ASSESSMENT ITEM 2: Your second assessment task will focus on the content you have learnt in the second half of the session. This assignment comprises two components: (1) Essay and (2) Reflective response.
OBJECTIVES: This assessment relates to the following subject learning objectives:
1. apply critical and analytical thinking, including a capacity to question existing practices and assumptions, to the study of management and organisations
2. evaluate the theoretical foundations of the fields of management and organisational studies; contextualise contemporary managerial practices in the light of this theory
3. explore management and organisational problems and issues relevant to organisations operating in a global and diverse workplace.
PART 1: ESSAY
Write an academic essay of 1500 words (+/-10% excluding references) in which you critically evaluate and draw conclusions about one the following topics. You will need to support your argument with one or more of the examples provided or choose your own examples.
1. MANAGING CULTURES: Discuss the proposition that what Peters and Waterman (1982) identify as a strong organisational culture will lead to excellence in performance. Illustrate your argument with examples. These include: Zappos, Cricket Australia, Westpac, or the ongoing Theranos case.
2. MANAGING POWER, POLITICS & DECISION MAKING: Non-decision making can be more powerful than decision-making. Discuss illustrating your argument with examples. These include: 2018 Banking royal commission, 2018 ABC leadership spill, or the ongoing Caster Semenya case.
Courpasson, D. & Clegg, S.R. 2012, The polyarchic bureaucracy: Cooperative resistance in the workplace and the construction of a new political structure of organizations, Research in the Sociology of Organizations, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 55-79.
3. MANAGING COMMUNICATIONS: Communication is a critical tool for organisational success. Discuss illustrating your argument with examples. These include: The Liberal Party of Australia, CBA, and The Catholic Church.
Groysberg, B. & Slind, M. 2012, Leadership is a conversation, Harvard Business Review, vol. 90, no. 6, pp. 76-84.
4. MANAGING KNOWLEDGE, INNOVATION & CHANGE: An organisation’s ability to innovate is critical to its ability to flourish in the long term. Discus, illustrating your argument with examples. These include: Chanel, Tesla, and Manchester City (or another Football club). 5. MANAGING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ETHICALLY: Profitability and ethical practices make uneasy bedfellows. Discuss illustrating your argument with examples. These include: Country Road, BP, and Qantas.
Serrat, O., 2017, Proposition 102: Harnessing creativity and innovation in the workplace, In Knowledge Solutions: Tools, Methods and Approaches to Drive Organizational Performance, Springer, Singapore, pp. 903-910.
Format: Double-space your text and use 2.54-centimetre margins. The text should be in a 12-point Times New Roman font and left-justified. Pages should be numbered, with the numbers appearing in the bottom right-hand corner of the pages. It should be submitted as a Word or readable pdf document and have the weekly topic in the file.
References: Your essay must contain at least 10 references. Select at least six sources from the tutorial readings, prescribed additional readings and the reference lists at the end of each lecture (ie. quality academic sources).
**INCLUDE ONLY APPLICABLE READINGS**
? Roberts, L. M., Spreitzer, G., Dutton, J., Quinn, R., Heaphy, E., & Barker, B. 2005, How to play to your strengths, Harvard Business Review, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 74-80.
? Cameron, K.S., Dutton, J.E. & Quinn, R.E. 2003, Positive Organizational Scholarship, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco, CA, pp. 14-27.
? Johnson, J.M., Piatak, J.S. & Ng, E. 2017, Managing generational differences in nonprofit organizations, in Word, J & Sowa, J. (eds.) The Nonprofit Human Resource Management Handbook: From Theory to Practice, Routledge, New York, pp. 304-322.
? Meyers, M.C., van Woerkom, M. & Bakker, A.B. 2013, The added value of the positive: A literature review of positive psychology interventions in organizations, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 618-632.
? Peterson, C. & Seligman, M.E.P. 2004, Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification, Oxford University Press, USA, New York.
? Parashar, S., Dhar, S. & Dhar, U. 2004, Perception of values: A study of future professionals, Journal of Human Values, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 143-52.
? Barry, B. 2007, The cringing and the craven: Freedom of expression in, around, and beyond the workplace, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 263-96.
? Jack, G. 2004, On speech, critique and protection, Ephemera, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 121-34.
? Klein, N. 2000, The branding of learning, in, No Logo: Taking Aim at the Brand Bullies, Picador, New York, pp. 87-105.
? Ravazzani, S. 2017, Communication in post-bureaucratic organizations: Confronting diversity and crisis, In P. Malizia, C. Cannavale & F. Maimone (eds), Evolution of the Post-bureaucratic Organization, IGI Global, Hershey, PA, pp. 297-320.
? Watson, T.J. 1995, Rhetoric, discourse and argument in organizational sense making: A reflexive tale, Organization Studies, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 805-21.
? Whitney, D. 1998, ‘Lets change the subject and change our organization: An appreciative inquiry approach to organization change’, Career Development International, vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 314-319.
? Hendry, J. 2006, Educating managers for post-bureaucracy: The role of the humanities, Management learning, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 267-281.
? Josserand, E., Villesèche, F., & Bardon, T. 2012, Being an active member of a corporate alumni network: A critical appraisal, paper presented to the British Academy of Management, Cardiff.
? Knights, D. & Roberts, J. 1982, The power of organization or the organization of power? Organization Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 47-63.
? McKenna, S., Garcia-Lorenzo, L. & Bridgman, T. 2010, Managing, managerial control and managerial identity in the post-bureaucratic world, Journal of Management Development, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 128-36.
? McSweeney, B. 2006, -Are we living in a post-bureaucratic epoch?-, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 22-37.
? Prasad, P. & Prasad, A. 2000, Stretching the iron cage: The constitution and implications of routine workplace resistance, Organization Science, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 387-403.
? Simpson, A.V., Clegg, S. & Freeder, D. 2013, Power, compassion and organization, Journal of Political Power, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 385-404.
? Zimbardo, P.G., Maslach, C. & Haney, C. 2000, Reflections on the Stanford prison experiment: Genesis, transformations, consequences, in T. Blass (ed.), Obedience to authority: Current perspectives on the Milgram paradigm, vol. Mawarh, NJ, Lawrence Erlbraum Associates, pp. 193-237.
? Birkinshaw, J. & Gibson, C. 2004, Building ambidexterity into an organization, MIT Sloan Management Review, vol. 45, pp. 47-55.
? Brown, T. 2008, Design thinking, Harvard Business Review, vol. 86, no. 6, p. 84.
? Cunha, J.V. & Cunha, M.P. 2001, Brave new (paradoxical) world: Structure and improvisation in virtual teams, Strategic Change, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 337-47.
? Harris, M. 2006, ‘Technology, innovation and post-bureaucracy: the case of the British Library-’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19 no. 1, pp.80 - 92
? Josserand, E. 2004, ‘Cooperation within Bureaucracies: Are Communities of Practice an Answer?’, Management, vol. 7, no. 3,pp. 307-339.
? Josserand, E., Teo, S. & Clegg, S. 2006, From bureaucratic to post-bureaucratic: The difficulties of transition, Journal of Organizational Change Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 54-64.
? Kim, B., Kim, E., Kim, Y. & Cho, J.Y. 2018, Where to find innovative ideas: interdependence-building mechanisms and boundary spanning exploration, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 376-387.
? Ossewaarde, M. 2018, Kafka on gender, organization and technology: The role of bureaucratic eros in administering change. Gender, Work & Organization, pp. 1-17, DOI: 10.1111/gwao.12278.
? Serrat, O. 2017, Knowledge Solutions: Tools, Methods and Approaches to Organizational Performance, Springer, Singapore.
? Swan, J., Scarbrough, H. & Ziebro, M. 2016, Liminal roles as a source of creative agency in management: The case of knowledge sharing communities, Human Relations, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 781-811.
? Wenger, E.C. & Snyder, W.M. 2000, Communities of practice: The organizational frontier, Harvard Business Review, vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 139-46.
? Weick, K.E. & Westley, F. 1999, Affirming an oxymoron, in S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W.R. Nord (eds), Managing organizations: Current issues, Sage, London, pp. 190-208.
