broader community context of what it means to be a miner (occupational communities) as well as within local work environments (the workplace culture associated with mining activities at Dover Colliery). We have sought to demonstrate how new change initiatives, even those accepted as part of orthodox change, can have seriously negative consequences on employees when applied without a careful consideration of the historical, political and social contexts in which employees develop their sense of worth in the workplace. These managerially imposed performance ratings severely violated miners' pre-existing occupational identity. Whether intentional or not, these appraisals threatened to accomplish what Knights (1990:311) terms the individualization of the worker. Transgressions against miners' identities set off a complex set of reactions in which miners' stories of the appraisal process provide insight into their emotional states and the coping mechanisms they brought into service to defend their identities from the unwelcome interventions of management. We illustrate how an analysis of miners' stories sheds light on how stories were used as a way of channelling discontent into defiance. Spaces for resistance to identity regulation were prised open through these emergent strategies which miners employed to combat attempts to manage the culture of the Dover Colliery. For example, some of the stories which miners told, especially those highlighting managerial incompetence, provided a key source of resistance. Perpetrators of identity violations received their comeuppance as miners appropriated their methods to turn the tables back on them. Indeed, much of the rough talk and masculine humour observed during mine visits was at the expense of above-ground managers. Miners' masculine humour was strategically employed against managers in the ongoing struggle over appraisal. As Mumby (2004:244`, emphasis in original) observes, 'organizational storytelling is a discursive site par excellence for the critical analysis of the dialectic of control and resistance', and as our analyses highlights, stories were used to resist and reconstitute identities legitimation battles between managers and workers. Assignment Assessment Criteria Topic Description Weight Introduction Define & discuss change management Background of the case Objectives of the Assignment 15 Content and Analysis 1. Critical analysis and evaluation of change initiated by the CEO of the Australian coal mine with relevant application of change and leadership theory 2. Critical explanation and analyses of miners' general views, in terms of: a. Threat to their occupational community (10 Marks) b. Implicative forces for change resistance(10 marks) 3. Preparation of Communication Plan for continuous change management for both employees and managerial performance at Australian coal mine with tabular format and textual explanation. 20 20 20 Conclusion Conclude the analysis by reviewing findings and emphasising what should be done differently in the case. 15% Referencing Implementation of Harvard Referencing (minimum of 15 references year 2006 and above from varied sources). 10% Total 100% Assessment 2: Refereed Article on Change Management (800 words- 40%) Assignment Tasks (Article Critique) 1. Select theories/concepts of leading and managing change that are applicable to the article with articulated critical understanding. 2. Make a critical review of the article. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the opinions of the author and discuss both the positive and negative points based on your overall judgment. 3. Discuss your own point of view on how change can be implemented based on your evaluation. Relate your critical analysis to any of the theoretical models of change. 4. Have at least 15 references with year not older than 2006 from varied sources. Instruction: There are three articles provided below with its corresponding links. Choose only one article for critical analysis. Write the title and number of the article chosen in your assignment. Article 1 Leading Through Change by Kimberly King http://www.businessperform.com/articles/change-management/leading_through_change.html Being a strong change catalyst is critical to being an effective mentor. In order to "inspire others to continually strive for higher levels of performance through creative and strategic methods that are always focused to achieving your goals" you must move through the personal emotions that change creates so that you can effectively lead others. Here are some critical suggestions for assisting you in developing strong change management skills in order to assist the organization through transition periods. Communicate upwards, not downwards or sideways During any type of change, it is natural to gain insight from your peers or to speak with people who report to you. When a change is first announced, most people react emotionally not logically. So if you are communicating to others based on emotion, you may be releasing some feelings that are not conducive to moving forward with new processes. Focus your communication with those above you for the purpose of understanding more of the reasons, results and ramifications of the change. Once you have information and feel comfortable with the direction, your communication downwards and sideways will be more logical in nature, rather than emotional. At this time your communication will assist the organization in consistently getting out the right message and helping others through their adaptation process. If negative emotions escape, they are difficult to overcome later and may be detrimental to the success of the organization. Hear others concerns without feeding into them You will be hearing many things during a time of change. Some information will be true, some will be assumptions, some will be misunderstandings and some will be created. Focus on what is being said and understanding the feelings. By asking more questions than making statements, you will be acknowledging the feelings of others without contributing to any true or false impressions. By asking strategic questions, you will also be helping others to assess their feelings and gain new insights. Ask questions Times of change are