Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Lord Ashcroft International Business School
Improving Organisational Performance
Department: Human Resource Management, Organisational Behaviour and Tourism Module Code: MOD001182
Year: 2013/14 Semester: 2
Module Guide
Page 2
Contents Improving Organisational Performance...................................................................... 1 2. Introduction to the Module ..................................................................................... 3 3. Intended Learning Outcomes ................................................................................ 4 3.1 Employability skills delivered in this Module ......................................................... 4 4. Outline Delivery ..................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Attendance Requirements ................................................................................... 6 5. Assessment ........................................................................................................... 7 5.1 Submitting via Turnitin®UK GradeMark [Cambridge and Chelmsford students] ... 8 5.2 Submitting your work [Students in all other locations at Associate Colleges] ..... 10 5.3 Marking Rubric and Feedback .......................................................................... 11 5.4 Re-Assessment (resit) ....................................................................................... 11 6. How is My Work Marked? .................................................................................... 11 7. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards ....................................................... 14 7.1 Specific Assessment Criteria and Marking Rubric.............................................. 14 7.2 University Generic Assessment Criteria ............................................................. 16 8. Assessment Offences .......................................................................................... 18 9. Learning Resources ............................................................................................ 20 9.1. Library .............................................................................................................. 20 10. Module Evaluation ............................................................................................. 22 11. Report on Last Delivery of Module ..................................................................... 23 Appendix 1: Re-Assessment Information ................................................................. 24
Module Guide
Page 3
Module/Unit title: Improving Organisational Performance Module Leader: Jill Baldwin Module Tutors: Kauthar Nasiruddin, 603 8991 9500. Extension : 248 Email: [email protected] Every module has a Module Definition Form (MDF) which is the officially validated record of the module. You can access the MDF for this module in three ways via:
the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
the My.Anglia Module Catalogue at www.anglia.ac.uk/modulecatalogue
Anglia Ruskin’s module search engine facility at www.anglia.ac.uk/modules All modules delivered by Anglia Ruskin University at its main campuses in the UK and at Associate Colleges throughout the UK and overseas are governed by the Academic Regulations. You can view these at www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs. A printed extract of the Academic Regulations, known as the Assessment Regulations, is available for every student from your Faculty Office [REPLACE WITH EQUIVALENT OFFICE/LOCATION AT ASSOCIATE COLLEGE] (all new students will have received a copy as part of their welcome pack). In the unlikely event of any discrepancy between the Academic Regulations and any other publication, including this module guide, the Academic Regulations, as the definitive document, take precedence over all other publications and will be applied in all cases.
2. Introduction to the Module
This module introduces the learner to how organisations can drive sustained organisation performance by creating a high-performance work organisation (HPWO) and involving line managers in the performance management process. The module assesses the different conceptual frameworks of high-performance working (HPW) and examines its impact on organisational performance, competitive advantage, employee engagement and employee wellbeing. It provides the learner with the business case for, and the barriers to, HPW as well as the role of people management in improving organisational performance. Furthermore, the module examines the contribution of the performance management process and shows how the involvement and commitment of line managers, and the use of effective and inclusive collaborative working and communication techniques, can support the building of a high-performance culture that promotes diversity, trust, enthusiasm and commitment and that recognises critical skills, capabilities, experience and performance. It considers the contribution of the theoretical foundations of high performance working and the criticisms of the under theorisation of the link between people management practices and performance. It explores the routes towards work intensification and links to stress management by appraising the concepts of high performance outcomes centred around the emancipation of the workforce as compared to the experiences within modern (multinational) organisations post- 2000.
Module Guide
Page 4
3. Intended Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this module the student will be expected to be able to:
Knowledge and understanding
1 Understand and critically appraise the conceptual frameworks and
complexity of high-performance working (HPW) and its contribution to
sustainable organisation performance. Explore, evaluate and understand
the business case for creating a high-performance work organisation
(HPWO).
2 Understand and be critically aware of the contribution of the performance
management process towards high levels of performance and understand
and critically appreciate the role of line managers in the performance
management process. Understand the contribution of the performance
management process to high levels of performance and critically
appreciate the role of line managers in the performance management
process.
Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills
3 Create and sustain a community of practice to build a high-performance
culture and appraise its validity, sustainability and issues surrounding
problems or challenges with implementing a high performance culture.
