Posted: February 21st, 2023

Managing Behaviour In Organisations Paper 1000 Words essay

1
MGMT90018
Managing Behaviour in Organisations
Assignment 1 – Critical Analysis Paper (20%)
2021 Semester 1
Prepared by
Adam Barsky, Subject Coordinator (abarsky@unimelb.edu.au)
Andrew Yu
Jesse Olsen
Victor Sojo
Department of Management and Marketing
Faculty of Business and Economics
2
Overview
The purpose of the critical analysis paper in this course is to extend your critical thinking
abilities within the topics that we have covered as part of this course. The assignment is
intended to be open ended to push each of you to think through the issues that managers and
organisations face when assessing potential matters that may emerge in the work
environment.
Due Date: Friday, April 9 @ 17:00 (Melbourne time)
This is an individual assignment in which you will submit a critical analysis paper of 1000
words (+/-10%; excluding headings, in-text citations, and the reference list). As noted, in the
Subject Guide, the Critical Analysis Assignment represents 20% of your total grade for the
course.
Topic
In the first five (5) weeks of this course, we have discussed the topics of ethics, job
performance & work behaviours, personality & values, attitudes, beliefs, & perceptions, and
motivation. For this assignment, you will apply your understanding of these topics to a
practical issue that organisations are facing today. You must draw upon the readings,
activities, and use your own research to provide a critical analysis of up to (3) of the
following questions. You can choose to do one, two or three of the questions below. It is up
to you if you want to cover more topics in less depth or one topic in more depth:
COVID has changed the way we work – particularly with respect to working remotely.
1. What are the key ethical dilemmas and issues that have arisen from the change to
remote work? What recommendations would you give organisational leaders and
decision makers to manage these ethical issues?
2. How has job performance and work behaviour changed as a function of remote work?
What recommendations would you give organisational leaders and decision makers
to manage these changes?
3. How have workers with different personality types responded to remote work?
Choose one personality trait and describe what recommendations you would give
organisational leaders and decision makers to manage employees with this
personality trait who are working remotely.
4. How have work attitudes (e.g., commitment to companies, what people find
satisfying in their work) shifted as a result of remote work? What recommendations
would you give organisational leaders and decision-makers to help them understand
and manage employee attitudes when most of the organisation is working remotely?
5. How has remote work changed what and how managers motivate employees? What
recommendations would you give organisational leaders and decision-makers to help
them motivate employees who are working remotely?
Submission Guidelines
Please read the following section carefully and make sure to email the subject coordinator
should you have questions about any of the following. Not following these basic
instructions will lead to deductions to your final mark on this assignment.
3
– Formatting style: You are expected to follow the American Psychological Association
(APA) 7th edition style for headings and seriation, citation and referencing, and tables
and figures (if applicable).
o See the UniMelb library resource for details: https://library.unimelb.edu.au/recite/apa
o Another helpful online resource can be found at:
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/general_format.html
– In-text formatting: Submissions should be double-spaced, 12 pt Times New Roman
font, 1” margins all around, and in a Microsoft Word file format (i.e., .doc, .docx) or PDF.
– File naming: For consistency across all submissions, your file should be named the
following format: “YourName.MGMT90018.Sem2.Assignment1”
o YourName = Your name
– Submission: Critical analysis papers must be uploaded as a .doc, .docx, or .pdf file and
submitted using LMS, via the ‘Assignments’ link (Assignments → Assignment 1 Critical
Analysis Paper). It would be wise to take a screen capture or photo of the final
submission screen for your own records.
– Similarity Checks and Plagiarism: Submissions will be processed through TurnItIn to
check for plagiarism (see Week 1’s module for a discussion of what constitutes
plagiarism).
o You will be able to check your own similarity scores (for potential plagiarism) before
actually submitting the assignment to us. However, TurnItIn may restrict the
frequency at which you can check this, if you attempt to conduct multiple checks in a
short amount of time.
o Please be familiar with what academic integrity, plagiarism, and collusion mean at
the University (https://academicintegrity.unimelb.edu.au/#plagiarism-and-collusion).
General Expectations and Recommendations
The most important aspect of this assignment is simply that you provide a critical analysis of
and reflection on the topic. This assignment was intentionally designed as a broad topic so
that there are different directions that you could take this assignment and therefore there are
many ‘correct answers.’ Be sure to (a) provide support for your position using available
research, (b) discuss the opposing perspective, and (c) provide rationale as to why your
arguments are preferable.
Below are several pointers that will help your thought processes better:
– A paper like this should include an introduction, body, and conclusion.
– It would be useful to use headings and subheadings to break up and organise your paper.
– You do not need a cover sheet, but be sure to include the subject code and name, your
name (no nicknames, please), and your student number at the top left hand corner of
the first page. For example:
4
Subject: MGMT 90018 – Managerial Psychology
Topic: Assignment 1
Jane Smith (0123456789)
– For more basic information about writing, the University of Melbourne offers some
resources for postgraduate students here:
https://services.unimelb.edu.au/academicskills/all_resources#general-skills
You are expected to draw on the following in your assignment:
– Concepts and evidence discussed in the seminars and assigned readings for Weeks 1 to 5.
– You are not expected to cover every single topic/theory covered in each of the Weeks 1 to
5. Rather, you should choose specific theories or concepts that are relevant to helping
you make your point for your critical analysis or help to support the examples that you
are using to communicate your point.
– As a guideline and given the length requirement, you should aim to include a balance of
three to five main ideas covered in the week(s) you are focusing on.
– The seminars should be helpful in guiding you through various topics to complete the
assignment. However, because the seminars are typically summaries and descriptions of
established research, you should aim to cite original sources (which may include assigned
readings and outside readings), rather than just rely on the seminars themselves.
– Applicable personal examples, including your personal experience from professional
work, school/university, volunteer work, other interest/belief groups, and/or class
discussions and activities (e.g., personality tests, perceptions, motivation exercises, etc.).
o This can be a useful part of the paper. However, be careful not to overemphasise this;
other sources need to be considered to further understand and take your experience
into perspective.
o You are expected to conduct your own additional research using academic/scholarly
sources. The best place to start searching for academic sources is through the
university library website.
▪ Web of Science (WOS) is a very good database to start with and includes
reputable academic sources. To access WOS, you can go to
https://library.unimelb.edu.au. Select ‘Databases’ and type in ‘Web of Science’,
select connect to Web of Science, which should then take you to a university
login screen for you to gain access to WOS.
▪ A secondary database might be Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com/).
However, note that the sources listed on scholar are not always peer-reviewed
and may be less reputable.
o Peer-reviewed journal articles (and in some cases, scholarly/academic books) are the
most preferred type of source. Be sure to consider whether online resources are the
perspective or opinion of a particular writer. Good sources are those that have been
peer-reviewed and are grounded in scientific evidence.
o Be careful not to use websites/blogs/social media posts, etc. that may be intended to
promote a person and/or his/her services. Websites often reflect individual opinions
and anecdotes, and they are not usually reviewed by experts. Thus, the quality of the
information there will often be suspect. Popular books should also be considered
5
with caution, as they often do not cite appropriate evidence to make the claims that
they do.
Final Thoughts: This is a ‘Critical Analysis Paper’. A critical analysis means that you will
offer your final opinion/view or evaluation, but it importantly considers the facts and the
different views/possibilities that might be out there. Of course, you need to briefly
communicate WHAT your argument/point of view is and HOW these relate to the prompt
(i.e., descriptive analysis), but your primary focus needs to be on WHY you take a certain
position (supported largely by sound logic and, where necessary, academic research). To
support your arguments and the position you take, use examples from things you have
observed or work/personal experiences that can help a reader gain better clarity in your
critical analysis. Put simply, we want you to focus more on the WHY and less on the WHAT
and HOW. Do not leave it up to your marker to make the connections for you. Be sure to
explain and support your arguments.
6
Marking
Marking will be out of a maximum of 100 points, which will be broken down according to the following table.
ASSIGNMENT 1 MARKING CRITERIA
CRITERIA N (0-49%) PASS (50-64%) H3 (65-69%) H2B (70-74%) H2A (75-79%) H1 (80-100%)
CONTENT
Introduction: Clarity
of aim, context, &
structure
(5 mark)
• Very poor
introduction that fails
to explain the aim,
context, and structure
of the paper.
• Inadequate introduction
to the paper. The
discussion of the paper’s
aim, context, and
structure is unclear.
• Adequate
introduction to the
paper. The discussion
of the paper’s aim,
context, and structure
is somewhat unclear.
• Good introduction to the
paper. The discussion of
the paper’s aim, context,
and structure is mostly
clear.
• Very good introduction to the
paper. The discussion of the
paper’s aim, context, and
structure is clear.
• Excellent introduction to the
paper. The discussion of the
paper’s aim, context, and
structure is very clear.
Theory: Integration of
Organisational
Behaviour theories
(20 marks)
• Very poor use of
relevant
Organisational
Behaviour concepts,
theories, and
terminologies in
analysis.
• Rudimentary use of
relevant Organisational
Behaviour concepts,
theories, and
terminologies in analysis.
• Adequate use of
relevant
Organisational
Behaviour concepts,
theories, and
terminologies in
analysis.
• Good use of relevant
Organisational Behaviour
concepts, theories, and
terminologies in analysis.
• Very good use of relevant
Organisational Behaviour
concepts, theories, and
terminologies in analysis.
• Excellent use of relevant and
complex Organisational
Behaviour concepts, theories,
and terminologies in
analysis.
Supporting Evidence:
Quality of the
reflection and use of
examples
(15 marks)
• Examples are of
extremely low quality
or contradict
arguments.
• Little to no reflection
included. What is
present is very poor in
quality.
• Examples are mostly
absent or irrelevant.
• Some reflection present
but is superficial in
quality.
• Some examples are
present but are of low
quality.
• Some reflection
present but is of low
quality.
• Examples are present but
few in number and not of
high quality.
• Reflection is present and
is mostly clear.
• Some examples are present
and are of high quality.
• Reflection is present and is of
high-quality.
• Multiple high-quality
examples are present.
• Reflection is present and of
very high-quality.
Critical analysis: Use
of objective analysis of
facts to form a
judgement
(20 marks)
• Discussion of
theoretical content (if
any) is entirely
descriptive.
• Discussion of theoretical
content is mostly
descriptive.
• Discussion of
theoretical content is
both descriptive and
analytical.
• Discussion of theoretical
content is more analytical
than descriptive.
• Discussion incorporates some
analysis, synthesis, and
critical evaluation of
theoretical content.
• Discussion incorporates
detailed analysis, synthesis
and critical evaluation of
theoretical content.
Recommendations:
Quality of
Recommendations
(20 mark)
• Recommendations not
adequately linked to
analysis.
• Recommendations
inadequately address
the topic.
• Recommendations
mostly linked to general
analysis.
• Recommendations
adequately address major
aspects of the topic.
• Recommendations
linked to analysis.
• Recommendations
address most aspects
of the topic directly.
• Recommendations clearly
linked to analysis.
• Recommendations
address all aspects of the
topic directly and in
detail.
• Recommendations very
clearly linked to analysis.
• Conclusions address all
aspects of the topic directly
and in detail.
• Some relevant and original
insights are also provided.
• Recommendations strongly
linked to analysis.
• Conclusions
comprehensively address all
aspects of the topic.
• Relevant and original
insights are also provided.
7
STYLE
Presentation: Clarity
of the paper
(10 marks)
• Grammar, spelling, and
punctuation: Very poor
control and use of
language conventions.
Major errors throughout.
• Writing style:
Inappropriate or
inconsistent writing style
used.
• Format: Very poor
formatting. Assignment
guidelines not adhered to.
• Adherence to word length:
Inadequate word length.
• Grammar, spelling, and
punctuation:
Inadequate control and
use of language
conventions, with some
errors throughout.
Further editing
required.
• Writing style: Mostly
consistent but could be
refined to improve
clarity and flow.
• Format: Adequate
formatting that adheres
to assignment
guidelines.
• Adherence to word
length: Writing could
generally be more
succinct/tightly
structured to avoid
repetition.
• Grammar, spelling, and
punctuation: Adequate
control and use of
language conventions,
with some errors
throughout.
• Writing style:
Consistent and
generally conveys ideas
clearly.
• Format: Adequate
formatting. Information
mostly presented in a
selection of formats that
ensure clarity.
• Adherence to word
length: Writing could
be more succinct/tightly
structured in some
sections.
• Grammar, spelling,
and punctuation:
Good control and use
of language
conventions, with few
minor errors
throughout.
• Writing style:
Consistent and
generally conveys
ideas clearly.
• Format: Good
formatting.
Information
presented in a range
of formats that
enhance clarity.
• Adherence to word
length: Writing is
mostly succinct and
logically structured.
• Grammar, spelling, and
punctuation: Very good
control and use of language
conventions.
• Writing style: Sophisticated
and conveys ideas clearly.
• Format: Very good
formatting. Information
presented in a range of
formats that enhance clarity
and reader interest.
• Adherence to word length:
Writing is succinct and wellstructured.
• Grammar, spelling, and
punctuation: Excellent control
and use of language
conventions.
• Writing style: Highly
sophisticated and conveys ideas
very clearly.
• Format: Excellent formatting.
Information presented in
optimal formats that maximise
clarity and reader interest.
• Adherence to word length:
Writing is very succinct and
tightly structured.
References: Evidence
of scholarship
(10 marks)
• Poor range of sources
present, if at all.
• Insufficient reference list
provided.
• Numerous citation errors
apparent in the reference
list and/or in the paper.
• Inadequate range of
sources present.
• Majority of material
sourced from the lecture
slides.
• Inadequate reference
list provided.
• Somewhat consistent
referencing style used
with some errors
present in the reference
list and/or in the paper.
• Adequate range of
sources present.
• Majority of material
sourced from the
required readings.
• Adequate reference list
provided.
• Relatively consistent
referencing style used
with some errors
present in the reference
list and/or in the paper.
• Good range of sources
present.
• Majority of material
sourced from
academic journal
articles, including
both the required
readings and
additional research.
• Detailed reference list
provided.
• Consistent
referencing style used
with few errors
present in the
reference list and/or
in the paper.
• Very good range of sources
present.
• Majority of material sourced
from academic journal
articles, with a heavy
emphasis on additional
research.
• Very detailed reference list
provided.
• Consistent referencing style
used with very few errors
present in the reference list
and/or in the paper.
• Excellent range of sources
present.
• Majority of material sourced
from academic journal articles,
with almost all references
coming from additional
research.
• Extensive reference list
provided.
• Consistent referencing style
used with no errors present in
the reference list and/or in the
paper.

Check Price Discount

Study Notes, Research Topics & Assignment Examples: Resources and references | Human Resource Management homework help »psy 605 asswk2