Critically evaluate the leadership and management styles at the company using relevant academic models.
2025-01-03 16:39:27
BPP Business School Coursework Cover Sheet
Please use this document as the cover sheet of for the 1st page of your assessment. Please complete the below table – the grey columns
Module Name
|
Executive Leadership and Governance
|
Programme Name
|
|
Student Reference Number (SRN)
|
|
Assessment Title
|
|
Please complete the yellow sections in the below declaration :
Declaration of Original Work:
I hereby declare that I have read and understood BPP’s regulations on plagiarism and that this is my original work, researched, undertaken, completed and submitted in accordance with the requirements of BPP School of Business and Technology.
The word count, excluding contents table, bibliography and appendices, is words.
Student Reference Number: Date:
By submitting this coursework you agree to all rules and regulations of BPP regarding assessments and awards for programmes.
Please note that by submitting this assessment you are declaring that you are fit to sit this assessment.
BPP University reserves the right to use all submitted work for educational purposes and may request that work be published for a wider audience.
MSc Management
Executive Leadership and Governance
Coursework Assessment Brief
1.General Assessment Guidance
- Your summative assessment for this module is made up of this one submission which accounts for 100% of the marks
- Please note late submissions will not be marked.
- You are required to submit all elements of your assessment via Turnitin online access. Only submissions made via the specified mode will be accepted and hard copies or any other digital form of submissions (like via email or pen drive etc.) will not be accepted.
- For coursework, the submission word limit is 5,000 words. You must comply with the word count guidelines. You may submit LESS than 5,000 words but not more. Word Count guidelines can be found on your programme home page and the coursework submission page.
- Do not put your name or contact details anywhere on your submission. You should only put your student registration number (SRN) which will ensure your submission is recognised in the marking process.
- A total of 100 marks are available for this module assessment, and you are required to achieve minimum 50% to pass this module.
- You are required to use only Harvard Referencing System in your submission. Any content which is already published by other author(s) and is not referenced will be considered as a case of plagiarism.
You can find further information on Harvard Referencing in the online library on the VLE. You can use the following link to access this information: http://bpp.libguides.com/Home/StudySupport
- BPP University has a strict policy regarding authenticity of assessments. In proven instances of plagiarism or collusion, severe punishment will be imposed on offenders. You are advised to read the rules and regulations regarding plagiarism and collusion in the GARs and MOPP which are available on VLE in the Academic registry section.
- You should include a completed copy of the Assignment Cover sheet. Any submission without this completed Assignment Cover sheet may be considered invalid and not marked.
2.Assessment Brief
You are a Management Consultant hired by BPP Consultants, who have been commissioned to provide information to a large investment firm, which is considering the following three aircraft manufacturers for investment. For this assessment, you are to select one company from the three listed below to focus on.
- Airbus SE.
- The Boeing Company.
- Embraer S.A.
The scope of your work is to complete four sections of a report covering Executive Leadership and Corporate Governance.
Please note, you are NOT required to make recommendations or advice in your report about whether to invest. This will be solely the investor’s decision after evaluating all the information obtained from your report.
Please select only one company from the above three when attempting the tasks below.
You should use the following links to obtain company presentations and reports:
The four tasks you should include in your report are:
Task 1 – Leadership and Management (LO1)
- Critically evaluate the leadership and management styles at the company using relevant academic models.
Conduct independent research into your chosen company and support your arguments with academic literature and the appropriate application of relevant leadership and management models.
Task requirements continue on the next page.
Task 2 – Corporate Governance and Regulation (LO4)
- Discuss the different governance rules, practices, and processes (collectively known as the Corporate Governance Framework) at the company that ensure that it meets the interests of its shareholders.
Conduct independent research and refer to relevant academic literature.
Ensure that you identify the internal governance mechanisms and the external governance rules and regulations and demonstrate how the company applies and complies with them to meet shareholder interests. Depending on your company of choice, these might include some of the following:
-The AMF (The French Financial Market Authority), the French Commercial Code and the French Corporate Governance Code.
The SEC (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission), the Securities and Exchange Act in the USA, and the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002.
