5CO01 Assignment Brief June 2026 | Artiron Motors Case
5CO01 Organisational performance and culture in practice |
|
Learner Assessment Brief |
|
Assessment ID / CIPD_5CO01_26_01 |
|
|
|
Level 5 Associate Diploma in People Management Organisational Learning and Development |
- Version 1 – Released June 2026
- Expires June 2027
- Study Centre information only: Last moderation window is September 2027
|
Centre number: |
1 |
1 |
9 |
9 |
||||||
|
Centre name:
|
ITonlinelearning |
|||||||||
|
Learner number (1st 7 digits of CIPD Membership number): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Learner surname: |
|
|||||||||
|
Learner other names: |
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Unit code: |
5CO01 |
|||||||||
|
Unit title: |
Organisational performance and culture in practice |
|||||||||
|
Assessment ID: |
CIPD_5CO01_26_01 |
|||||||||
|
Assessment start date: |
|
|||||||||
|
Assessment submission date: |
|
|||||||||
|
First resubmission date for centre marking – if applicable: |
|
|||||||||
|
Second resubmission date for centre marking – if applicable: |
|
|||||||||
|
Declared word count: |
|
|||||||||
|
Declared word count resubmission 1 – if applicable: |
|
|||||||||
|
Declared word count resubmission 2 – if applicable: |
|
|||||||||
This unit assessment examines the connections between organisational structure and the wider world of work in a business context. It highlights the factors and trends, including the digital environment, that impact on business strategy and workforce planning, recognising the influence of culture, employee wellbeing and behaviour in delivering change and organisational performance.
CIPD’s insight
We provide you with this information from our website to connect you with our research and insights on the topic, so you can explore our latest thinking. It is not intended to replace the learning and formative assessment provided by your Study Centre.
Organisational climate and culture (October 2025)
Organisational culture is an important aspect of organisational life and a term that has become a mainstay among business leaders. The work of HR, L&D and OD influences and is influenced by organisational culture because every organisation is made up of human relationships and human interactions.
Despite its dominance, the language of culture is often unclear, difficult to define, and therefore hard to measure. Consequently, real culture change is near-impossible if we can’t actually pin down what we’re looking to change. Rather than culture, focusing on organisational climate – the meaning and behaviour attached to policies, practices and procedures employees experience – is a much more specific, tangible way to positively influence the workplace.
This factsheet explores why organisational culture is a popular but limited construct, and why shifting to organisational climate is much more effective for employers.
Explore our viewpoint on organisational culture in more detail.
https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/factsheets/organisation-culture-change-factsheet/
Wellbeing at work (Sept 2025)
Fostering employee wellbeing is good for people and the organisation. Promoting wellbeing can help prevent stress and create positive working environments where individuals and organisations can thrive. Good health and wellbeing can be a core enabler of employee engagement and organisational performance.
This factsheet focuses on wellbeing in the workplace, explaining why it matters. We outline the domains of our wellbeing model, and look at the role of different stakeholders in cultivating a healthy workplace.
Explore our viewpoint on employee health and wellbeing in more detail, along with actions for government and recommendations for employers.
https://www.cipd.org/uk/knowledge/factsheets/well-being-factsheet/
Relevant podcasts
For more information on this unit’s key issues, listen to CIPD’s podcast, HR People Pod.
Episode 11: Workplace wellbeing
Episode 42: Organisational change readiness
Preparation for the taskYou must:
|
Task
This task requires you to answer 12 questions, each relating to the case study. Your answers should respond accurately to the questions and should be informed by wider reading from key academic texts, articles and relevant publications. References should be included within each of your answers and full details presented in a bibliography at the end of your assessment.
Please ensure that your work is presented clearly and that you use either the question number or the question in full as a heading for each of your answers. Please also ensure that your work complies with the word count requirements stated at the end of the assessment brief.
Case study
Artiron Motors is a multinational automotive manufacturer with more than 50,000 employees, an annual revenue of £25 billion, and a pre-tax profit of £2.1 billion. The company has sites in the UK, five European countries, the US and Canada, selling to major markets in the UK, Europe, the US, Canada and China. Artiron Motors has a strong focus on sustainability, which impacts manufacturing processes, support functions, and the development of new electric vehicles (EVs).
