Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 1 ASSESSMENT BRIEF PROGRAMME TITLE: BA (Hons) Business (Top-Up) MODULE TITLE: Business Futures (BF) MODULE CODE: MN6062GN INTAKE/SEMESTER: January 2017 (Spring) MODULE LEADER: Dr. Chuma Osuchukwu MODULE LECTURERS Dr. Chuma Osuchukwu ASSESSMENT TYPE: Assessment 1 ASSESSMENT TITLE: Business Futures WEIGHTING: Assignment 1 (LO 1-3) - 50% WRITTEN BY: Dr. Chuma Osuchukwu MODERATED BY: Maleeha Ashraf DATE OF ISSUE: 16/02/17 SUBMISSION DEADLINE: 31/03/17 Learning Outcomes Covered: 1. Demonstrate current understanding of some specialist areas in depth, in appreciating the different approaches to leadership and their relevance, in a multi-cultural context. 2. Critically reflect upon the concepts of 'organisational responsibility' and 'responsible leadership' and their implications for private, public and third sector institutions. 3. Critically examine the evolving and complex relationship between business, government and civil society in the context of ethical and corporate social responsibilities. Maximum word length: This assignment should be completed within a limit of 2,500 words plus or minus 10%. Words in tables, diagrams and appendices including your reference list do not count. You should note that there may be penalties for assignments which are over length.Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 2 Assignment Submission Guidance: Students should provide a completed assignment cover sheet (cover slide for Presentation) with all essential details. All assignments should be submitted in electronic format via college systems on or before the submission deadline. The e-submission system will not allow late submissions. Assessment Aim: The aim of this assignment is to ensure that the student understands and can examine critically the interaction between organisations and their wider contexts for effective management and responsible business leadership. It is designed to ensure that you understand the need for organisations to manage responsibly and behave ethically in relation to social, cultural, economic and environmental issues affecting them. Assessment Questions: Q1a: Critically analyse two different leadership approaches and show how their impact on organisational effectiveness. Support your response with organisational examples (LO 1) - 20%. Q1b. Analyse the impact of knowledge management on business leadership within a multicultural context. Give industry examples (LO 1) - 20%. Q2: Critically examine one ethical business principle and show how it applies to the concepts of organisational responsibility and responsible leadership in business. Provide industry examples to support your findings (LO 2) – 30%. Q3. Demonstrate your understanding of the relationship organisational ethical and social corporate responsibilities create between business, government and the civil society. Support your response with industry examples (LO 3) – 30%.Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 3 Assessment Format Guidance Title page - The details of the Module, student name and ID number. Contents page - Should be provided with page numbers. Introduction - The background, the context and the aim of the report. Starts on Page 2 Key Sections - As many as necessary in line with the questions required of you. Summary and Conclusion - Overall findings of the investigation: the overall picture that has emerged and the implications. References - Identification of literature and other sources used and referred to in the text. Ensure that all references are quoted at the end of any quotations, definitions and web-sourced materials. Submission of a report without references will not be allowed. Use the Harvard referencing system for your referencing. *Do not provide appendices. Plagiarism and Collusion Explained Any act of plagiarism and collusion will be seriously dealt with according to the regulations. In this context the definition and scope of plagiarism are presented below: Plagiarism is defined as the act of using the work of others, intentionally or unintentionally, without acknowledging the source of that information or inspiration. “Even if the words are changed or sentences are put in a different order, the result is still plagiarism” (Cortell 2003). Collusion is described as the submission of work produced in collaboration with others for any given assignment based on the assessment of individual work when one person shares his/her work with others who submit part or all of that work as their own work. In this assignment, it is acceptable to discuss various ideas and concepts with others, but the substantive application and coverage in your submission must be your own work. Guidelines on Harvard Referencing System Any information or work that is not yours needs to be referenced in line with the Harvard Referencing System or else may be considered as plagiarism. Copying from someone’s work can be unintentionally done if you are unaware of the rules for acknowledging and referencing direct quotations. The Harvard system of citation requires you to use a given convention which places primarily the authors’ surnames and year of publication within the text. For example:Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 4 According to Bell (1999), as you write your report, you will use a citation to indicate in your text the source of the information. This is called in-text referencing. The authors and publication information cited within the main body of your work must be listed in the reference list. For example: Bell, J.; (1999), ‘Doing your Research Project’, (3rd Ed), Buckingham: Open University Press. Detailed guidance on the Harvard Referencing System (HRS) is available on the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). For further details and guidelines on Harvard Referencing, visit the following link: http://tinyurl.com/jtq47gm or follow the instructions on Harvard Referencing Guide provided by London Met University Library.Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 5 Marking Criteria 70% to 100% Excellent coverage of the topic with justification. Work of distinguished quality which is based on a rigorous, comprehensive and detailed knowledge base, including awareness of the provisional nature of knowledge and its theoretical, ethical and conceptual dimensions, together with its wider context and implications. Work will demonstrate sustained ability to engage in analysis of new/abstract data and situations, synthesise data and concepts to design novel solutions, critically evaluate evidence and its contradictions, and confidence in application to define and propose resolutions to complex problems relevant to the field of study or assessment task. This will be the basis for authoritative arguments and judgements and work which meets professional standards in relation to a full range of key skills. There will be strong evidence of competence across a range of specialised skills using them to plan, develop and evaluate problems solving strategies, to challenge received opinion and develop reflective judgements and reports. Clear evidence of capability to operate autonomously with minimal guidance in complex and unpredictable contexts using a wide range of innovative and standard techniques will be demonstrated. Outputs will be communicated effectively, accurately and reliably. 60% to 69% Work of commendable quality based on a strong comprehensive/detailed knowledge base for the field of study, including an assured grasp of concepts, principles and major theories, and demonstrating some awareness of the provisional nature of such knowledge and understanding together with its wider implications. There will be evidence of considered and confident analysis of new/abstract data/situations, synthesis of data/concepts, critical evaluation of evidence and effective application of knowledge skills to address complex problems. The ability to work effectively within professional contexts with minimum direction to meet objectives and take responsibility for quality of outputs and criticize them will also be evident. There will be evidence of capability in all relevant subject based and key skills, including the ability to self-evaluate and work autonomously with minimal direction to use effectively a range of innovative and standard techniques in complex and unpredictable contexts.Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 6 50% to 59% Work of sound quality based on a firm detailed/comprehensive knowledge base for the field of study and its developing and provisional nature, including a good grasp of current theories and issues both abstract and practical, together with the ability to organise and communicate effectively. The work may be rather standard and limited in its insight/theoretical grasp or depth, but will be mostly accurate and provide some evidence of the ability to analyse the new or abstract, synthesise data/concepts, critically evaluate and apply appropriate methods/techniques, with minimal guidance. There will be no serious omissions or inaccuracies and there will be capability in professional contexts. There will be good evidence of ability to take responsibility for own learning, some capability to challenge received opinion and make use of a range of resources to form judgements. Evidence of the ability to operate with autonomy in complex and unpredictable situations, selecting and applying appropriate techniques will be demonstrated within limits. There will be competence in relevant key skills. 40% to 49% Work of broadly satisfactory quality based on a knowledge base which is coherent and of appropriate depth/detail for the field of study, including an awareness of current theories and issues and some key theories, appropriately presented and organised. However, work will be primarily derivative, with limited evidence of autonomous/creative analysis, synthesis, and evaluation or application. Although there will be limits to knowledge and intellectual skills, such that work may contain omissions, there will be some evidence of an ability to deploy established techniques of analysis and enquiry, sound conceptual understanding and capacity to manage own learning and communicate effectively and appropriately. There will be some evidence of operating with autonomy in predictable contexts, but less evidence of ability to operate in more complex or unpredictable situations. However, an ability to select and apply a variety of standard and possible innovative techniques, and to meet threshold standards of competence in relevant key skills, will be demonstrated. 35% to 39% Work which indicates some evidence of a systematic and coherent engagement with key aspects of the field of study, including familiarity with current scholarship, and evidence of ability to utilise specialised skills, but which also contains significant limitations in understanding or knowledge, such that there is insufficient evidence of e.g. the ability to sustain valid argument, critically evaluate evidence from a range of sources, effectively communicate complex ideas to different audiences, transfer or apply skills to solve problems in relation to threshold standards of competence.Programme validated by London Metropolitan University. 7 0% to 34% Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in relation to one or more areas of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills. It may address the assessment task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with some of the subject matter, but such satisfactory characteristics will be clearly outweighed by major deficiencies across remaining areas.