-CVM (The Brazilian Securities and Exchange Commission), The Brazilian Corporate Governance Code, and the Novo Mercado Listing Regulation
Task 3 – Risk Management (LO3)
- Analyse three significant risks that the company faces and recommend appropriate responses to each of these risks.
Conduct independent research into your company of choice and ensure that your analysis and recommendations are specific to the company.
For higher marks, use and apply relevant risk management models and frameworks such as the Three Horizon Model, Risk Heat Maps, or the 4T’s Process. Explain how you used the models to identify and analyse the risks and to offer your recommendations.
As part of your recommendations, explain what role the board of directors plays in the risk management process at the organisation.
Task 4 – Ethical Leadership (LO2)
- Discuss at least one significant ethical business challenge that the company faces and provide ethical leadership recommendations on how the company can address and manage this ethical challenge.
Conduct independent research and explain why the challenge(s) you discuss are considered ethical, by analysing their impact on the company and its stakeholders. Ensure that your recommendations are targeted at the company’s top management and leadership.
For higher marks, use and apply a relevant ethical leadership model or framework such as the Triple Bottom Line
Task requirements continue on the next page.
Presentation and Structure
- Clear structure and layout
- Writing style: professional and concise
- Appropriate Harvard referencing: range and credibility of the sources used and correct application of Harvard referencing style throughout the report and appendices.
Do NOT include an executive summary, introduction, or conclusion.
Your report structure should include the following sections: Cover page (University cover sheet)
Table of Contents
List of Abbreviations (if appropriate)
Task 1- Leadership and Management (LO1)
Task 2 – Corporate Governance and Regulation (LO4) Task 3 – Risk Management (LO3)
Task 4 – Ethical Leadership (LO2)
References
Appendix (if appropriate)
Suggested Word Count Guide
Task 1- Leadership and Management
|
1,250 Words
|
Task 2 – Corporate Governance and Regulation
|
1,250 Words
|
Task 3 – Risk Management
|
1,250 Words
|
Task 4 – Ethical Leadership
|
1,250 Words
|
Total
|
5,000 Words
|
The word count applies to the main body of the report only i.e., cover page, table of content, list of abbreviations, references, and appendices are not part of the 5,000-words count.
3.Marking Guide
Learning Outcome
|
Fail
|
Marginal Fail
|
Pass
|
Merit
|
Distinction
|
High Distinction
|
0% – 39%
|
40% – 49%
|
50% – 59%
|
60% – 69%
|
70% – 79%
|
80% - 100%
|
LO1: Develop your
|
Weak or
|
Limited knowledge of
|
Satisfactory
|
Good level of
|
Excellent knowledge
|
Outstanding
|
knowledge of
|
inadequate
|
critical leadership
|
knowledge and
|
knowledge and
|
and understanding of
|
knowledge and
|
critical leadership
|
knowledge of
|
capability in leading
|
understanding of
|
understanding of
|
critical leadership
|
understanding of
|
capability in
|
critical
|
organisations. Limited
|
critical leadership
|
critical leadership
|
capability in leading
|
critical leadership
|
leading
|
leadership
|
evaluation of the
|
capability in
|
capability in leading
|
organisations. An
|
capability in leading
|
organisations
|
capability in
|
company`s leadership
|
leading
|
organisations. A good
|
excellent critical
|
organisations. An
|
|
leading
|
and management
|
organisations.
|
critical evaluation of
|
evaluation of the
|
outstanding critical
|
|
organisations.
|
style. Limited research
|
Satisfactory
|
the company`s
|
company`s leadership
|
evaluation of the
|
|
Weak or no
|
and analysis of the
|
evaluation of the
|
leadership and
|
and management
|
company`s leadership
|
|
evaluation of
|
company’s leadership
|
company`s
|
management style,
|
style, that objectively
|
and management
|
|
the company`s
leadership and
|
and management.