An ambitious goal has just been set to be carbon net zero by 2036. The strategy to support this goal was developed by senior leaders following extensive consultation with employees. This strategy, known as the Evolve strategy, aims to support the organisation to evolve into a more sustainable organisation. Artiron Motors has a complex organisational structure that includes features of a divisional structure for manufacturing and corporate functions such as finance, marketing and people, and features of a matrix structure for projects related to new products. Employees in corporate functions work in open plan offices and can work from home up to two days a week.
The company is facing significant external pressures, including tariffs, protectionism, rising energy costs, supply chain disruptions, advancements in battery technology, and increasing demand for both eco-friendly and safer vehicles. As an internationally known brand, a significant developer and producer of motor vehicles, and a large, profitable employer, Artiron Motors has been the subject of, and continues to face, many attempted cyber-attacks. Understanding the causes of these external pressures and analysing their potential impact is essential for Artiron Motors to achieve its goals.
Manufacturing processes rely heavily on robotics for activities including painting, welding, assembly, quality checking and material handling. Artiron Motors plan to introduce collaborative robots, known as cobots, to work alongside humans. In addition, manufacturing plants will require upgrading for EV production.
The People Team is led by a people director and organised into sub-teams that specialise in resourcing, talent management, reward, employment relations and learning and development. A shared service centre deals with routine queries from managers and employees, many of which are dealt with by an AI assistant known as Arti. Each people specialism has a hierarchical structure that includes a manager, team leader, advisers and assistants.
The employment relations sub-team recently surveyed employees to gain their opinion on their experience of working for Artiron Motors. The responses to the survey show that staff want Artiron Motors to do more to support their wellbeing. In particular, dissatisfaction was shown with:
- personal protective equipment (PPE) by production operatives
- long working hours by support functions
- and pay by all employees.
To be successful, the Evolve strategy requires a talent pipeline. The early careers programme provides part of the talent pipeline and includes apprenticeships (a paid work-based training programme that combines work and study), placement years for students on degree programmes, and two-year contracts for students who have completed degree programmes. The roles are located in a variety of geographical locations and in a range of specialisms such as manufacturing, engineering, product design, project management, data analytics, finance, and people management. New employees on the early careers programme attend a corporate induction, along with other new starters in other roles. During the induction, the company mission and vision statements are communicated and discussed, along with organisational values. Senior staff, who wear the same uniforms as all other staff, explain the importance of quality, innovation, sustainability, and inclusion.
Questions
Q1. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a divisional structure and a matrix structure for Artiron Motors, given the nature and size of the organisation. (AC 1.1)
Q2. Analyse how two customer preferences for eco-friendly products could impact organisational strategy at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.2)
Q3. Analyse the impact of tariffs and supply chain disruption on Artiron Motors. (AC 1.3)
Q4. Assess the impact of robotics and cyberattacks on the car manufacturing industry and how this impacts work at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.4)
Q5. Explain how Schein’s model of organisational culture could help Artiron Motors understand their organisational culture. (AC 2.1)
Q6. Assess how people practices could positively support an innovative and inclusive culture at Artiron Motors. (AC 2.2)
Q7. Referring to at least one model or theory of change management, explain how Artiron Motors can manage its transition towards carbon net zero. (AC 2.3)
Q8. Referring to one model of how change is experienced by employees, discuss how change could be experienced by employees at Artiron Motors during the change to introduce cobots. (AC 2.4)
Q9. Assess two factors that could impact employee wellbeing at Artiron Motors including why it is important that these factors are addressed. (AC 2.5)
Q10. Discuss how different roles in the People Team at Artiron Motors could support employees on early careers programmes through any three stages of the employee lifecycle. (AC 3.1)
Q11. Analyse how people practices could help Artiron Motors achieve their goal to be carbon net zero by 2036. (AC 3.2)
Q12. Discuss how Artiron Motors could consult and engage with employees to improve wellbeing. (AC 3.3)
|
Your evidence must consist of:
|
Reference list/Bibliography
Answer Checklist
You may find the following checklist helpful to make sure that you have answered all the questions. You don’t have to use it if you don’t want to.