3.1 Employability skills delivered in this Module
It is important that we help you develop employability skills throughout your course which will assist you in securing employment and supporting you in your future career. During your course you will acquire a wide range of key skills. In this module, you will develop those identified below:
SKILL Skills acquired in this
module
Communication (oral) X
Communication (written) X
Commercial Awareness X
Cultural sensitivity
Customer focus X
Data Handling X
Decision making X
Enterprising
Flexibility
Initiative X
Interpersonal Skills
Leadership/Management of others
Networking X
Organisational adaptability X
Project Management X
Problem Solving and analytical skills X
Responsibility X
Team working
Time Management X
Other
Module Guide
Page 5
4. Outline Delivery
Wk Lecture Seminar/Workshop Student-managed learning
1
The foundations of Performance Management (PM)
Introduction to Module Guide and Assessment
Chapter 1 Armstrong (2009) Chapter 1 Armstrong & Baron (2005)
2
The conceptual framework of PM
Case Study Example of PM Chapter 2 Armstrong (2009)
3
Performance Management Systems
Case Study Example of PM Chapter 4 Armstrong (2009)
4
Performance Management Processes
Assignment planning PM Models
Chapter 2 Armstrong & Baron (2005) Chapters 7-12 Armstrong (2009)
5
Performance Management Processes part 2
Assignment Planning PM Models
Chapter 2 Armstrong & Baron (2005) Chapters 7-12 Armstrong (2009)
6
Performance Management in Action
Outcomes of the CIPD survey Performance management in Action: current trends and practice CIPD (2009)
7
High Performance Working High Performance Culture Employee Engagement
Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D. and Harley, B. (2000) ‘Employees and High-Performance Work Systems: Testing Inside the Black Box’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38:4, pp. 501-531.
8
Managing Organisational Performance
Student led session – PM example from assignment research
Chapter 5 Armstrong & Baron (2005) Chapter 17 Armstrong (2009)
9
Managing Team Performance
Student led session – PM example from assignment research
Chapter 9 Armstrong & Baron (2005) Chapter 18 Armstrong (2009)
10
Role of Line Managers Student led session – PM example from assignment research
Chapter 22 Armstrong (2009)
11
Managing under-performers
Student led session – PM example from assignment research
Chapter 11 Armstrong & Baron (2005)
12
Developing Performance Management
Module Review Assignment tutorials
Chapter 21 Armstrong (2009) Chapter 12 Armstrong & Baron (2005)
Module Guide
Page 6
4.1 Attendance Requirements
Attending all your classes is very important and one of the best ways to help you succeed in this module. Research has found a clear correlation between student attendance and overall performance. In accordance with the Student Charter, you are expected to arrive on time and take an active part in all your timetabled classes. If you are unable to attend a class for a valid reason (e.g. illness), please contact your Module Tutor [ Anglia Ruskin will closely monitor the attendance of all students and will contact you if you have been absent without notice for two weeks. Continued absence can result in various consequences including the termination of your registration as you will be considered to have withdrawn from your studies. International students who are non-EEA nationals and in possession of entry clearance/leave to remain as a student (student visa) are required to be in regular attendance at Anglia Ruskin. Failure to do so is considered to be a breach of national immigration regulations. Anglia Ruskin, like all British Universities, is statutorily obliged to inform the UK Border Agency of the Home Office of significant unauthorised absences by any student visa holders.
Module Guide
Page 7
5. Assessment
The assessment for this module consists of one part. Deadlines for assessments vary.
Part Type of assessment Word or time limit
Submission method
Deadline for assessment
1 Essay 3000 Turnitin®UK GradeMark or in hard copy (off main UK campus only)
NO LATER THAN: 8th May, 2014 by 5pm
Part 1 – Essay
Mark Learning Outcome
1. Structure and Approach: Relevance to question; treatment in depth; originality and creative thought; justification of organisational choices; logical structure; introduction and summary/ conclusion.
20% 1,2,3
2. Investigation and Use of Sources: Academic Definitions, Use of Conceptual Framework, Critical discussion of Strategic Alignment
30% 1,2,3
3. Reasoning, Argument and Analysis: Accurate presentation of 4 topics of evidence; logical development of argument; intelligent discussion to compare organisations; depth and detail; application of course material and reading; appropriate conclusions drawn
40% 1,2,3
4. Presentation and Style: Legibility; grammar; spelling; absence of typing errors; clear layout; requested information included.
10% 1,2,3
TOTAL MARKS 100%
As part of the seminar work and in preparation for your assessment you will have been researching and reviewing case studies of Performance Management and High Performance Working practices from organisations within or without the United Kingdom. Question/Task
Research and choose two organisations using high performance work (HPW) and/or Performance
Management (PM) practices, which you can compare and contrast in their approach.
Choices/ options
You may/ might explore two organisations in the same sector (e.g. manufacturing)
You may/ might explore two organisations in different sectors (e.g. manufacturing and service; public and private)
You may/ might explore HPW or PM in different sized organisations (e.g. large and SME).