|
leadership and
management
|
with some discussion
of the strengths and
|
weighs the strengths
and weakness of the
|
style, that objectively
weighs all the
|
|
management
|
|
style. Some
|
weakness of the
|
company’s
|
strengths and
|
|
style. Weak or
|
|
research and
|
company’s
|
leadership and
|
weakness of the
|
|
inadequate
|
|
analysis, of the
|
leadership and
|
management. An
|
company’s
|
|
research and
|
|
company’s
|
management. Good
|
excellent and
|
leadership and
|
|
analysis of the
|
|
leadership and
|
application of
|
detailed application
|
management. An
|
|
company’s
leadership and
|
|
management.
|
relevant leadership
and management
|
of relevant
leadership and
|
outstanding and
extensive application
|
|
management.
|
|
|
models to the
|
management models
|
of relevant
|
|
|
|
|
company. Evidence-
|
to the company.
|
leadership and
|
|
|
|
|
backed analysis of
|
Excellent evidence-
|
management models
|
|
|
|
|
the company’s
|
backed analysis of
|
to the company.
|
|
|
|
|
leadership and
|
the company’s
|
Outstanding and
|
|
|
|
|
management.
|
|
extensive evidence-
backed analysis of
|
|
|
|
|
|
leadership and management.
|
the company’s leadership and management.
|
LO4: Critically
|
Weak or
|
Limited evaluation of
|
Satisfactory
|
Good evaluation of
|
Excellent evaluation
|
Outstanding
|
evaluate the
|
inadequate
|
the impact of the
|
evaluation of the
|
the impact of the
|
of the impact of the
|
evaluation of the
|
impact of the
|
evaluation of
|
governance and
|
impact of the
|
governance and
|
governance and
|
impact of the
|
governance and
|
the impact of
|
regulatory context on
|
governance and
|
regulatory context on
|
regulatory context on
|
governance and
|
regulatory context
|
the governance
|
the success of an
|
regulatory context
|
the success of an
|
the success of an
|
regulatory context on
|
on the success of
|
and regulatory
|
organisation. Limited
|
on the success of
|
organisation. Good
|
organisation.
|
the success of an
|
an organisation
|
context on the
|
knowledge of the
|
an organisation.
|
and clear
|
Thorough and deep
|
organisation.
|
|
success of an
|
Corporate Governance
|
Satisfactory
|
understanding of the
|
knowledge and
|
Thorough, balanced,
|
|
organisation.
|
Framework at the
|
appreciation of
|
Corporate
|
understanding of the
|
and deep knowledge
|
|
Weak or
|
company. Limited
|
the Corporate
|
Governance
|
Corporate
|
and understanding of
|
|
inadequate
|
explanation of internal
|
Governance
|
Framework at the
|
Governance
|
the Corporate
|
|
knowledge of
|
governance in the
|
Framework at the
|
company. Good
|
Framework at the
|
Governance
|
|
the Corporate
|
company and external
|
company.
|
explanation of
|
company. Excellent
|
Framework at the
|
|
Governance
|
governance rules and
|
Satisfactory
|
internal governance
|
and detailed
|
company.
|
|
Framework at
the company.
|
regulations.
|
explanation of
internal and
|
in the company and
external governance
|
discussion of internal
governance in the
|
Outstanding and
extensive discussion
|
|
Weak or
|
|
external
|
rules and regulations.
|
company and
|
of internal
|
|
inadequate
|
|
governance rules
|
A good discussion on
|
relevant external
|
governance in the
|
|
explanation of
|
|
and regulations.
|
how the company
|
governance rules and
|
company and
|
|
internal
|
|
Some discussion
|
complies with these
|
regulations that
|
relevant external
|
|
governance in
|
|
on how the
|
rules and regulations.
|
apply to the
|
governance rules and
|
|
the company
|
|
company complies
|
|
company. An
|
regulations that
|
|
and external
|
|
with these rules
|
|
excellent discussion
|
apply to the
|
|
governance
|
|
and regulations.
|
|
on how the company
|
company. An
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
outstanding and
|
|
rules and regulations.
|
|
|
|
complies with these rules and regulations.
|
extensive discussion on how the company complies with these rules and regulations.