|
Questions |
Answered |
|
|
Q1. |
Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a divisional structure and a matrix structure for Artiron Motors, given the nature and size of the organisation. (AC 1.1) |
|
|
Q2. |
Analyse how two customer preferences for eco-friendly products could impact organisational strategy at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.2) |
|
|
Q3. |
Analyse the impact of tariffs and supply chain disruption on Artiron Motors. (AC 1.3) |
|
|
Q4 |
Assess the impact of robotics and cyberattacks on the car manufacturing industry and how this impacts work at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.4) |
|
|
Q5. |
Explain how Schein’s model of organisational culture could help Artiron Motors understand their organisational culture. (AC 2.1) |
|
|
Q6. |
Assess how people practices could positively support an innovative and inclusive culture at Artiron Motors. (AC 2.2) |
|
|
Q7. |
Referring to at least one model or theory of change management, explain how Artiron Motors can manage its transition towards carbon net zero. (AC 2.3) |
|
|
Q8. |
Referring to one model of how change is experienced by employees, discuss how change could be experienced by employees at Artiron Motors during the change to introduce cobots. (AC 2.4) |
|
|
Q9. |
Assess two factors that could impact employee wellbeing at Artiron Motors including why it is important that these factors are addressed. (AC 2.5) |
|
|
Q10. |
Discuss how different roles in the People Team at Artiron Motors could support employees on early careers programmes through any three stages of the employee lifecycle. (AC 3.1) |
|
|
Q11. |
Analyse how people practices could help Artiron Motors achieve their goal to be carbon net zero by 2036. (AC 3.2) |
|
|
Q12. |
Discuss how Artiron Motors could consult and engage with employees to improve wellbeing. (AC 3.3) |
|
Declaration of Authentication
Declaration by learner
I can confirm that:
I understand the consequences of malpractice and accept that any violation of this agreement may result in disciplinary action. |
|
Learner name: |
|
Learner signature:(This must be a true signature, so a handwritten signature, or a photo or scan of a handwritten signature, or an e-signature. A typed signature is not acceptable.) |
|
Date of submission*Date of first re-submission (if applicable)*Date of second re-submission (if applicable)**This should be the date on which you submit your assessment for marking. |
|
Marking Guidance for Assessors
You should mark in line with the marking descriptors set out on page 12 of this brief.
You must provide a mark from one to four for each question set. You must provide constructive, developmental feedback against each question where you award a mark of one, so refer/fail and rich summary feedback at the end of the feedback form, following the instructions provided there.
To pass the unit assessment learners must achieve a mark of two (Low Pass) or above for each ofthe questions. You must refer/fail them if you award a mark of one for any of the questions.
Please ensure that you use the correct terminology. Learners have three attempts at the assessment. They only ‘fail’ the assessment if they do not achieve a mark of one for any of the questions at their third attempt. Until then they are ‘referred’.
When you have marked each question, you should total the marks awarded and determine the unit outcome. The table below shows the marking bands for each outcome for this unit.
|
Overall mark |
Unit result |
|
0 to 23 |
Refer/Fail |
|
24 to 30 |
Low Pass |
|
31 to 39 |
Pass |
|
40 to 48 |
High Pass |
Please note that the unit outcome is provided:
- to help learners understand where they are performing well and where they may need to develop
- to help inform your teaching practice
- for moderation purposes
The qualification is not graded and unit outcomes do not appear on learners’ certificates or statements of unit credit.
