Instructions on Assessment:
Produce a 4000 word report in which you critically analyse the role of Line Manager/Leader and their relationship with the HR representative in the management of people in organisations today.
You must make significant reference to appropriate literature and best practice.
To do this, you should pick one of the topics from across the module curriculum i.e.
Recruitment and Selection of employees or
Management and Leadership of employees or
Motivating and engaging employees or
Employee learning and development or
Managing performance or
Managing and leading change
In your analysis you should:
Define the key practice you have chosen
Identify and critically discuss appropriate models relating to the practice
Identify and evaluate the relationship between the line manager/leaders role and that of the HR representative in the management of people (inc. such as benefits, limitations, clarity, overlaps, tensions, devolvement etc).
The report is worth 100% of the module mark.
Word limits for assignments
The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment. Summarising and compressing the information in your assignment into the word limit is one of the skills that students are expected to acquire, and demonstrate as part of the assignment process.
The assignment must be within +10% of the word-count – assignments in excess of this will accrue a penalty of 10%.
The word count does not include:
Title and Contents page
Appropriate tables, figures and illustrations
Quotes from interviews.
Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
Exams and Assessments/PGBM02-First Sit/2015-2016 Page 2 of 4
Submission of Assessment:
All assignments must be submitted on SunSpace first. A Turnitin Report will be generated, which then needs to be submitted on JIRA along with the original file. Therefore there will be 2 attachments on JIRA. Your mark and feedback will be made available to you electronically on JIRA once the internal moderation process has taken place, you should note that at this stage marks are still subject to external examiner and academic board approval.
Referencing your work
In this institution the Harvard method of referencing is used.
The Harvard method of referring to publications and of arranging references uses the author’s name and the date of the publication. References are listed at the end of the text in alphabetical order by author’s name. The general format of a journal reference is shown below:
Smith, J. (1999) How to succeed! Journal of Entrepreneurs , 1(2), p. 34-56
Author’s name and initials are listed first, followed by year of publication in brackets. Then there is the title of article and the journal where article appears, which is underlined or in italics. Finally, state the volume and issue Number (in brackets) along with the pages where article can be located.
A short guide to Harvard referencing will also be available on the Sunspace site under the module assessment navigation button.
Academic Integrity and Misconduct:
Your attention is drawn to the University’s stated position on plagiarism. THE WORK OF OTHERS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE ASSIGNMENT MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO ITS SOURCE (a full bibliography and/or a list of references must be submitted as prescribed in the assessment brief).
Please note that this is intended to be an individual piece of work. Action will be taken where a student is suspected of having cheated or engaged in any dishonest practice. Students are referred to the University regulations on plagiarism and other forms of academic irregularity. Students must not copy or collude with one another or present any information that they themselves have not generated.
For further information on academic integrity and misconduct see https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collections-8155
Exams and Assessments/PGBM02-First Sit/2015-2016 Page 3 of 4
Generic Assessment Criteria – Postgraduate
These should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working
Argument and Structure
Reference to Literature
86 – 100%
The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also unequivocal evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
The work examined is excellent and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and some evidence of originality.
70 – 75%
The work examined is of a high standard and there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is clearly articulated evidence demonstrating that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
60 – 69%
Directly relevant to the requirements of the assessment
A substantial knowledge of relevant material, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and issues therein
Comprehensive analysis – clear and orderly presentation
Well supported, focussed argument which is clear and logically structured.
Contains distinctive or independent thinking; and begins to formulate an independent position in relation to theory and/or practice.
Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable format
Critical appraisal of up-to-date and/or appropriate literature. Recognition of different perspectives. Very good use of a wide range of sophisticated source material.
50 – 59%
Some attempt to address the requirements of the assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages
Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant material, with intermittent evidence of an appreciation of its significance
Significant analytical treatment which has a clear purpose
Generally coherent and logically structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s)
May contain some distinctive or independent thinking; may begin to formulate an independent position in relation to theory and/or practice.
Competently written, with only minor lapses from standard grammar, with acceptable format
Uses a good variety of literature which includes recent texts and/or appropriate literature, including a substantive amount beyond library texts. Competent use of source material.
40 – 49%
Some correlation with the requirements of the assessment but there are instances of irrelevance
Basic understanding of the subject but addressing a limited range of material
Some analytical treatment, but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks clear analytical purpose
Some attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency, with issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in simplistic terms
Sound work which expresses a coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical conformity to one or more standard views of the topic
A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader
Evidence of use of appropriate literature which goes beyond that referred to by the tutor. Frequently only uses a single source to support a point.
Exams and Assessments/PGBM02-First Sit/2015-2016 Page 4 of 4
35 – 39%
Relevance to the requirements of the assessment may be very intermittent, and may be reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms
A limited understanding of a narrow range of material
Largely descriptive or narrative, with little evidence of analysis
A basic argument is evident, but mainly supported by assertion and there may be a lack of clarity and coherence
Some evidence of a view starting to be formed but mainly derivative.
Numerous deficiencies in expression and presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic or repetitious style
Barely adequate use of literature. Over reliance on
material provided by the tutor.
The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
30 – 34%
The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.
The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the
Instructions on Assessment: