U25171 MANAGEMENT SPECIALISM 

ASSIGNMENT 2: Harmonic Working Version One

All work submitted must adhere to the University Policy on ‘Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism’

Assignment Two Schematic

The diagram below outlines the overall process of Assignment Two. You think about the problem – you meet to diagnose the problem – you split up to do individual research and analysis – you meet to share and discuss – to split up to write your individual report based on the group’s work and your own. 

Part One (Group): Strategic Issues (10% or 0%)

You will form a group of five people and use the current situation at one of the companies found on this link as the source of case material for the assignment.

You will use some of the class-based activities in Assignment One or supply an alternative but equal and appropriate contribution e.g. models or theories.

Your team will discuss your perceptions of what the key problem(s) in the company situation is/are.

In class during week five an assignment meeting will be held with the Module Coordinator. You are required to bring copies of relevant class-based exercises to share from Assignment One or other work you have developed.

The first piece of work (due in Week 6) will carry out a diagnosis of the company problem(s) or problem situations by scanning the company and its environment. This will establish if the problem is related to say growth or competition or globalisation or technology shift etc.you will be given a grade for this which will count for 10% of the final Assignment Two grade or 0% depending on your final report grade. The work should be largely diagrammatic with a list of sources. You can use up to 500-words to explain your thinking. You will submit one piece of work for the whole group.

Part Two (Group): Analysis (20% or 0%)

You will reflect on the case and consider who you will write your report for (your client), what aspects of the case (as a group and as an individual) you feel are key to the project and what the purpose of your analysis and solution building is.

In class during weeks seven to eight assignment meetings will be held with the Module coordinator/Tutor discussion and in week nine a formal team meeting with the Module Coordinator will take place.

For the second piece of work (due in Week 8) your group will split up to apply consultancy or business models such as PESTEL or Ansoff’s Matrix or a model or approach you generate for yourself. The models you use must be justified and any data/information in them must be referenced/supported/evidenced. You will merge/cut-and-paste the work into one WORD file and submit it; you will be given a grade for this which will count for 20% of the final Assignment Two grade or 0% depending on your final report grade. The work should be largely diagrammatic with a list of sources unless you e.g. profile the CEO. You can use up to 1000-words to explain your thinking. You will submit one piece of work for the whole group.

You will share your exercises; in that other team members are allowed to use them as their own i.e. they may well end up in their final papers.

Part Three (Individual): Final Report (100% or 70%)

You must now have a final team meeting in week ten to discuss each other’s work and ideas/discoveries; your seminar tutor may attend this meeting on request. During this meeting you may disagree with each other but remain respectful. You may need to explain your ideas or have others explain theirs.

The purpose of this meeting is to see where differences and similarities lie in your group thinking.

Once you have shared your Part Two analysis you will own the work produced by your colleagues. You are free to reflect on it, use it or develop it. You may prefer to build more on the ideas of other people in the group rather than your own – this is your choice. Once you share the exercises they belong to the whole group – there is no need to cite other group member’s work you just use it as if you thought of it.

You will then prepare an individual report for your client outlining your perceptions of what the key problem(s) in the case situation is/are and how you would solve or begin to solve them.

You must produce a 2500 word (word-processed) individual Final Report that includes as many of the ideas your group generated as is sensible, submitted as per the date above. For extra credit the VSM and Value Chain can be used and associated diagnosis submitted as appendices.

Part Four (Individual): Self-check Appendix (submitted with the Final Report)

The Self-check Appendix is designed to guide you to “good scholarship”. Using four of your references (or all if you used less than four) you are required to quote the element of your text that contains a reference to support your argument or point then take a screenshot of the part of the text in the source that supports your writing. A blank (see page 7) for that you can use in your assignment and an example (see page 8) are given below. This must be attached to your Final Report.

Part Five (Individual): Critical Reflection

For extra credit write a 300-word explanation of why you did this report the way you did. You might explain why you planned it in a particular way or why you did the research in a particular way. Justify why you thought your approach was sensible/logical/rational and explain why you did not use another possible way to write the report i.e. why the way you chose was the better way.

Part Five will be marked out of 10-marks and the marks will be added to the marks for Parts One and Two, Three and Four.

Nota Bene: The Final Report must not exceed 2500 words. 2500 words is a limit not a target. High volume does not equate to high marks, conciseness is valued but the upper limit is set high to accommodate the work of other members of the team.

Though this report will contain other people’s ideas it will be assessed on an individual basis, as each interpretation could be different. It would not be expected to see group members cite other group members work and it would not expected that each report contained five pieces of individual work all in the same order – you can split the words up add your own ideas etc.

The report must be written in a recognised style, i.e. with an abstract, list of references, results (where applicable) and conclusions.

Objectives

To draw on and relate to a management topic, to carry out individual and group research and evaluation to produce a problem-solving report.

Requirements

Meet the learning objectives listed above. Identify and critically analyse fundamental issues related to a specific area of management. Undertake a study that shows clear evidence of synthesis and evaluation. Prepare a report that is of a standard appropriate for the final examination of a Master’s Degree.

Report Structure

The report structure is flexible (see “Before you start your assignment read this” below) but some things that may be obvious can sometimes be missed if you get interested in a particular aspect of the situation. When writing the report some issues that you should consider are:

• Who is the client the report is written for and did their role or background direct your report?
• Has the economic/competitive/global environment been researched and considered?
• Were your solutions decisions supported with evidence?
• Why do you think your decisions are practical and likely to be acceptable to the client?

Assessment Criteria

Your seminar tutor will assess the paper on the basis of the Learning Outcomes plus the General and Employability Skills Outcomes:

Discretion - additional credit may be awarded to a student who tackles a difficult subject area well.

The report will receive credit for integration and synthesis of ideas as well as the further development from your initial ideas. Credit will be given if your ideas become key in the work of others.

The assignment will be graded for individuals as defined below:

The above criteria are to be considered in the context of the University Criteria:

Before you start your assignment read this

Self-check Appendix: Please download and use as the appendix to your final submission