not times to be silent. It is not advised that you snuff your feelings, simply channel them in productive directions. Ask questions and seek to understand everything you need to know. Do not be afraid to ask the same questions over and over. Management is there to support the changes and help guide your journey to success. Note your feelings and actions Change is definitely a process. Many times change invokes initial fears of inadequacy or uncertainty. Then you may feel confusion and may feel as though everything was going along just fine before and now you feel a sense of disorder or chaos. Then you may experience times of disappointment or anger because this was not your vision or your idea of how things should be. Then there are times of hesitancy as you try the new methods but still feel comfortable with the old ways. And finally there is acceptance. This is now the time for the "new norm". Things start to settle down and everyone falls into alignment with the new plan. Understand the stages of your feelings and ensure that you are moving in a positive direction through the continuum. Gather followers Surround yourself with positive influences and those who are successfully finding their way through the maze of changes. Look to them for answers and direction. Latch on to these change catalysts and follow their lead. They know the way. Embrace the opportunity! Change is always a little scary because it is a place of unknown entities. Take time to explore the new picture and find where you feel comfortable in the grand scheme of things. Everyone must find their place in the new state of the organization. Look for opportunities of growth. Take this time to learn about yourself and explore your strengths. Seize this opportunity and look for ways to capitalize on the transformations. These changes may open up doors for you that you never knew existed. Seize this moment to drive your destiny! Article 2 Change Management in Practice: Why Does Change Fail? by Jonathan Palmer http://www.businessperform.com/articles/change-management/change_management_practice.html Resistance to change may be active or passive, overt or covert, individual or organised, aggressive or timid ... and on occasions totally justified. Sadly most significant change fails to meet the expectations and targets of the proposers. The failure is given the catchall name "resistance", yet resistance can be principled and creative as well as from vested interest. Top management is frequently unreasonable in its expectations and time scale, forgetting the process it went through when it decided to make the change. An effective change manager will prepare an organisation for change in the early stages of project definition and stakeholder review, by taking managers through a similar sales process and responding to their apparent resistance: the "creative conflict". This process is likely to improve the project definition and buy in. It will also ensure that it is clear the moment resistance becomes "vested interest". It is unrealistic to expect an independent change manager to tackle vested interest resistance but the change director can use his or her intervention as a signal to the organisation – such interventions should be few but telling. An independent change manager is a cross between a foil and a lightning conductor – the foil ensuring that positive energy is deflected to the right place, the lightening conductor removing negative energy from the organisation. Avoiding Failure: Managing Resistance Resistance is a key element in why change fails. A recent informal UK survey of 120 government transformation programmes identified that: • 15 percent achieved their objectives, • a further 20 percent failed to achieve their objectives but were nevertheless regarded as satisfactory, • 65 percent were unsatisfactory. A subsequent discussion forum on ecademy.com identified seven key reasons why change fails. (The list is virtually identical to one made by Kotter at Harvard 15 years ago). 1. The organisation had not been clear about the reasons for the change and the overall objectives. This plays into the hands of any vested interests. 2. They had failed to move from talking to action quickly enough. This leads to mixed messages and gives resistance a better opportunity to focus. 3. The leaders had not been prepared for the change of management style required to manage a changed business or one where change is the norm. "Change programmes" fail in that they are seen as just that: "programmes". The mentality of "now we're going to do change and then we'll get back to normal" causes the failure. Change as the cliché goes is a constant; so a one off programme, which presumably has a start and a finish, doesn't address the long-term change in management style. 4. They had chosen a change methodology or approach that did not suit the business. Or worse still had piled methodology upon methodology, programme upon programme. One organisation had six sigma, balanced scorecard and IIP methodology all at the same time. 5. The organisation had not been prepared and the internal culture had 'pushed back' against the change. 6. The business had 'ram raided' certain functions with little regard to the overall business (i.e. they had changed one part of the process and not considered the impact up or downstream) In short they had panicked and were looking for a quick win or to declare victory too soon. 7. They had set the strategic direction for the change and then the leaders had remained remote from the change (sometimes called 'Distance Transformation'), leaving the actual change to less motivated people. Success has many parents; failure is an orphan. Very few organisations will manage all seven! However any one in isolation will make the change programme inconsistent and aggravate resistance. Advance planning and stakeholder management will avoid some of these pitfalls. Furthermore, the list is an invaluable diagnostic tool for identifying why (and where) resistance is taking place, giving an opportunity to defuse resistance by correcting the mistake. Conclusion • Resistance can be healthy (a pearl can result). • Unknown, unanticipated, unquantified, unaddressed resistance will always be dangerous. • A badly thought out