Marking Descriptors
|
Mark |
Range |
Descriptor |
|
1 |
Refer/Fail |
The response DOES NOT
|
|
2 |
Low Pass |
The response DOES
|
|
3 |
Pass
|
The response
|
|
4 |
High Pass |
The response
|
|
|
*Not all ACs in each unit need a reference. If they don’t, the brief will say so. All ACs in Unit 5CO01 require a reference. References should be presented using a recognised form of referencing. For example, if using Harvard referencing, this would include in-text citations and a list of references or bibliography at the end of the assessment. |
|
Marking grid and feedback for learner
|
Unit 5CO01: Assessor Feedback to Learner |
|||
|
Centre number |
|
||
|
Centre name |
|
||
|
Learner number (1st 7 digits of CIPD Membership number) |
|
||
|
Learner surname |
|
||
|
Learner other names (e.g. first name and middle name(s)) |
|
||
|
Reported word count Submission |
|
Actual word count Submission |
|
|
Reported word count Resubmission 1 |
|
Actual word count Resubmission 1 |
|
|
Reported word count Resubmission 2 |
|
Actual word count Resubmission 2 |
|
Note to Assessor – Please enter a mark for each AC. You need only provide feedback where you have awarded a mark of 1. This feedback should be developmental.
|
TASK |
||
|
Question Number |
Question |
Mark 1-4 |
|
Q1. |
Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a divisional structure and a matrix structure for Artiron Motors, given the nature and size of the organisation. (AC 1.1) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q2. |
Analyse how two customer preferences for eco-friendly products could impact organisational strategy at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.2) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q3. |
Analyse the impact of tariffs and supply chain disruption on Artiron Motors. (AC 1.3) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q4. |
Assess the impact of robotics and cyberattacks on the car manufacturing industry and how this impacts work at Artiron Motors. (AC 1.4) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q5. |
Explain how Schein’s model of organisational culture could help Artiron Motors understand their organisational culture. (AC 2.1) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q6. |
Assess how people practices could positively support an innovative and inclusive culture at Artiron Motors. (AC 2.2) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q7. |
Referring to at least one model or theory of change management, explain how Artiron Motors can manage its transition towards carbon net zero. (AC 2.3) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q8. |
Referring to one model of how change is experienced by employees, discuss how change could be experienced by employees at Artiron Motors during the change to introduce cobots. (AC 2.4) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q9. |
Assess two factors that could impact employee wellbeing at Artiron Motors including why it is important that these factors are addressed. (AC 2.5) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q10. |
Discuss how different roles in the People Team at Artiron Motors could support employees on early careers programmes through any three stages of the employee lifecycle. (AC 3.1) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q11. |
Analyse how people practices could help Artiron Motors achieve their goal to be carbon net zero by 2036. (AC 3.2) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Q12. |
Discuss how Artiron Motors could consult and engage with employees to improve wellbeing. (AC 3.3) |
|
|
Assessor feedback first submission (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 1 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Assessor feedback resubmission 2 (if applicable) |
|
|
|
Total marks for TASK |
|
|
|
Total marks for TASK (resubmission 1 if applicable) |
|
|
|
Total marks for TASK (resubmission 2 if applicable) |
|
|
|
Total marks for UNIT |
|
Grade |
|
||
|
Total marks for UNIT (resubmission 1 if applicable)
|
|
Grade (resubmission 1 if applicable) |
|
||
|
Total marks for UNIT (resubmission 2 if applicable)
|
|
Grade (resubmission 2 if applicable) |
|
||
|
Assessor Feedback Summary Please use this box to summarise your feedback on the assessment overall. This should highlight strengths and any areas for improvement, either referring to specific ACs or commenting more generally across the assessment. (Note: developmental feedback on any ACs awarded a mark of 1 should have already been provided in the relevant box of the assessment form above. Please use a different font colour for any resubmission comments) |
|
||||
|
|
Submission |
Resubmission 1 |
Resubmission 2 |
||
|
Assessor name |
|
|
|
||
|
Assessor signature* I confirm that I am satisfied that to the best of my knowledge, the work produced is solely that of the learner. |
|
|
|
||
|
Date |
|
|
|
||
*This must be a true signature, so a handwritten signature, or a photo or scan of a handwritten signature, or an e-signature. A typed signature is not acceptable.