|
LO3: Critically
|
Weak or
|
Limited appreciation
|
Satisfactory
|
Good critical
|
Excellent critical
|
Outstanding critical
|
evaluate risk
|
inadequate
|
of critical evaluation of
|
appreciation of
|
evaluation of risk
|
evaluation of risk
|
evaluation of risk
|
management at a
|
appreciation of
|
risk management at a
|
critical evaluation
|
management at a
|
management at a
|
management at a
|
corporate level
|
critical
|
corporate level,
|
of risk
|
corporate level. A
|
corporate level.
|
corporate level.
|
|
evaluation of
|
Limited analysis, and
|
management at a
|
good and clear
|
Thorough and deep
|
Thorough, balanced,
|
|
risk
|
evaluation of three
|
corporate level.
|
analysis and
|
knowledge and
|
and deep knowledge
|
|
management at
|
risks faced by the
|
Satisfactory
|
evaluation of three
|
understanding of risk
|
and understanding of
|
|
a corporate
|
company. Limited
|
analysis and
|
significant risks faced
|
management. A
|
risk management. An
|
|
level. Weak or
|
recommendations for
|
evaluation of
|
by the company.
|
thorough an
|
outstanding analysis
|
|
inadequate
|
the management of
|
three risks faced
|
Good and
|
excellent analysis and
|
and evaluation of
|
|
analysis and
|
the risks identified.
|
by the company.
|
appropriate
|
evaluation of three
|
three significant risks
|
|
evaluation of
|
Limited discussion on
|
Satisfactory
|
recommendations
|
significant risks faced
|
faced by the
|
|
three risks faced
|
the board’s role in
|
recommendations
|
for the management
|
by the company.
|
company.
|
|
by the
|
managing these risks.
|
for the
|
of the risks identified.
|
Excellent, realistic,
|
Outstanding,
|
|
company. Weak
|
|
management of
|
A good discussion on
|
and appropriate
|
realistic, and
|
|
or inadequate
|
|
the risks
|
the board’s role in
|
recommendations
|
insightful
|
|
recommendatio
|
|
identified. A
|
managing these risks.
|
for the management
|
recommendations
|
|
ns for the
|
|
Satisfactory
|
some application of a
|
of the risks identified.
|
for the management
|
|
management of
|
|
discussion on the
|
risk management
|
An excellent
|
of the risks identified.
|
|
the risks
|
|
board’s role in
|
model or framework
|
discussion on the
|
An outstanding
|
|
identified. Weak
|
|
managing these
|
such as the Three
|
board’s role in
|
discussion on the
|
|
or inadequate discussion on
the board’s role
|
|
risks.
|
Horizon Model or Risk Heat Maps.
|
managing these risks. Excellent and
detailed application
|
board’s role in
managing these risks.
Outstanding and
|
|
|
|
|
|
of a risk management
|
extensive application
|
|
in managing these risks.
|
|
|
|
model or framework such as the Three Horizon Model, the 4T Model or Risk Heat Maps.
|
of one or more risk management modes or frameworks such as the Three Horizon Model, the 4T Model or Risk Heat Maps.
|
LO2: Apply your
|
Weak or
|
Limited application of
|
Satisfactory
|
Good application of
|
Excellent application
|
Outstanding
|
understanding of
|
inadequate
|
how an understanding
|
application of how
|
how an
|
of how an
|
application of how an
|
leadership
|
application of
|
of leadership
|
an understanding
|
understanding of
|
understanding of
|
understanding of
|
principles to key
|
how an
|
principles can be
|
of leadership
|
leadership principles
|
leadership principles
|
leadership principles
|
business
|
understanding
|
applied to key
|
principles can be
|
can be applied to key
|
can be applied to key
|
can be applied to key
|
challenges
|
of leadership
principles can
|
business challenges.
Limited knowledge
|
applied to key
business
|
business challenges.
Good and clear
|
business challenges.
Thorough, and
|
business challenges.