process and implementation will always result in resistance. • An independent change manager can bring the independence, experience, and objectivity to manage resistance. • A successful change is essential in creating a change culture. Article 3 Moving Beyond Fear for Small Business Success by Michael Keith Clark http://www.businessperform.com/articles/change-management/small_business_success.html One of my clients is in a transition stage with her business. Her practice has become so successful that she no longer has the time to do her administrative work or even the marketing work that helped her become successful. I am working with her developing a plan to hire administrative and functional staff that will allow her to continue to grow her business and enjoy her work life. One of the issues we are facing which affects many business owners is that if she doesn't have time to do what she's already doing, where will she get the time to hire new employees, train them and do the marketing that is needed to justify the new employees? She keeps coming home to a pile of work and it has created a huge block to her growth. We just returned from a business trip where we learned new ways to grow the business and improve operating efficiencies. During the meetings and initially afterwards my client was incredibly excited about the possibilities. But then something disconcerting happened. I've seen this happen before. In fact, it's happened to me many times and probably has happened to you as well. As my client started looking at the work that she would need to do to match the new vision she had, she went from being excited to feeling overwhelmed. This was painful to witness. I want to see my clients succeed just as much as parents want their children to. Watching her, I saw the excitement fade and fear and resistance mount. As we condensed our notes from our business meetings, the resistance became stronger and stronger and I heard resignation in her voice as we talked about what was needed. The list we had created was long and contained tasks that comprised weeks of work. And in her current mood, she wasn't about to do it. As her consultant, it is my job to make this project work for her. What I realized was that she was in the middle of the classic change cycle. Whenever we go through a change, we go through this six-stage cycle. Loss Whether good or bad, the change will bring about a sense of loss of what "was". Doubt You doubt yourself, the project, the facts, the timing—and you try to find reasons to not move forward. Discomfort Or more specifically fear. This is the danger area. If you can't move beyond the fear, the change will be impossible. Discovery The light at the end of the tunnel. Options and possibilities open up and optimism builds based on your new choices. Understanding You now really understand the change and are proactively involved in it. You see its benefits and know its usefulness. Integration The change has stopped being a change because it has now become a part of you and you have integrated the challenges and successes into your life. The critical stage in this process is the discomfort or fear stage. If you can't get beyond the fear, you can't move forward and you will be stuck. I've found that the most useful thing that we can do is acknowledge that we are scared. It's not easy for most people to say that they are scared of a change at work or at home, especially when they can see the benefits that the change will bring. But speaking up and saying that you are afraid is the most important part of moving ahead. You may be afraid to speak out the fear because it may seem "silly". It may be the fear of the unknown, the fear of success, or the fear of failure. It may be a feeling of insecurity that you aren't good enough and the change is going to expose your weakness. You can't hide from the fear. Dig deep and get it out of you. Put it on paper and take a good look at it. Remember the saying that FEAR is False Evidence Appearing Real. Now give it to friends, associates, and co-workers and let them help you. They can give your perspective on the change and how it will help you and how you can overcome the fear. This will also help you with stage four, seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. As the fear dissolves, you will start to see options and possibilities and become optimistic about the change. And now you are moving forward again embracing the new. Understanding the six stages of change and especially the critical Fear stage is important for any business's long-term success. We have to embrace change and be proactive to stay competitive and be profitable. Whenever your business is faced with a change, minor or major, be aware of this and work to help everyone involved to move as quickly as possible through the fear stage and into the abundance the change will bring you. Assignment Assessment Criteria Criteria Description Weight (%) Introduction Brief Summary of the article Objective of the assessment 15 Analysis and Content 1. Selection of theories/concepts of leading and managing change applicable to the article with articulated critical understanding. 2. Critical evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the author's opinion. Discussion of both the positive and negative points based on owns overall judgment. 3. Discussion of own point of view based on self evaluation and relatedness of critical analysis to theoretical models of change. 20 15 15 15 Conclusion Make a summary of the assignment. 10 Referencing Implementation of Harvard Referencing (minimum of 15 references with year not older than 2006 from varied sources). 