June 2026 Brief at a Glance
| Requirement | Current brief |
|---|---|
| Unit | 5CO01 Organisational Performance and Culture in Practice |
| Assessment ID | CIPD_5CO01_26_01 |
| Qualification | Level 5 Associate Diploma in People Management |
| Case organisation | Artiron Motors |
| Questions | 12 |
| Recommended total | Approximately 4,550 words |
| Accepted range | 4,095–5,005 words |
| Release date | June 2026 |
| Expiry date | June 2027 |
| Last moderation window | September 2027 |
| Referencing | References required across all assessment criteria |
Suggested 4,550-Word Planning Guide
| Question | Suggested words |
|---|---|
| Q1 | 430 |
| Q2 | 350 |
| Q3 | 350 |
| Q4 | 430 |
| Q5 | 330 |
| Q6 | 390 |
| Q7 | 400 |
| Q8 | 370 |
| Q9 | 360 |
| Q10 | 420 |
| Q11 | 400 |
| Q12 | 320 |
| Total | 4,550 |
Example Answer of Question 1
Q1. Evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a divisional structure and a matrix structure for Artiron Motors, given the nature and size of the organisation. (AC 1.1)
Artiron Motors’ combination of divisional and matrix features is broadly appropriate for a multinational automotive manufacturer with more than 50,000 employees, although each structure creates different control and coordination risks. A divisional structure groups related activities around major outputs or responsibilities and can give managers clearer accountability for performance (Mintzberg, 1980). At Artiron Motors, divisional features across manufacturing and corporate functions such as finance, marketing and people management reduce the need for every decision to be made centrally. This is valuable in a business generating £25 billion in annual revenue and operating across several countries.
The principal advantage of the divisional structure is operational focus. Manufacturing leaders can concentrate on production quality, plant efficiency and upgrades for electric-vehicle production, while corporate functions retain specialist policies and controls. Clear responsibility should also make it easier to identify where costs, delays or performance problems arise. However, separation may create silos. Manufacturing may prioritise output and cost control while the People Team focuses on capability, wellbeing and employee relations. Without integration, concerns about PPE, long working hours and pay may be treated separately from the Evolve strategy, even though they can affect organisational performance. Divisional arrangements may also duplicate management and support activities, increasing costs at Artiron Motors’ scale.
The matrix structure is suitable for new-product projects because it combines functional expertise with project responsibility (Galbraith, 1971). Developing electric vehicles and upgrading manufacturing plants require contributions from engineering, manufacturing, finance, project management, product design, data analytics, marketing and people specialists. Matrix working enables Artiron Motors to use this expertise across projects without permanently placing every specialist within a separate product unit. It can therefore strengthen knowledge sharing and ensure that product decisions consider technical, financial, workforce and sustainability requirements.
However, matrix working can reduce clarity. Employees may receive competing instructions from functional and project managers, while managers may disagree over budgets, specialist availability or deadlines. Research on cross-functional structures identifies authority conflict and increased coordination demands as recurring matrix problems (Ford and Randolph, 1992). These risks are significant at Artiron Motors because projects span different functions and may involve geographically dispersed sites. Excessive consultation could delay decisions concerning EV development or plant conversion, while unclear authority could make accountability for project costs or failure difficult to establish.
Overall, neither structure is sufficient on its own. Divisional features provide the control and specialist accountability required for Artiron Motors’ large continuing operations, whereas matrix arrangements are better suited to cross-functional new-product work. The existing hybrid is therefore appropriate, provided that Artiron Motors defines decision-making authority, resolves conflicts between functional and project managers promptly, and uses shared performance objectives to prevent divisions and projects from pursuing competing priorities.
Approximate word count: 432 words
References
Ford, R.C. and Randolph, W.A. (1992) ‘Cross-functional structures: A review and integration of matrix organization and project management’, Journal of Management, 18(2), pp. 267–294. doi: 10.1177/014920639201800204.
Galbraith, J.R. (1971) ‘Matrix organization designs: How to combine functional and project forms’, Business Horizons, 14(1), pp. 29–40. doi: 10.1016/0007-6813(71)90037-1.
Mintzberg, H. (1980) ‘Structure in 5’s: A synthesis of the research on organization design’, Management Science, 26(3), pp. 322–341. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.26.3.322.
This example was created for guidance and is not copied or adapted from any customer’s work.
Need support with the complete unit? Our CIPD Assignment Help includes the June 2026 5CO01 Artiron Motors assessment, covering all 12 criteria from organisational structures and external pressures to culture, change, employee wellbeing and people practice