Thorough, balanced,
|
|
be applied to
|
displayed of a
|
challenges.
|
evaluation of a
|
balanced evaluation
|
and deep evaluation
|
|
key business
|
significant ethical
|
Satisfactory
|
significant ethical
|
of a significant
|
of a significant
|
|
challenges.
|
challenge that the
|
appreciation of a
|
challenge that the
|
ethical challenge that
|
ethical challenge that
|
|
Weak or
|
company faces.
|
significant ethical
|
company faces. Good
|
the company faces.
|
the company faces.
|
|
inadequate
|
Limited demonstration
|
challenge that the
|
demonstration of
|
Excellent
|
Outstanding
|
|
knowledge
|
of how this challenge
|
company faces.
|
how this challenge
|
demonstration of
|
demonstration of
|
|
displayed of a
|
impacts the company
|
Some
|
impacts the company
|
how this challenge
|
how this challenge
|
|
significant
|
and its stakeholders.
|
demonstration of
|
and its stakeholders.
|
impacts the company
|
impacts the company
|
|
ethical
|
Limited or
|
how this challenge
|
Appropriate
|
and its stakeholders.
|
and its stakeholders.
|
|
challenge that
|
inappropriate
|
impacts the
|
leadership-level
|
Excellent, realistic,
|
Outstanding,
|
|
the company
|
recommendations on
|
company and its
|
recommendations on
|
and appropriate
|
realistic, and
|
faces. Weak or
|
how the company can
|
stakeholders.
|
how the company
|
leadership-level
|
insightful leadership-
|
no
|
address this ethical
|
Appropriate
|
can address this
|
recommendations on
|
level
|
demonstration
|
challenge.
|
recommendations
|
ethical challenge.
|
how the company
|
recommendations on
|
of how this
|
|
on how the
|
Some application of
|
can address this
|
how the company
|
challenge
|
|
company can
|
an ethical leadership
|
ethical challenge.
|
can address this
|
impacts the
|
|
address this
|
framework or model,
|
Excellent application
|
ethical challenge.
|
company and its stakeholders.
Weak or
|
|
ethical challenge.
|
such as the Triple Bottom Line.
|
of an ethical leadership
frameworks or
|
Outstanding application of one or
more ethical
|
inadequate
|
|
|
|
model, such as the
|
leadership
|
recommendatio
ns on how the
|
|
|
|
Triple Bottom Line.
|
framework or model
such as the Triple
|
company can
|
|
|
|
|
Bottom Line.
|
address this
|
|
|
|
|
|
ethical
|
|
|
|
|
|
challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research Skills
|
Weak or poor
|
Limited research skills
|
Satisfactory
|
Good demonstration
|
Excellent
|
Outstanding
|
|
research skills
|
exhibited through the
|
demonstration of
|
of research skills
|
demonstration of
|
demonstration of
|
|
exhibited
|
use of a narrow range
|
research skills
|
through the use of a
|
research skills
|
research skills
|
|
through an
|
academic sources –
|
exhibited through
|
somewhat broad
|
through the use of a
|
through the use of a
|
|
overreliance on
|
and corporate sources
|
the use of some
|
range of academic
|
broad range of
|
broad range of
|
|
some sources
|
and annual reports
|
academic sources
|
sources – and
|
academic sources –
|
academic sources –
|
|
and limited use
|
where appropriate.
|
– and corporate
|
corporate sources
|
and corporate
|
and corporate
|
|
of academic
|
|
sources and
|
and annual reports
|
sources and annual
|
sources and annual
|
|
sources.
|
|
annual reports
|
where appropriate.
|
reports where
|
reports where
|
|
|
|
where
|
|
appropriate.
|
appropriate.
|
|
|
|
appropriate.
|
|
|
|
Presentation and Structure
|
Weak presentation, inadequate structure, weakly referenced.
|
Limited presentation and structure with inappropriate references. Limited expression.
|
Presentation and structure are satisfactory with full and appropriate references (possibly limited in quantity; largely correct Harvard referencing style). Structured layout and mainly accurate expression.
|
Presentation and structure are good with precise, full and appropriate references and correct Harvard referencing style. A good example of structured layout and professional and accurate expression.
|
Presentation and structure are excellent with precise, full and appropriate references extensively used. An exemplar of structured layout and professional and accurate expression. Inclusion of sources outside of the prescribed course reading.
|
Presentation and structure are outstanding with precise, full and appropriate references extensively used. An exemplar of structured layout and professional and accurate expression. Inclusion of sources outside of the prescribed course reading.
|
100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions