Organisational Behaviour (MNG82001)
Assignment 2 Guidelines & Marking Criteria
Title: Assignment 2 – Critical Analysis: Group Decision Making
Marks: 20 (which is 20% of the unit grade)
Due: Prior to 11pm on Wed 20th Jan 2021 (week 11).
Purpose: This assignment seeks to develop students’ awareness for the way in which Teamwork occurs in organisations.
Assume that your workplace manager has nominated yourself and 4 fellow workers to plan the organisation’s 5-year anniversary celebrations. This event, which will take place in 6 weeks, is intended to be a relatively simple (i.e. casual) gathering of all 20 employees. The manager has provided a budget of $500 for catering purposes.
The ‘Event Planning Group’ is scheduled to hold its first face-2-face meeting early next week. One group member, Sally, made the suggestion that before meeting, everyone nominate how they think the $500 should be spent. This seemed like a good idea and the suggestions put forward are:
• Sally and another member, Sharon, suggest that the group hire a Kareoke machine for the night. This would cost $400.
• Greta suggests that the $500 be donated to a local charity and everyone brings a plate of food to share.
• Carlos indicated that he does not have any particular suggestion and is happy to go with whatever the group decides.
• Your suggestion is to use the funds for decorations (balloons and streamers), pizza and champagne. You have estimated the costs and determined there will be enough pizza for everyone and one glass of champagne which will be used as part of a ‘toast’ (i.e. an expression of goodwill towards the organisation and its members) at the end of the night.
You know that when the Event Planning Group meets next week, each individual member, except Carlos, is likely to only support and push for their particular idea. You are worried that the group will not work as a team. You therefore need to prepare for this situation by considering a range of factors that will likely influence the group’s decision-making process.
Your task is to prepare a report that identifies these key factors and explains how they will influence the group’s decision-making process.
The report length will be 750-1000 words and contain at least one, but no more than two, references from ‘peer-reviewed’ Academic Journal articles. All references must come from the SCU Library’s electronic databases. Students must also provide the URL link for each article as part of the reference details. See example below.
Report Format and Submission process
The report should be in the form of a single ‘word’ document (doc. or docx) .
Ensure that the assignment document has been saved in your name (e.g. Pat Gillett.docx). All assignments are to be submitted through ‘Turn-it-in,’ which can be accessed from the ‘Assignment 2’ folder in BlackBoard. The link will be activated in week 9 and you can submit the assignment multiple times up until the due date.
Assignments submitted after the due date will incur a penalty. See this document for details.
Feedback: Students who submit their report by the due date will receive feedback within 2 weeks. This feedback will be in the form of a marking rubric and a copy of your report with electronic comments from the marker.
Note: it is not necessary to provide the SCU Assignment ‘Coversheet’.
a) Assignment ‘Coverpage’ (Title page). This is a document that each student develops themselves. It should clearly identify the following information:
• Unit name & code
• Assignment title
• The word count of your assignment.
• This page should not be numbered.
b) Content; i.e. your report. Take note of the following:
• Table of Contents and Abstract are not required.
• Develop a catchy title/heading (one that highlights the focus of your discussion).
• Your report. Appropriate intext citation and referencing skills must be demonstrated. Follow the Library’s Harvard Referencing guide http://libguides.scu.edu.au/ld.php?content_id=31222394.
Important – all in-text citations must identify the relevant page number(s). Assignments that do not provide this information, or it is incorrect, will incur a penalty.
• Sub-headings are not necessary
• Quoting is only permitted when providing the definition of a concept. Paraphrase all other information obtained from your source(s).
c) Reference List. Place on a new page. This content is not included in the word count.
Formatting Features o Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after the coverpage and is placed bottom right hand corner. o Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1½ line spacing. o Margins – top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page borders.
o Spelling - if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check. o Writing and grammar must conform to the standards of a professional report. Referencing Example
…(Soeiro, Santos & Alves 2016, p. 158)
Soeiro, FC, Santos, M & Alves, J 2016, 'Network-based innovation: the case for mobile gaming and digital music', European Business Review, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 155-75, viewed (date), https://search-proquest-
(notice how the URL address identifies ‘SCU’ and the particular database; i.e. ‘proquest’).
Structure and style of the Report
There is no prescribed structure that students need to follow for their discussion.
The general aim is to write an interesting and informative account of the factors that you think will influence the group’s decision-making process.
Avoid simply describing the factors. Critically analyse the factors and discuss how they directly relate to the scenario provided.
Note: because students are part of the scenario, it is OK to adopt the first-person perspective. However it should be kept to a miniumum. Most of the discussion should be in third-person.
A. Writing and Analysis
(weight = 60%)
1) Unsatisfactory. The work submitted does not address the assignment Task or Purpose. Contact your Tutor to discuss how this misunderstanding has occurred.
2) Pass. The work submitted addresses the assignment Task and Purpose. However, the academic quality (writing and analysis) is limited. It is important that you commit more time to the preparation of your future assignments.
3) Credit. A satisfactory understanding of the group decisionmaking process has been demonstrated. Some of the writing is a little awkward or unclear, and the analysis could go further to demonstrate a stronger level of understanding.
4) Distinction. A good understanding of the group decision-making process has been demonstrated. There is one area of the discussion that may be slightly unclear; either in regard to the clarity of writing, analysis or rationale.
5) HD. A very strong understanding of the group decision-making process has been demonstrated. The discussion contains strong analysis, which is well-supported by clear writing and rationale.
B. Referencing & use of Sources 1) Unsatisfactory. The required number and type of academic journal articles are not cited, or, full reference details of the cited articles are not provided. This grade will also be awarded if any cited
(weight = 40%)
work cannot be reasonably attributed to the particular journal article page(s) identified in the ‘in-text’ reference details.
2) Pass. The required number and type of academic journal articles have been cited. However, a number of ‘factual’ statements appear in the report which are not attributed to a reputable published source (i.e. reference).
3) Credit. The required number and type of academic journal articles have been cited. However, there is a minor error with the Referencing style. Double-check your work with the SCU Library’s Harvard Referencing Guide.
4) Credit. You have made a good effort to appropriately cite all relevant information. In at least one area the discussion is a little awkward due to the way you have incorporated the reference and/or information attributed to it. Consider other ways of acknowledging the information.
5) HD. All relevant information in the discussion has been properly acknowledged and the correct Referencing style has been applied.
U P C D HD
A. 2 6 8 10 12
B. 1 5 6 7 8