Module Guide
Page 8
Your essay should include the following: An introduction to the companies you have chosen, and your rationale for choosing these in order to compare and contrast their approaches . A critical discussion of academic definitions of PM/HPW Evidence of understanding of the conceptual framework that underpins PM; e.g motivation theory Critical discussion of how companies achieve strategic alignment/clear line of sight A discussion which compares and contrasts 4 of the following areas in the chosen company approaches:
Performance Measures (Behaviour or Results)
Performance & Learning/Development
Performance & Reward (Non-financial rewards and pay)
Process of Performance Management: A Cycle of Expectations, Goal Setting, Support (Feedback & Coaching), Review, Analysis and Assessment
Team Performance
Managing Performance Management (Roles of HR, Line Manager & under performance)
Integration with other HR practices (HPW
A final conclusion to summarise the key points of the essay discussion, and makes the links of the theories discussed with practice. NO RECOMMENDATIONS ARE REQUIRED AS THIS IS A COMPARISON ESSAY
Please refer to the marking Criteria for more guidance of how the marks are allocated against these requirements. Any late work will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question. You are requested to keep a copy of your work.
5.1 Submitting via Turnitin®UK GradeMark [Cambridge and Chelmsford students]
You are required to submit your written assignment(s) online via Turnitin/Grademark. Unless stated on the assignment brief, all your assignments should be submitted online. Hard copy assignments handed into the iCentre will NOT be marked. You must put YOUR Student ID number (SID) as the submission title (details below). You will be enrolled automatically to two types of Turnitin class: 1) Grademark Classes entitled by module name, to which you will submit a ONE TIME ONLY final submission; 2) The Originality Report Class to which you can submit multiple drafts for originality checking. The Grademark class page shows the start date (when you can begin submitting work), the due date for your assignment and the post date. All assignments must be submitted by 5pm on the due date. Any late work will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question. The post date is the date when both feedback and provisional results will be posted online. You should follow the detailed instructions provided on the VLE.
Module Guide
Page 9
When you submit your paper, remember to:
ONLINE SUBMISSION AND FEEDBACK THROUGH GRADEMARK At the post date you will get your feedback through Turnitin/Grademark. We have implemented this online feedback system to give you the following benefits:
More timely receipt of your feedback;
Better quality feedback;
The ability to hand in your work online;
Reduction in time spent queuing to hand in and pick up your assignments;
The ability to receive marker feedback when it is posted, regardless of your location;
Reduction of both yours and the university’s carbon footprint by no longer printing work.
HOW TO VIEW YOUR FEEDBACK Click on the class that you wish to view and then you will see the assignments for the module listed. Click the blue view button to open up the document viewer. A new window will open and you will see your feedback on the right-hand side of the screen. Or click on the grey arrow to download a copy of your assignment and feedback.
a) Keep default (recommended)
b) Enter your first
and last name(s)
c) Enter your SID as the submission title VERY IMPORTANT!
d) Browse to
search for your
assignment file
e) Upload
SID
f) or cancel
Module Guide
Page 10
POINTS TO NOTE
1. The due date as seen in eVision is the official submission deadline. Any late work will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question. Do not leave it until the last minute to submit your work – the system becomes extremely busy and can be slower during the period of the deadline.
2. Grademark final submission classes will become available 10 working days before the final submission date. Be aware that work can only be submitted ONCE to these classes and cannot be removed or changed.
3. All work submitted MUST be entitled by your Student ID number.
4. Any work handed in via the iCentre will NOT be marked.
5. The Originality Report is automatically generated by Turnitin on submitting work. A paper copy of
the originality report is not required.
6. The Originality Report will not be used to make assessment decisions unless concerns arise as to poor academic practice, plagiarism, or collusion. The report may then be considered as part of the normal investigatory procedures undertaken by the academic team and the Director of Studies (again, please see Section 10 of the Assessment Regulations).
7. Re-sits and extensions are also to be submitted via Turnitin. New Turnitin classes will be created for re-sits.
8. Full details as on submitting to Turnitin, the Originality Report, and a FAQs list, can be located on the module VLE. If you have experience submission difficulties, please email: [email protected] Furthermore, there is a support VLE site (http://vle.anglia.ac.uk/sites/grademark/laibs/Content/Start.aspx) with videos to show you how to submit your work and to view your feedback.
All coursework assignments and other forms of assessment must be submitted by the published deadline which is detailed above. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted – ignorance of the deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non-submission.
5.2 Submitting your work [Students in all other locations at Associate Colleges]
All student work which contributes to the eventual outcome of the module (i.e. if it determines whether you will pass or fail the module and counts towards the mark you achieve for the module) is submitted according to your institutions guidelines. Academic staff CANNOT accept work directly from you. Any late work will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question.
Module Guide
Page 11
You are requested to keep a copy of your work.
5.3 Marking Rubric and Feedback
The rubric, shown in Section 7.1 Specific Marking Criteria, will be used to mark your work. Feedback
You are entitled to written feedback on your performance for all your assessed work. For all assessment tasks which are not examinations, this is provided by a member of academic staff through Grademark at Cambridge and Chelmsford. At other locations and Associate Colleges, this is provided through the completion of the assignment coversheet on which your mark and feedback will relate to the achievement of the module’s intended learning outcomes and the assessment criteria you were given for the task when it was first issued. Examination scripts are retained by Anglia Ruskin and are not returned to students. However, you are entitled to feedback on your performance in an examination and may request a meeting with the Module Leader or Tutor to see your examination script and to discuss your performance. Anglia Ruskin is committed to providing you with prompt feedback on all assessed work within a prompt 20 working days of the submission deadline or the date of an examination. This is extended to 30 days for feedback for a Major Project module (please note that working days excludes those days when Anglia Ruskin University is officially closed; e.g. between Christmas and New Year). Personal tutors will offer to read feedback from several modules and help you to address any common themes that may be emerging. On occasion, you will receive feedback and marks for work that you completed in the earlier stages of the module. We provide you with this feedback as part of the learning experience and to help you prepare for other assessment tasks that you have still to complete. It is important to note that, in these cases, the marks for these pieces of work are unconfirmed and subject to external moderation and approval. This means that, potentially, marks can change, in either direction! Marks for modules and individual pieces of work become confirmed on the Dates for the Official Publication of Results which can be checked at www.anglia.ac.uk/results.
5.4 Re-Assessment (resit)
If you are unsuccessful with the 1st attempt of your assessment, you must complete a re-assessment. As indicated in Section 6.2.7. of the Senate Code of Practice, this is a NEW assessment, you CANNOT re-work the assessment explained in this section. The re-assessment information is given in Appendix 1.
6. How is My Work Marked?
After you have submitted your work or you have completed an examination, Anglia Ruskin undertakes a series of activities to assure that our marking processes are comparable with those employed at other universities in the UK and that your work has been marked fairly, honestly and consistently. These include:
Anonymous marking – your name is not attached to your work so, at the point of marking, the lecturer does not know whose work he/she is considering. When you undertake an assessment task where your identity is known (e.g. a presentation or Major Project), it is marked by more than one lecturer (known as double marking)
Internal moderation – a sample of all work for each assessment task in each module is moderated by other Anglia Ruskin staff to check the standards and consistency of the marking
Module Guide
Page 12
External moderation – a sample of student work for all modules is moderated by external examiners – experienced academic staff from other universities (and sometimes practitioners who represent relevant professions) - who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback, advice and assurance that the marking of your work is comparable to that in other UK universities. Many of Anglia Ruskin’s staff act as external examiners at other universities.
Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) – performance by all students on all modules is discussed and approved at the appropriate DAPs which are attended by all relevant Module Leaders and external examiners. Anglia Ruskin has over 25 DAPs to cover all the different subjects we teach.
This module falls within the remit of the HRM, OB & Tourism DAP.
The following external examiners are appointed to this DAP and will oversee the assessment of this and other modules within the DAP’s remit:
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR AND TOURISM
External Examiner’s Name Academic Institution Position or Employer
Dr Janet Astley
York St John University Senior Lecturer
Mr Harold Birkett None(retired) Formerly an academic member - Staffordshire
Dr Lynn Nichol
University of Gloucestershire Senior Lecturer
Dr Julia Pointon
De Montfort University Principal Lecturer
Dr Lynne Powell University of Northumbria at Newcastle
Senior Lecturer
Prof Christopher Prince
Birmingham City University Executive Dean
Dr Paul Smith University of Sunderland Associate Dean (Resources & Research)
Dr Nancy Stevenson University of Westminster Principal Lecturer and Programme Leader
The above list is correct at the time of publication. However, external examiners are appointed at various points throughout the year. An up-to-date list of external examiners is available to students and staff at www.anglia.ac.uk/eeinfo.
Module Guide
Page 13
Anglia Ruskin’s marking process is represented in the flowchart below:
Student submits work / sits
examination
Work collated and passed to Module Leader
Work is marked by Module Leader and Module Tutor(s)1. All marks collated by Module Leader
for ALL locations2
Internal moderation samples selected. Moderation undertaken
by a second academic3
Unconfirmed marks and feedback to students within 20 working
days (30 working days for Major Projects)
External moderation samples selected and moderated by
External Examiners4
Marks submitted to DAP5 for consideration and approval
Marks Approved by DAP5 and forwarded to Awards Board
Any issues?
Any issues?
Students receive initial (unconfirmed)
feedback
Confirmed marks issued to students
via e-Vision
Ma
rkin
g S
tage
Inte
rnal M
odera
tion S
tage
Exte
rna
l M
ode
ratio
n S
tag
e
DA
P4 S
tage
YES
YES
NO
NO
Flowchart of Anglia Ruskin’s Marking Processes
1 All work is marked anonymously or double marked where identity of the student is known (e.g.in a presentation)
2 The internal (and external) moderation process compares work from all locations where the module is delivered
(e.g.Cambridge, Chelmsford, Peterborough, Malaysia, India, Trinidad etc.) 3 The sample for the internal moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever
is the greater) for each marker and covers the full range of marks 4 Only modules at levels 5, 6 and 7 are subject to external moderation (unless required for separate reasons). The
sample for the external moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for the entire module and covers the full range of marks
5 DAP: Departmental Assessment Panel – Anglia Ruskin has over 25 different DAPs to reflect our subject coverage
Module Guide
Page 14
7. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
7.1 Specific Assessment Criteria and Marking Rubric
Marking Criteria Marker’s Comments Marks
Structure & Approach A clear introduction, stating what will be undertaken, how this will be done and why. (5 marks) Introduction includes an explanation of companies chosen and why. (5 marks) The essay has a conclusion that offers a summary of key points, linking theory to practice. (10 marks)
/20
Investigation & Use of Sources Definition(s) of PM/HPW is/are well chosen, academic, and discussed. (10 marks) Evidence of understanding of the conceptual framework that underpins Performance Management is clear in the discussion (10 marks) Clear discussion of the relevance of strategic alignment/clear line of sight (10 marks) Use of appropriate academic supporting evidence, that evidences a depth and breadth of research and reading
/30
Module Guide
Page 15
Reasoning, Argument & Analysis A logical development of arguments. Intelligent discussion to compare and contrast the 2 organisations, identified from 4 (10 marks for each) of the following theoretical concepts:
Performance Measures (Behaviour or Results)
Performance & Learning/Development
Performance & Reward (Non-financial rewards and pay)
Process of Performance Management: A Cycle of Expectations, Goal Setting, Support (Feedback & Coaching), Review, Analysis and Assessment
Team Performance
Managing Performance Management (Roles of HR, Line Manager & under performance)
Integration with other HR practices (HPW) The similarities and differences in the company approaches are analysed and well applied to the theoretical concepts.
/40
Presentation & Style Clarity of writing: Legibility; grammar; spelling; absence of typing errors; clear layout. The requested information is included. Harvard Referencing correctly applied.
/10
General Comments:
Overall Mark: /100
Module Guide
Page 16
7.2 University Generic Assessment Criteria
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS
LEVEL 5
Level 5 reflects continuing development from Level 4. At this level students are not fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility
for their own learning with some direction. Students are expected to locate an increasingly detailed theoretical knowledge of the discipline within a more general intellectual context, and to demonstrate this through forms of expression which go beyond the merely descriptive or imitative. Students are expected to demonstrate analytical competence in terms both of problem identification and resolution, and to develop their skill sets as required.
Mark Bands Outcome
Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2)
Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills
Ch
ara
cte
risti
cs o
f S
tud
en
t A
ch
iev
em
en
t b
y M
ark
ing
Ban
d
90-100%
Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level
Exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with extraordinary originality and autonomy.
Exceptional management of learning resources, with a higher degree of autonomy/ exploration that clearly exceeds the brief. Exceptional structure/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Exceptional team/practical/professional skills.