Supplement your argument with at least two references from other relevant quality journal articles and two references relevant to your examples (eg. websites, reports, etc.). You are encouraged to read widely. All sources must be properly acknowledged using the Harvard referencing style. Any source referenced ‘in-text’ must be listed in the reference list at the end of the essay. Any essay that contravenes the referencing policy may draw severe penalties and be referred to the student conduct committee.
PART 2: REFLECTIVE RESPONSE
In preparing your essay, you are expected to engage in a meaningful, reflective drafting process, making use of writing analysis tools that can provide you with individualised feedback on your written communication. As such your second task is to write a reflection of approximately 300 words (+/-10%), to the feedback your tutor provided to your first essay and from other sources listed below. As part of this exercise you need to (at a minimum):
1. Prepare a draft of your essay by Week 11 (9am, Monday 7 October). This draft will not be marked but will form the basis of analysis and reflection of your written communication. (NOTE: although there is no grade/mark attached to the draft, failure or late submission of this draft to Turnitin by the due date will result in penalties applied to your final essay mark.)
2. Submit your draft essay to at least one writing analytics tools by Week 11 from the list below.
3. Reflect on the feedback provided by the writing analytics tool.
4. Re-draft your essay using this feedback.
5. Prepare a “Writing reflection” (instructions below), accounting for how you used the feedback from the first assessment, the analytics tool, Turnitin similarity report and other resources to improve your written communication in your essay, which you submit, with supporting evidence (e.g. samples of writing analysis reports) in Week 12. Students must submit their draft essay to at least one of the following writing analytics tools:
• Grammarly: https://app.grammarly.com/
• ProWritingAid: https://prowritingaid.com
• Hemmingway Editor: http://www.hemingwayapp.com/
Accompanying your final report, you are required to submit a reflective response, accounting for how you improved the written communication in your essay. This account should address the following issues:
• What tools and resources did you use?
• How did you use these tools and resources to improve the written communication of your essay? (HINT: Try to be as specific as possible in making clear the link between your use and interpretation of the feedback from these tools and the improvements you made to your essay)
• In your opinion how helpful do you think these tools and resources are improving written communication? (HINT: You can write about your personal experience in using the tools, your intentions about how you might use these again, or what recommendations or advice you would make to others about using these tools or resources, etc.)
This account should be in the style of a personal reflection informed by wide reading and digestion of academic sources. You should aim to convey your ideas as clearly as possible. However, the form and structure are much more flexible than an essay or report. For example, you should write in the first person (i.e. using “I”) and there is no need to cite other reference material, although you may do so.
The reflective response should be on a separate page following the essay reference list. It can be structured according to the tools and resources you used or the criteria from the marking rubric from assignment 1. Double-space your text and use 2.54-centimetre margins. The text should be in a 12-point Times New Roman font and left-justified. Pages should be numbered, with the numbers appearing in the bottom right-hand corner of the pages.
Following your reflective response please attach relevant supporting evidence, e.g. pictures or screen shots of samples of feedback from assignment 1 or writing analysis tools, samples of feedback from peers, details and notes from other activities, workshops, resources, you used. The supporting evidence should clearly show the feedback from the tool/resource before your changes and how you changed your essay in response to this feedback. This should be highlighted so the marker can clearly see the changes to your essay before and after the tool/ resource. Note: Please do not append more than 3 pages of evidence.
The weighting of the evaluative criteria of this assessment are as follows: Argument (10%), Organisation and Structure (10%), Critique (20%), Understanding and Content (20%), Academic English (10%), Format and Referencing (10%), Reflective Response (20%). Detailed explanations of unsatisfactory to highly-proficient performance in each of these areas are provided in the marking rubric. If the academic English and communication skills are of poor quality this will undoubtedly effect all the other marking criteria as we cannot effectively mark what is not clearly written or otherwise communicated. In order to receive a High Distinction the standard of work (argument, communication, organisation) must be of ‘publishable’ quality.
SUBMISSION TIMETABLE (x 2)
1) Draft submission - complete draft of essay and reference list with at least one writing analytics tool by 6am, Monday 7 October
2) Final submission - complete final essay by 6 am, Monday 14 October
*Students must submit their draft report to at least one writing analytics tool listed above.