10% Total 100% Plagiarism Warning Summary • Plagiarism occurs if you use somebody else's work in an assignment or exam answer, but fail to state where you got the material from. • It can happen in any type of assessment where you are given the questions or tasks in advance. • If another student uses your work in their answer(s), both you and they will be punished when caught. • Punishments for committing plagiarism can be very severe. The details Plagiarism is a form of cheating in which students use the work of others and present it as their own. Staffordshire University publishes a fully detailed description of what the term 'plagiarism' means on the University's main web-site under the heading 'Procedures for dealing with suspected cases of academic dishonesty. We strongly recommend that you go and read the full document at the above address. Meanwhile, here is an extract of some of the relevant content. You will have committed plagiarism and may be caught, reported and punished (as described below) if you: • Copy extensively from the work of others (from sources such as books, magazines, journals, web-sites for example) and submit the work as your own. NB It is acceptable to refer to the work of others as long as you do not use too much, and reference your sources properly. If you do not know how to do this, please follow the guidelines given in the document entitled 'Adding quotations and references to your written work' at this web-site address: http://www.staffs.ac.uk/schools/business/bsadmin/staff/s3/jamr.htm • Copy another students' work and submit it for assessment under your own name. • Allow another student to copy your work and they then submit it for assessment under their name This last item is of particular importance; few students seem to understand what it means. If, for example, you allow another student to borrow your work and they subsequently copy some that work and present it as their own, you and they will both be punished even though someone else copied your work. The risks of working with other students Some assessment tasks are explicitly designed for group work, and it will be made clear that a group answer is expected from you. All other tasks are intended as an assessment of your individual comprehension and performance, and group answers are not permitted. In individually assessed forms of assessment your work must be different from that of every other student. Plagiarism can occur in assignments and any examination where the questions are issued to students in advance. In both cases it is possible for you to ask other people about how best to answer the questions or complete the necessary task You should be aware that different modules and subjects may have different requirements. In some subjects, answers to questions may, for example, require every student on a module to employ or refer to the same diagram(s), concepts and the like in order to construct an acceptable answer. You should note, however, that even in these circumstances your explanations of what the diagrams mean, and any other writing referring to any common diagrams and concepts should all be in your own words. Moreover, the situation may be very different on other modules, where the submission of work that has a very similar structure, or the use of very similar materials such as concepts, diagrams, quotations and the like, to that of another student, may lead to you being accused of plagiarism. The picture is complicated and, unfortunately, it is not possible to give advice that is directly relevant to every module you study. If you are unsure about how to avoid plagiarism in any specific module, then rather than hoping and guessing, you should ask for guidance from the member of staff who delivers that module. Our overall advice is straightforward; by all means discuss how best to answer questions or complete tasks with your colleagues, but when it comes to actually writing your answers - DO IT ALONE! What happens if you get caught? Examination Boards may punish offending students in any manner that they deem fit. Typical punishments Boards may choose range from reducing grades, making students re-sit modules, through to failing students on a module or an entire award. The University regards this form of cheating as a serious offence. Full details of the range of likely punishments can be found on the University's web-site under the heading 'Procedures for dealing with suspected cases of academic dishonesty. Please consider yourself warned Managing and Leading Change BSB10178-6 Marking Criteria Case Analysis 60% Student's ID Number: _____________________ Criteria Description Weight (%) First Marker Second Marker Agreed Mark Introduction Thorough discussion on the definition and concept of change management Detailed information was provided in the background of the case. Key points in the assignment were identified in the objectives. 15 Content and Analysis 1. Critical analysis and evaluation of change initiated by the CEO of Australian coal mine with relevant application of change and leadership theory 2. Critical explanation and analysis of miners' general views, in terms of: a. Threat to their occupational community (10 Marks) b. Implicative forces for change resistance(10 marks) 3. Preparation of Communication Plan for continuous change management for both employees and managerial performance at Australian coal mine with tabular format and textual explanation. 20 20 20 Conclusion Conclusion of analysis by reviewing findings and emphasising what should be done differently in the case. 15% Referencing Implementation of Harvard Referencing (minimum of 15 references with year not older than 2006 from varied sources) 10 Total 100 First Marker's Signature________________ Second Marker's Signature_____________ Managing and Leading Change BSB10178-6 Marking Criteria Article Critique 40% Student's ID Number: _____________________ Criteria Description Weight (%) First Marker Second Marker Agreed Mark Introduction Article was summarized concisely. Key points in the assignment were identified in the objectives. Analysis and Content 1. Selection of theories/concepts of leading and managing change applicable to the article with articulated critical understanding. 2. Critical evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the author's opinion. Discussion of both the positive and negative points based on own overall judgment. 3. Discussion of own point of view based on self evaluation and relatedness of critical analysis to theoretical models of change. 20 15 15 15 Conclusion Summarised the assignment with emphasis on salient points. 10 Referencing Implementation of Harvard Referencing (minimum of 15 references with year not older than 2006 from varied sources) 10 Total 100 First Marker's Signature________________________ Second Marker's Signature________________________