80-89% Outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with clear originality and autonomy
Outstanding management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Outstanding team/practical/professional skills
70-79% Excellent knowledge base, exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with considerable originality and autonomy
Excellent management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that may exceed the brief. Structured/accurate expression. Very good academic/ intellectual skills and team/practical/professional skills
60-69% Good knowledge base; explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with some originality, detail and autonomy
Good management of learning with consistent self-direction. Structured and mainly accurate expression. Good academic/intellectual skills and team/practical/ professional skills
50-59% Satisfactory knowledge base that begins to explore and analyse the theory and ethical issues of the discipline
Satisfactory use of learning resources. Acceptable structure/accuracy in expression. Acceptable level of academic/intellectual skills, going beyond description at times. Satisfactory team/practical/professional skills. Inconsistent self-direction
40-49%
A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level
Basic knowledge base with some omissions and/or lack of theory of discipline and its ethical dimension
Basic use of learning resources with little self-direction. Some input to team work. Some difficulties with academic/ intellectual skills. Largely imitative and descriptive. Some difficulty with structure and accuracy in expression, but developing practical/professional skills
30-39%
A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this
level. Possible compensation. Sat-isfies qualifying mark
Limited knowledge base; limited understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension
Limited use of learning resources, working towards self-direction. General difficulty with structure and accuracy in expression. Weak academic/intellectual skills. Still mainly imitative and descriptive. Team/practical/professional skills that are not yet secure
20-29%
Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensation
available
Little evidence of an information base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension
Little evidence of use of learning resources. No self-direction, with little evidence of contribution to team work. Very weak academic/intellectual skills and significant difficulties with structure/expression. Very imitative and descriptive. Little evidence of practical/professional skills
10-19% Inadequate information base. Inadequate understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension
Inadequate use of learning resources. No attempt at self-direction with inadequate contribution to team work. Very weak academic/intellectual skills and major difficulty with structure/expression. Wholly imitative and descriptive. Inadequate practical/professional skills
1-9% No evidence of any information base. No understanding of discipline and its ethical dimension
No evidence of use of learning resources of understanding of self-direction with no evidence of contribution to team work. No evidence academic/intellectual skills and incoherent structure/ expression. No evidence of practical/ professional skills
Module Guide
Page 17
0% Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the
assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes
Module Guide
Page 18
8. Assessment Offences
As an academic community, we recognise that the principles of truth, honesty and mutual respect are central to the pursuit of knowledge. Behaviour that undermines those principles weakens the community, both individually and collectively, and diminishes our values. We are committed to ensuring that every student and member of staff is made aware of the responsibilities s/he bears in maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and how those standards are protected. You are reminded that any work that you submit must be your own. When you are preparing your work for submission, it is important that you understand the various academic conventions that you are expected to follow in order to make sure that you do not leave yourself open to accusations of plagiarism (e.g. the correct use of referencing, citations, footnotes etc.) and that your work maintains its academic integrity. Definitions of Assessment Offences
Plagiarism Plagiarism is theft and occurs when you present someone else’s work, words, images, ideas, opinions or discoveries, whether published or not, as your own. It is also when you take the artwork, images or computer-generated work of others, without properly acknowledging where this is from or you do this without their permission. You can commit plagiarism in examinations, but it is most likely to happen in coursework, assignments, portfolios, essays, dissertations and so on. Examples of plagiarism include:
directly copying from written work, physical work, performances, recorded work or images, without saying where this is from;
using information from the internet or electronic media (such as DVDs and CDs) which belongs to someone else, and presenting it as your own;
rewording someone else’s work, without referencing them; and
handing in something for assessment which has been produced by another student or person. It is important that you do not plagiarise – intentionally or unintentionally – because the work of others and their ideas are their own. There are benefits to producing original ideas in terms of awards, prizes, qualifications, reputation and so on. To use someone else’s work, words, images, ideas or discoveries is a form of theft. Collusion Collusion is similar to plagiarism as it is an attempt to present another’s work as your own. In plagiarism the original owner of the work is not aware you are using it, in collusion two or more people may be involved in trying to produce one piece of work to benefit one individual, or plagiarising another person’s work. Examples of collusion include:
agreeing with others to cheat;
getting someone else to produce part or all of your work;
copying the work of another person (with their permission);
submitting work from essay banks;
paying someone to produce work for you; and
Module Guide
Page 19
allowing another student to copy your own work. Many parts of university life need students to work together. Working as a team, as directed by your tutor, and producing group work is not collusion. Collusion only happens if you produce joint work to benefit of one or more person and try to deceive another (for example the assessor). Cheating Cheating is when someone aims to get unfair advantage over others. Examples of cheating include:
taking unauthorised material into the examination room;
inventing results (including experiments, research, interviews and observations);
handing your own previously graded work back in;
getting an examination paper before it is released;
behaving in a way that means other students perform poorly;
pretending to be another student; and
trying to bribe members of staff or examiners. Help to Avoid Assessment Offences
Most of our students are honest and want to avoid committing assessment offences. We have a variety of resources, advice and guidance available to help make sure you can develop good academic skills. We will make sure that we make available consistent statements about what we expect. You will be able to do tutorials on being honest in your work from the library and other support services and faculties, and you will be able to test your written work for plagiarism using ‘Turnitin®UK’ (a software package that detects plagiarism). You can get advice on how to use honestly the work of others in your own work from the library website (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) and your lecturer and personal tutor. You will be able to use ‘Turnitin®UK’, a special software package which is used to detect plagiarism. Turnitin®UK will produce a report which clearly shows if passages in your work have been taken from somewhere else. You may talk about this with your personal tutor to see where you may need to improve your academic practice. We will not see these formative Turnitin®UK reports as assessment offences. All students in Cambridge and Chelmsford are also expected to submit their final work through Turnitin®UK as outlined above. If you are not sure whether the way you are working meets our requirements, you should talk to your personal tutor, module tutor or other member of academic staff. They will be able to help you and tell you about other resources which will help you develop your academic skills. Procedures for assessment offences An assessment offence is the general term used to define cases where a student has tried to get unfair academic advantage in an assessment for himself or herself or another student. We will fully investigate all cases of suspected assessment offences. If we prove that you have committed an assessment offence, an appropriate penalty will be imposed which, for the most serious offences, includes expulsion from Anglia Ruskin. For full details of our assessment offences policy and procedures, see Section 10 of the Academic Regulations at: www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs.
