Evaluate Ian’s leadership style considering the existing literature. What type of leadership style would you adopt if you were in Ian’s position? Justify your position by drawing upon recognised leadership and management theories.
ASSESSMENT: Individual Coursework
BMO0264 Leading Managing and Developing People
|
Module Code: |
BMO0264 |
|
Module Title: |
Leading Managing and Developing People |
|
Assessment Type |
Individual Coursework |
|
Academic Year |
2021/22 |
|
Assessment Task |
|
|
This assessment task addresses the following learning outcomes from the module specification: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. |
|
|
Duration: N/A |
Word Count: 2500 words |
|
Task specific guidance: This assessment task is an individual 2,500-word essay. Your coursework should use an essay structure and be based on ‘suitable for referencing’ (recent) academic and practitioner material. The expectation is to write critically – avoid description of the content or material referred to. The reference list does not count towards the word limit. Taking the case study, The Information Systems Department at Fulchester University, as your starting point, you are required to undertake research to answer the following questions (The questions are weighted equally):
Case Study: The Information Systems Department at Fulchester University Fulchester University is one of the largest universities in the UK, with 30,000 students spread over five teaching sites. There is an extensive computer network in place, which is managed and supported by the information systems department. The main functions of the department are to ensure that the network is operating smoothly, to install and run an up-to-date portfolio of software and to provide a trouble-shooting services for network users. This is the most extensive and visible of the department’s roles and involves helping students in the drop-in suites and computer laboratories and the library, and also teaching, research and administrative staff using the network from PCs in their own offices. The department is managed by Ian Rafeeq, who is based in the University’s central administration block along with a small team of support staff. The service in the five teaching sites is provided by a team based at each location. In each case, these comprise a team leader, who reports to Ian Rafeeq and between eight and 10 information systems officers, depending on the size of site. HR services are provided from a central HR team at Fulchester and each HR Business Partner (such as yourself) is assigned several departments to deal with. The Information Systems department has recently become your responsibility and you have just received this e-mail from Ian Rafeeq: Hi, I’m glad we’ve got someone new in HR looking after us, between you and me the last one we had wasn’t much use. Anyway, I’ve got a problem here in Information Systems, it seems like every week that I have to turn up at the `leaving do` of one of the information systems officers. It’s all very pleasant, I make my usual speech and have a glass of wine, but with all these people leaving I’m having real difficulty running a service. I always seem to be a couple of people short at each site, though some sites are worse than others in that respect. It sometimes feels like I’m welcoming someone to the department one week and handing over their leaving present the next! Mind you, we also lose people with a bit more experience than that. It’s all down to money of course, and who can blame them, we can’t pay competitive rates in the university sector and people are bound to go to the private sector where they can earn more. It wouldn’t be so bad if wasn’t the best ones who leave all the time. They come to us after their degree with a couple of years` information systems work behind them, we give them some valuable experience and then they go off somewhere else. Training and qualifications are the big thing in our line of work, you’ve got to keep at the cutting edge of knowledge otherwise your skills are not marketable. Mind you, these people probably want a new challenge after a couple of years, I suppose the work must seem pretty routine once you’ve mastered it, but as we have only one team leader at each site there is no prospect of promotion. The Information Systems Officers who have been here a long time tend very rarely to leave, in fact as they have reached the top of the pay scale they are actually paid quite well and, given their skills, it would be hard for them to earn as much elsewhere. The trouble is they are not our best people, are no longer motivated and, to be honest, drag everyone else down. The other thing is, it is really difficult to find good new recruits, only last week I interviewed 12 people and none of them were any good, but we are so thin on the ground that we had taken on someone who hasn’t really got the skills and experience that we need. I know the university is trying to save money by advertising only in the Evening News, but it doesn’t seem to be working for us. I’m at a loss to know what to do, particularly as we can’t change the pay rates because they are agreed at national level. Can you come and see me at 9am tomorrow, I could do with some help with this? Regards, Ian Ian Rafeeq seems to have his own ideas as to the nature, extent and causes of his labour turnover problem. The turnover situation is becoming critical for the business, and you cannot change the nationally agreed rates. You are also aware that many view pay as a short-term intervention for turnover issues. |
|
|
General study guidance:
|
|
|
Assessment criteria |
|
|
|
Learning Outcomes |
|
|
This section is for information only. The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these are the things you need to show in this piece of work. On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate: Knowledge and Understanding
Ability
Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions. |
|
|
Submission information |
|
|
Word Limit: |
2500 words |
|
Submission Date: |
Block 3 (Nov & Dec 2021): 17/12/2021 Block 5 (Feb & Mar 2022): 11/03/2022 |
|
Feedback Date: |
Block 3: 28/01/2022 Block 5: 01/04/2022 |
|
Submission Time: |
15.00 |
|
Submission Method: |
Electronically via module site in Brightspace. Paper/hard copy submissions are not required. For technical support, please contact: busvle@hud.ac.uk |
Appendix 1 PGT Assessment Criteria
These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed. They describe different levels of performance of a given criteria.
Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.
The grades between Pass and Merit should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module. The higher-level categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the basic requirement, perform at a superior level beyond the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
|
|
Unacceptable |
Unsatisfactory |
Pass |
Merit |
Distinction |
||||
|
0 – 9 |
10-19 |
20-34 |
35-49 |
50-59 |
60-69 |
70-79 |
80-89 |
90-100 |
|
|
Fulfilment of relevant learning outcomes |
Not met or minimal |
Not met or minimal |
Not met or partially met |
Not met or partially met |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
|
Response to the question /task |
No response |
Little response |
Insufficient response |
Adequate response, but with limitations |
Adequate response |
Secure response to assessment task |
Very good response to topic; elements of sophistication |
Clear command of assessment task; sophisticated approach |
Full command of assessment task; imaginative approach demonstrating flair and creativity |
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
|
|
Unacceptable A superficial answer with only peripheral knowledge of core material and very little critical ability |
Unsatisfactory Some knowledge of core material but limited. |
Pass A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles |
Merit A coherent answer that demonstrates critical evaluation |
Distinction An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability
|
||||
|
|
0-9 |
10-19 |
20-34 |
35-49 |
50-59 |
60-69 |
70-79 |
80-89 |
90-100 |
|
Conceptual and critical understanding of contemporary / seminal knowledge in the subject |
Entirely lacking in evidence of knowledge and understanding |
Typically, only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts |
Knowledge of concepts falls short of prescribed range Typically only able to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts |
Marginally insufficient. Adequate knowledge of concepts within prescribed range but fails to adequately solve problems posed by assessment |
A systematic understanding of knowledge; critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights; can evaluate critically current research and can evaluate methodologies |
Approaching excellence in some areas with evidence of the potential to undertake Research. Well-developed relevant argument, good degree of accuracy and technical competence |
Excellent. Displays (for example): high levels of accuracy; evidence of the potential to undertake research; the ability to analyse primary sources critically. |
Insightful. Displays (for example): excellent research potential; flexibility of thought; possibly of publishable quality. |
Striking and insightful. Displays (for example): publishable quality; outstanding research potential; originality and independent thought; ability to make informed judgements. |
|
Understanding |
Limited insight into the problem or topic |
Limited insight into the problem or topic |
Limited insight into the problem or topic |
Some insight into the problem or topic |
Practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline |
Independent, critical evaluation of full range of theories with some evidence of originality |
Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis |
Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis |
Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis |
|
Use of evidence and sources to support task |
Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources |
Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources |
Some irrelevant and/or out of date Sources |
Limited sources |
Comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship
|
Complex work and concepts presented, key texts used effectively |
Full range of sources used selectively to support argument
|
Full range of sources used selectively to support argument
|
Full range of sources used selectively to support argument
|
|
Development of ideas |
Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent |
Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent |
Argument not developed and may be confused and incoherent |
Argument not fully developed and may lack structure |
The argument is developed but may lack fluency
|
Argument concise and explicit
|
Coherent and compelling argument well presented
|
Coherent and compelling argument well presented
|
Coherent and compelling argument well presented
|


