HRMT19023 1 Term 1, 2017 HRMT19023 Assessment details for all students Assessment task 3 — Written Assessment: Individual Report Due date: 11:45PM AEST, Friday of week 12 ASSESSMENT Weighting: 40% 3 Length: The report should be a maximum of 2500 words and not less than 2200 words (excluding reference list) Objectives This assessment task relates to course learning outcomes numbers 5 and 6. Before starting this assessment read the details and marking criteria set out below. Task Description This is an individual assessment. The report should be a maximum of 2500 words and not less than 2200 words (excluding reference list and Executive Summary) Based on a case study provided you will be expected to present a report containing an analysis of the scenario, along with recommendations for managing the situation. In relation to the case study, you should: • Classify and discuss the type of conflict (and the models or theoretical approaches you have relied upon in making your assessment) • Identify the players in the conflict, discuss their role and possible perspective on the conflict • Identify and discuss the major issues in the conflict and any special issues such as power imbalance, gender, high emotion, race, disability etc • Propose and discuss the strategy/strategies you believe will be most appropriate for the effective management of this conflict and justify your selection • Provide detail and rationale of how your chosen strategy/strategies might be actually implemented given the circumstances you have outlined in your analysis. Evidence your argument with scholarly sources – minimum 8 academic peer reviewed journal articles (no later than 2009) to pass this criterion. General discussion is not an adequate response to the task. Additional Information Some Background Hannah was awarded a promotion to a more senior position in the team some two years ago, much to Jack’s frustration, as he had applied for a similar promotion several times and been unsuccessful. Jack is convinced that he has been treated unfairly, and that women in the Department were preferenced for senior positions since the organisational restructure near five years ago after the appointment of a female Chief Executive Officer, Lee. Around three months of Hannah taking up the promotion, Jack could contain his frustration no longer and said some spiteful and uncouth words to Hannah. Since then they avoid one another. Senior colleagues have tried to assist with informal mediation and despite a number of attempts this has not been successful. It is evident that Hannah and Jack do not have a positive working relationship. So that Jack can meet his performance requirements (KPIs), he needs a specific monthly report that Hannah is responsible for producing, and distributing and this is an additional task that Hannah took HRMT19023 2 Term 1, 2017 on about 10 months ago). Hannah in turn, relies on the team members (including Jack) to provide her with the raw data for those reports. Jack has been vocal inside and outside of the team, commenting that Hannah’s reports are a “waste of time and useless”, and that he can’t do aspects of his job effectively because of the unreliability of these reports. Hannah has strong and positive working relationships throughout the Department and they have advised Hannah of Jack’s conversations. Hannah is extremely annoyed and exasperated by Jack’s comments, as the reports can only be as good as the information provided by the team (including Jack). This is impacting her personal life, as on a regular basis, Hannah arrives home stressed about work (and much of the venting is about Jack) and her partner is concerned about her well-being. At her partner’s prompting, Hannah has decided to speak to Jack directly about the issues between them. The resulted in a shouting match; Jack has continued to make malicious comments about the legitimacy of her promotion some two years ago. Hannah is annoyed with herself (and somewhat disheartened) that she was not able to remain calm when speaking with Jack about the situation. The situation now Roman, the Head of Division, is taking up a short-term secondment with the organisation overseas, and you will be acting in his position for 5 weeks. You are from an entirely separate Division – Business Development and have never met Jack or Hannah in person. Roman has advised you of the latest episode between Jack and Hannah. All the information you have been provided is from Roman based on hearing lunch-room chatter. Roman also advised that he’s heard that Jack has had a number of medical appointments for ‘work related matters’, and stress leave in an option. In this brief handover, Roman asks you if you have any suggestions to fix the problems with Hannah and Jack. You are armed with all the knowledge and competence of your recently completed studies, and offer to prepare a report with an analysis of the situation and outline strategies to implement to effectively manage the conflict. Assessment item 3 – Written Assessment: Individual Report Your submission will be assessed on the extent to which it meets each of the following criteria: Does your submission demonstrate Weighting Discussion and analysis of the case scenario, making reference to relevant models and theories 10% Discussion of the key players' roles and perspectives 10% Identification of the major issues and any special issues, making reference to relevant theories 25% Identification of and justification for proposed conflict management strategy/strategies based upon previous analysis and relevant theories 20% Discussion of methods of implementation of chosen strategy/strategies 15% Presentation, report format, layout, structure, language, clarity of expression, grammar and correct spelling using Australian English 5% Reference sources: minimum 8 academic peer reviewed journals to pass this criterion 10% Referencing: strict conformity to the required referencing protocol 5% The submission will be marked based on the criteria above (/100) and converted to a grade out of 40.