Module Guide
Page 20
9. Learning Resources
9.1. Library
Lord Ashcroft International Business School [email protected]
Resources Notes
Key text Armstrong, M. (2009) Armstrong's handbook of performance management: an evidence-based guide to delivering high performance. 4th ed. London: Kogan Page.
This key text will need to be supplemented by wider reading and research Some useful case studies in this book, which you may choose to use for companies in the essay.
Books Performance Management Aguinis, H. (2013) Performance management. 3rd ed. London: Pearson. ARMSTRONG, M. and BARON, A. (2013) Managing performance. 3rd ed. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Beardwell, I. and Holden, L. (eds.) (2010) Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Approach, London: Prentice Hall. CIPD. (2009) Performance management in action. London: CIPD. HOLBECHE, L. (2005) The high performance organisation: creating dynamic stability and sustainable success. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann. Murray, G., Bélanger, J., Giles, G. and Lapointe, P. Work and Employment Relations in the High-Performance Workplace, London: Continuum. PURCELL, J., KINNIE, N., HUTCHINSON, S., RAYTON, B. and SWART, J. (2003) Understanding the people and performance link: unlocking the black box. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. PURCELL, J., KINNIE, N., SWART, J. and RAYTON, B. (2009) People Management and Performance. Oxford: Routledge. Redman, T and Wilkinson, A. (2006) Contemporary Human Resource Management: Text and Cases (2nd ed.), Harlow: FT/Prentice
Chapters are regularly referred to from this key text
Module Guide
Page 21
Hall. Strategic HRM Boselie, P. (2010) Strategic human resource management : a balanced approach, London: McGraw Hill. Boxall, P. and Purcell, J. (2007) Strategy and human resource management, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2nd edition
Journals People Management The International Journal of productivity and Performance Management Work Study Human Resource Management Journal Harvard Business Review British Journal of Industrial Relations International Journal of Human Resource Management Industrial Relations Journal Journal of Performance Management Journal of Management Studies British Journal of Management Team performance Management Learning Leadership Journal of Organisational Change Management
These journals are indicative only. A literature search, and your own independent research will reveal other sources of authoritative journals articles which may be personally relevant.
Specific journal articles Baron, Angela, Armstrong, Michael (2004) ‘Get into line’, People Management, Vol. 10, Issue 20 KOCHANSKI, J. (2008) Four key steps to performance management. Workspan. Vol 51, No 2, February. pp32–36. Ramsay, H., Scholarios, D. and Harley, B. (2000) ‘Employees and High-Performance Work Systems: Testing Inside the Black Box’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38:4, pp. 501-531.
P. McGovern, C. Truss, L. Gratton, P. Stiles and
V. Hope-Bailey (1997) `Performance
Management and the New Psychological
Contract’, Human Resource Management
Journal, Vol.7, No.1.
Websites www.cipd.co.uk www.ies.co.uk
These websites contain authoritative research articles used by workplace practitioners Information on training, events,
Module Guide
Page 22
www.theworkfoundation.com
membership, and the latest issues regarding personnel and development in the UK An independent, apolitical, international center of research and consultancy in human resource issues The Work Foundation is the leading independent authority on work and its future
CIPD/ IES/ work foundation reports Armstrong, K. and Ward, A. (2006) What makes for effective performance management? http://www.theworkfoundation.com/research/publications/publicationdetail.aspx?oItemId=163
BROWN, D. (2010) Performance management: can the practice ever deliver the policy? Brighton: Institute for Employment Studies. 5pp. Available at: http://www.employment-studies.co.uk/pubs/report.php?id=op23 CIPD. (2005) Performance management [online]. Survey report. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/perfmangmt/general/_perfmagmt.htm [Accessed 22 October 2009].
