Posted: September 14th, 2017

Managing

Managing
This assignment takes the form of an individual essay of approx. 2000 words to be submitted on 26 January 2014 via blackboard (paper copies will not be collected). Students select ONE of the following titles: 1. Discuss to what extent a Foucauldian approach to discourse is postmodern? In response to this question you should:
• consider the applicability of discourse analysis in organization studies • use empirical examples
2. Why does Reed approach rationality, power and knowledge in terms of ‘meta-narrative interpretative frameworks’ (1999, p. 28)? In response to this question you should:
• use either Wittgenstein or Derrida’s theory of language. • discuss how ‘analytical narratives’ (Reed, 1999, p. 28) can be used to study organizations
NB –
1. All work should make clear and appropriate use of academic literature. 2. All work should be appropriately referenced. 3. Examples should be used, where appropriate, to both develop ideas and construct argument.
Note well – in this assignment I am interested in whether you have a good grasp of the core concepts. I am not seeking your opinion – this may come in due course in semester B when you have had a chance to apply the concepts.
Managing – semester A (criteria grid)

Assessment Grid
80-100 70 -79 60-69 50 -59 40 -49
Fail
Clarity of expression Excellent Fluent, clear. Correct use of terminology and English. Careful proofreading Mostly clear Very few grammatical or spelling errors Some points unclear Most words correctly spelt Many points unclear Some misuse of words and grammatical errors Careless proof reading Difficult to understand. Spelling grammar and general use of English needs urgent attention
Referencing Flawless Correctly cited and listed Minor flaws and omissions Adequate but some omissions Poor and incomplete None
Structure Develops logical argument. Links aims, objectives, investigation, findings and conclusion Develops logical argument. Links aims, objectives, investigation, findings and conclusion Generally good. Some minor inconsistencies Does not always follow through arguments Objectives unclear. Key themes not clear. Conclusion unclear. No aims and objectives. Disorganised. Haphazard No conclusion
Literature Review Selective and clearly focussed elaboration of the academic issues underpinning the research. Critiques the relevance of the material drawn from extensive reading. Selective and clearly focussed elaboration of the academic issues underpinning the research. Evidence of extensive reading around the topic. A substantial elaboration of academic material underpinning the research question. Good use of academic sources. Just sufficient use of relevant sources Lack of focus on research question Limited academic support for the research question. Some irrelevant material Over-use of general internet sources Use of only one or two sources (or none)
Understanding and Analysis Demonstrates clear understanding of subject. Capable of analyzing the concepts in relation to practice and theory Logical, insightful and highly focussed Clearly identifies defines and explains key issues. Relates theory and practice Use of insight and critical thought. Identifies most issues. Gives clear explanations Gives some relevant illustrative examples Reflective stance on most points Misses some key points. Definitions and explanations not always clear Some attempts at analysis Some irrelevant material. Misunderstands some concepts Unsupported assertions Descriptive rather than analytical Clear and consistent evidence of not understanding basic concepts Sweeping generalisations No evidence of analysis

ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!