Posted: December 24th, 2014

Real world business issues

Real world business issues

Order Description

Please explain the following themes and how they link with each other. Why they are important and their concerns for the benefit of the individual business manager.

1) Management Style
2) Effectiveness
3) Motivation

COURSEWORK 2014/ 2015

Module Title:
Real World Business Issues    Module No:    BIO0226

Coursework Requirement:

RWBI BIO0226 : Explain these themes

1) Management Style
2) Effectiveness
3) Motivation

and Concerns for the Benefit of the Individual Business Manager. How does these themes link with eachother

LEARNING OUTCOMES

This assignment assesses the following learning outcomes:

1. Detect the characteristics of new and unstructured external issues that impinge on organisational performance.
2. Appreciate the nature of change driven by issues not arising from within the organisation.
4. Positively engage with new and unstructured issues in a deliberate and systematic fashion.
7. Construct and present information in a coherent and professional format which inspires further inquiry.

1.    The first two guest lectures contain distinct and contradictory ideas (equivalent to the Unstructured Information typically shared during a board/business

meeting without prior knowledge of the members). Using your notes, research and ‘board-room’ presentations use thematic analysis to identify connections, either

obvious or less clear, between the two lectures that have a common theme. The themes should have potential relevance to individual business managers in the changing

nature of work now and in the future.

2.    Having identified three or four (maximum) common themes use text books, journals and secondary research to support your unique argument(s) for why managers and

leaders should take note of these concerns in their future practice.

3.    The work should offer arguments that are directly drawn from these connections and should demonstrate your unique thinking supported by evidence from academic

research, and drawing directly on previous learning from within the course. These links must be explicitly grounded in academic concepts and theory, supported by good

referencing.

4.    A short critical and personal reflection on your approach to dialogue and argumentation should contain no more than 200 words. (Using the word “I” in this

section is permissible.)

Your answer should be in an assignment format.

Tutor referral will apply to this assessment component.  Tutor – referred work must be resubmitted one week after notification.

The work will be assessed in three areas:

Thematic connections: The work will clearly demonstrate the building of a coherent argument built from the unstructured content from guest speaker contributions.

Description should be avoided, instead critically evaluating the content that relates to a managerial perspective.

Evidenced argumentation: Assignments will give strong argued reasoning for the points raised. They will demonstrate wider reading and cite examples from the lectures

in support. A wide variety of academic materials is recommended including textbooks, journal articles and reliable websites all of which should be accurately

referenced. Recommended reading lists are available in the handbook but original, relevant research will be recognised.

Structured insights and reflection: There will be an appropriate level of coherency in the argument where the unstructured ideas have been brought together to offer

key points along with personal reflection. Appropriate assignment format. Please make an appointment with the Academic Skills Tutors for any additional help needed

with assignment writing and referencing.

Pay close attention to the Assessment and Grading Criteria at the end of this document. These criteria will be used to provide feedback on your marked assignment.

¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬____________________________________________________________________________

Word Limit:    1500  +/- 10%
Submission Date:
4th January 2015 2,000 words.

Time:
11.59pm – electronically
Notes:
Referencing your work:

The University preferred referencing style is APA 6th.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Your work will be graded according to the following criteria, which are also set in the Assessment Guidelines set out in your Student Handbook.

The criteria are not intended to be either exhaustive or definitive and are to be taken as guidelines rather than imposing absolute standards.

A    90-100

Outstanding    I    A comprehensive piece of work, well evidenced and supported with accurate referencing throughout. All content is relevant and all aspects of

the question are addressed
A    80-89    I    A high quality piece of work though one or two additional considerations could potentially be enhanced to strengthen the answer. Accurate

referencing and a substantial body of evidence used to support the answer.
A    70-79    I    An excellent answer, well evidenced and referenced. One or two minor areas may have been omitted though this does not detract from the overall

quality of the argument.
B+
B
B-    67 – 69

Above Average    II(i)    A good answer that displays a good familiarity with the available literature. Comprehension of all the issues involved and contains evidence of

independent criticism and analysis. Free from errors and all relevant points discussed.
C+
C
C-    57 – 59
54 – 56
50 – 53

Average    II(ii)    A middle range answer that shows familiarity with the available literature. Comprehension of all the issues involved and contains evidence of

independent criticism and analysis. Free from errors and all relevant points discussed.
D+
D
D-    47 – 49
44 – 46
40 – 43

Satisfactory    III    A poor answer which, whilst demonstrating an understanding of the basic issues involved (and hence deserves a pass) is deficient in terms of

material covered, level of comprehension etc. Insufficiently researched and, perhaps, major errors and omissions.
R    37 – 39
34 – 36
30 – 33
Refer        A refer answer, which demonstrates a lack of depth in terms of comprehension and knowledge of the subject matter.
F    20-29
Fail        Little or no understanding of the subject matter and, probably, a minimum degree of effort.
F    10-19     Fail        Minimal relevant content within the answer and complete lack of evidence to support. The work is poorly presented
F    0-9         Fail        Virtually no relevant content and inadequate presentation. This grade could be given due to non-submission.

Requirement:

RWBI BIO0226 Assignment One – Identifying Themes and Concerns for the Benefit of the Individual Business Manager: Lectures One and Two

1.    The first two guest lectures contain distinct and contradictory ideas (equivalent to the Unstructured Information typically shared during a board/business

meeting without prior knowledge of the members). Using your notes, research and ‘board-room’ presentations use thematic analysis to identify connections, either

obvious or less clear, between the two lectures that have a common theme. The themes should have potential relevance to individual business managers in the changing

nature of work now and in the future.

2.    Having identified three or four (maximum) common themes use text books, journals and secondary research to support your unique argument(s) for why managers and

leaders should take note of these concerns in their future practice.

3.    The work should offer arguments that are directly drawn from these connections and should demonstrate your unique thinking supported by evidence from academic

research, and drawing directly on previous learning from within the course. These links must be explicitly grounded in academic concepts and theory, supported by good

referencing.

4.    A short critical and personal reflection on your approach to dialogue and argumentation should contain no more than 200 words. (Using the word “I” in this

section is permissible.)

Your answer should be in an assignment format.

Tutor referral will apply to this assessment component.  Tutor–referred work must be resubmitted one week after notification.

The assignment will be assessed in relation to thematic connections, evidenced argumentation and structured insights and reflection.

Criteria    0-39    40-49    50-59    60-69    70 or above
Thematic connections – The work will clearly demonstrate the building of a coherent argument built from the unstructured content from guest speaker contributions.

Description should be avoided, instead critically evaluating the content that relates to a strategic perspective.    Limited or no meaningful connections offered

between the lectures demonstrating a lack of understanding. Work is descriptive.     Basic thematic connections and commentary are offered demonstrating some

unique understanding. Work is descriptive.    The thematic connections between the lectures are offered with some meaningful interpretations but the more critical

nature of these is not appreciated. Work is descriptive with an attempt at critical evaluation.    A good development of thematic connections between the lectures and

appreciation of their complex nature. The work is critically evaluative    Excellent development of the thematic connections and critical evaluation of the relationship

between these. Detailed discussion and examples to support accurate conclusions.
Evidenced argumentation – Assignments will give strong argued reasoning for the points raised. They will demonstrate wider reading and cite examples from the lectures

in support. A wide variety of academic materials is recommended including textbooks, journal articles and reliable websites all of which should be accurately

referenced.
Reliance on lecture notes and lack of academic evidence to support the thematic connections and arguments.    Research has been undertaken and arguments

offered but are limited in breadth. Mainly reliant on textbooks/ internet sites.    Research and arguments supported by journal articles, textbooks, previous

learning and internet sites recommended on the reading list.    Research and arguments are academically based and appropriate examples used. A limited amount of

original material included.    Extensive reading and original research to support the arguments. Numerous relevant and academic examples researched to support the

discussion,
Structured insights and reflection – There will be an appropriate level of coherency in the argument where the unstructured ideas have been brought together to offer

key points along with personal reflection. Appropriate assignment format.     Weak structure and not in assignment format. Poor coherency. Poor presentation,

reflection and referencing not using the Harvard system.    Assignment format is used but not effectively as possible. Presentation, reflection and coherency are

satisfactory. Attempt made to reference using the Harvard system but may not be accurate.    Assignment format used and appropriate. Reflections and coherency are

good. Reasonably presented. Bibliography/ referencing used but may contain errors.    Assignment format used with good standard of presentation, coherency and

reflection. Meaningful reflection. Bibliography/ referencing should be accurate using the Harvard system but may contain minor errors.    Very good assignment structure

with discussion being logically developed, very coherent. Significant reflection made, including links to the ideas themselves. High standard of presentation and

accurate bibliography/ referencing using the Harvard system.

Requirement:
RWBI BIO0226 Assignment Two – Identifying Themes and Concerns to support Strategic Direction: a paper for the attention of the Board of Directors: Lectures Three, Four

and Five

1.    As in assignment one, use your notes, research and presentations and then thematic analysis to identify three to four common connections, but this time based

on lectures three, four and five. However, in this second assignment your arguments should be concerned with Issues of Strategic Importance, drawn from the themes, and

of general value to any typical business and therefore should be addressed as a paper to the Company Board. (Strategic Direction is concerned with the long-term,

beyond the financial year, and not immediate operational performance.)

2.    Having identified three or four (maximum) common themes and concerns now use text books, journals and secondary research to support your unique arguments for

why The Board should take note that these concerns are significant to them.

3.    Therefore, the arguments offered will NOT be concerned with the practice of individual managers but more concerned with the long-term survival and performance

of a company as a whole. E.g. If you identify a theme concerned with supply chain management, you should argue, using the lecture and your additional research for how

supply chain management in the future is changing and why this might be a concern for businesses in general.

4.    The work should offer arguments that are directly drawn from the connections and should demonstrate your unique thinking supported by evidence from academic

research and previous learning from within the course. These links must be explicitly grounded in academic concepts and theory, supported by good referencing.

5.    A short critical and personal reflection on your approach to questioning should contain no more than 200 words. (Using the word “I” in this section is

permissible.)

Your answer should be in an assignment format.

Tutor referral will apply to this assessment component.  Tutor–referred work must be resubmitted one week after notification.

The assignment will be assessed in relation to thematic connections, evidenced argumentation and structured insights and reflection.

Criteria    0-39    40-49    50-59    60-69    70 or above
Thematic connections – The work will clearly demonstrate the building of a coherent argument built from the unstructured content from guest speaker contributions.

Description should be avoided, instead critically evaluating the content that relates to a strategic perspective.    Limited or no meaningful connections offered

between the lectures demonstrating a lack of understanding. Work is descriptive.    Basic thematic connections and commentary are offered demonstrating some unique

understanding. Work is descriptive.    The thematic connections between the lectures are offered with some meaningful interpretations but the more critical nature of

these is not appreciated. Work is descriptive with an attempt at critical evaluation.    A good development of the thematic connections between the lectures and

appreciation of its complex nature. The work is critically evaluative    Excellent development of the thematic connections and critical evaluation of the relationship

between these. Detailed discussion and examples to support accurate conclusions.
Evidenced argumentation – Assignments will give strong argued reasoning for the points raised. They will demonstrate wider reading and cite examples from the lectures

in support. A wide variety of academic materials is recommended including textbooks, journal articles and reliable websites all of which should be accurately

referenced.
Reliance on lecture notes and lack of academic evidence to support the thematic connections and arguments.    Research has been undertaken and arguments

offered but are limited in breadth. Mainly reliant on textbooks/ internet sites.    Research and arguments supported by journal articles, textbooks, previous

learning and internet sites recommended on the reading list.    Research and arguments are academically based and appropriate examples used. A limited amount of

original material included.    Extensive reading and original research to support the arguments. Numerous relevant and academic examples researched to support the

discussion.
Structured insights and reflection – There will be an appropriate level of coherency in the argument where the unstructured ideas have been brought together to offer

key points along with personal reflection. Appropriate assignment format.     Weak structure and not in assignment format. Poor coherency. Poor presentation,

reflection and referencing not using the Harvard system.    Assignment format is used but not effectively as possible. Presentation, reflection and coherency are

satisfactory. Attempt made to reference using the Harvard system but may not fully accurate.    Assignment format used and appropriate. Reflections and coherency are

good. Reasonably presented. Bibliography/ referencing used but may contain errors.    Assignment format used with good standard of presentation, coherency and

reflection. Meaningful reflection. Bibliography/ referencing should be accurate using the Harvard system but may contain minor errors.    Very good assignment structure

with discussion being logically developed, very coherent. Significant reflection made, including links to the ideas themselves. High standard of presentation and

accurate bibliography/ referencing using the Harvard system.

 PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT :)0