CIPD. (2009) Performance management: an overview [online]. Factsheet. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Available at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/perfmangmt/general/perfman.htm CIPD (2009) Performance management in action: current trends and practice
10. Module Evaluation
During the second half of the delivery of this module, you will be asked to complete a module evaluation questionnaire to help us obtain your views on all aspects of the module. This is an extremely important process which helps us to continue to improve the delivery of the module in the future and to respond to issues that you bring to our attention. The module report in section 11 of this module guide includes a section which comments on the feedback we received from other students who have studied this module previously. Your questionnaire response is anonymous. Please help us to help you and other students at Anglia Ruskin by completing the Module Evaluation survey. We very much value our students’ views and it is very important to us that you provide feedback to help us make improvements. In addition to the Module Evaluation process, you can send any comment on anything related to your experience at Anglia Ruskin to [email protected] at any time.
Module Guide
Page 23
11. Report on Last Delivery of Module
MODULE REPORT FORM
This form should be completed by module tutors (where there is more than one delivery) and forwarded to Module Leaders who compiles the results on to one form for use at the Programme Committee and other methods of disseminating feedback to students.
Module Code and Title: Improving Organisational Performance
Anglia Ruskin Department: HRM, OB & Tourism
Location(s) of Delivery: Numerous
Academic Year: 2013-14 Semester/Trimester: 2
Enrolment Numbers (at each location):
Module Leader: Jill Baldwin
Other Module Tutors: Numerous
Student Achievement Provide a brief overview of student achievement on the module as evidenced by the range of marks awarded. A
detailed breakdown of marks will be available at the Departmental Assessment Panel.
A reasonable passmark, with marks that ranged from 17-80%. The majority of marks did fall at the lower end, and the results from the international partners were less pleasing. The average marks on the module was 50%
Feedback from Students Briefly summarise student responses, including any written comments
Students struggled to identify companies to base their essay upon.
Module Leader/Tutor’s Reflection on Delivery of the Module, including Response to Feedback from Students (including resources if appropriate)
It is necessary to make clearer the case studies available for students to use. More encouragement for research and participation to share this is necessary in seminars. The marking criteria is very detailed, and disappointingly students overseas did not follow this very closely.
Developments during the current year or planned for next year (if appropriate)
More contact with overseas partners
External Examiner’s Comments State whether the external examiner agreed the marks and/or commented on the module
Marks were agreed.
Module Guide
Page 24
Appendix 1: Re-Assessment Information
THIS INFORMATION ONLY APPLIES TO STUDENTS WHO ARE UNSUCCESSFUL IN THEIR FIRST SUBMISSION
The re-assessment for this module consists of one part. Due to the nature of research and application to two companies of your choice, the re-assessment is a re-work of the original piece, as agreed in the academic regulation for such case study assessment.
Part Type of assessment Word or time limit
Submission method
Deadline for assessment
1 Essay 3000 Turnitin®UK GradeMark or in hard copy (off main UK campus only)
Resit period: 21st July, 2014
Part 1 – Essay
Mark Learning Outcome
5. Structure and Approach: Relevance to question; treatment in depth; originality and creative thought; justification of organisational choices; logical structure; introduction and summary/ conclusion.
20% 1,2,3
6. Investigation and Use of Sources: Academic Definitions, Use of Conceptual Framework, Critical discussion of Strategic Alignment
30% 1,2,3
7. Reasoning, Argument and Analysis: Accurate presentation of 4 topics of evidence; logical development of argument; intelligent discussion to compare organisations; depth and detail; application of course material and reading; appropriate conclusions drawn
40% 1,2,3
8. Presentation and Style: Legibility; grammar; spelling; absence of typing errors; clear layout; requested information included.
10% 1,2,3
TOTAL MARKS 100%
As part of the seminar work and in preparation for your assessment you will have been researching and reviewing case studies of Performance Management and High Performance Working practices from organisations within or without the United Kingdom. Question/Task
Research and choose two organisations using high performance work (HPW) and/or Performance
Management (PM) practices, which you can compare and contrast in their approach.
Choices/ options
You may/ might explore two organisations in the same sector (e.g. manufacturing)
You may/ might explore two organisations in different sectors (e.g. manufacturing and service; public and private)
You may/ might explore HPW or PM in different sized organisations (e.g. large and SME).
