Critically analyse and evaluate the leadership style of two leaders, from the perspective of the leadership theories and models taught in the module. Apply at least two approaches to each leader.

2025-10-20 12:26:30

Student Assignment Brief

This document is intended for Coventry University Group students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this module. It must not be passed to third parties or posted on any website. If you require this document in an alternative format, please contact your Module Leader.

Contents:

The work you submit for this assignment must be your own independent work, or in the case of a group assignment your own groups’ work. More information is available in the ‘Assignment Task’ section of this assignment brief.

Assignment Information

Module Name: International Leadership

Module Code: 7030SSL

Assignment Title: Group Presentation

Assignment Due: 6/11/2025 by 6 PM

Assignment Credit: 10 Credits

Word Count (or equivalent): 20 minutes presentation and 300 words reflection

Assignment Type: Standard

Percentage Grade (Applied Core Assessment). You will be provided with an overall grade between 0% and 100%. You have one opportunity to pass the assignment at or above 40%.

Assignment Task

This assignment includes two parts: 1. a group assignment and 2. a personal reflective account.

The group presentation weighs 80% of the 100%, while the personal reflective account is 20% of the 100%. This assignment requires you to:

Part 1: Group presentation [20 minutes]

Form a group comprising 2-4 students. Prepare a recorded video PowerPoint presentation in which all group members are present. The video link must be included in the personal reflective account.

  • Abdelmadjid Tebboune, President of Algeria
  • Paul Biya, President of Cameroon
  • Asif Ali Zardari, President of Pakistan
  • Droupadi Murmu, President of India
  • Keir Starmer, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
  • Andrew Holness, Prime Minister of Jamaica
  • Reshma Saujani – Girls who code
  • Ursula Burns - Xerox Corporation CEO from 2009 to 2016
  • Indra Nooyi - CEO of PepsiCo from 2006 to 2019
  • Meg Whitman - CEO of eBay from 1998 to 2008
  • Bob Iger former - CEO of the Disney Corporation
  • Shantanu Narayen - CEO, Adobe  

From the list of international leaders provided, Part 1 of the assignment requires you to:

1.Critically analyse and evaluate the leadership style of two leaders, from the perspective of the leadership theories and models taught in the module. Apply at least two approaches to each leader.

2. Critically elaborate on how the models or theories are used to support each leader’s style.

3.Record a 20-minute presentation video as a group; each member of the group should present in the video. Any student who does not present will be marked as zero.

Part 2: Personal reflective account

As an integral part of the assessment, you must submit a 300-word self-reflection on what you have learned from the International Leadership module.

1.How has it influenced your approach as a leader.

2.You can re-evaluate any of your past experiences (personal or professional) in the light of what you know now. What will you take away to apply in your career.

3.Use appropriate literature and a reflective model to support your reflection. The individual reflective account should be submitted to Turnitin on Aula with a link to the video by the deadline.

Presentation and Video Requirements:

Use suitable presentation software to make a professional presentation on the assignment outlined above, with relevant referencing using the APA 7th style of referencing.

Length: 20 minutes

Please keep the video recording safe until marks have been confirmed by the Exam Board and external moderation has been completed.

There will be a penalty of a deduction of 10% of the mark (after internal moderation) for work exceeding the word /time limit by 10% or more.

The word limit includes quotations and citations but excludes the reference list.

This assessment is categorised as AMBER for the use of AI.

You may use AI for the following only:

  • Inspiration: using AI tools to generate research questions or topic.
  • Planning and management: using AI tools to suggest a title, structure, subheadings, or themes, to generate templates, to suggest processes for task management, or to generate prompts to assist thinking through assessment structure or task management.
  • Sources and data collection: using AI tools to suggest sources.
  • Summarising and consolidating notes: using AI tools to summarise notes or to consolidate notes.
  • Translation: using AI tools to translate small sections of your written or recorded work into the language(s) used in an assignment
  • Presentation: using AI tools to present data in an accessible format such as by generating, graphs, charts, tables, slides, images, word-clouds, animations, or captions.
  • Checking: using AI tools to proofread work. 

Where permitted, any assistance/content generated by AI is not your own work and must be acknowledged within your work (see submission instructions below). Failure to do so is academic misconduct.

Submission Instructions:

How to submit your assessment 

The assessment must be submitted by 06/11/2025 at 6 PM.

No paper copies are required. 

Each member of the group must submit their reflective account individually in the TURNITIN link, with the group presentation link present on the top.

Please make sure you have given the teaching team permission to access your video link.

  • Your coursework will be given a zero mark if you do not submit a copy through Turnitin. Please take care to ensure that you have fully submitted your work.
  • Please ensure that you have submitted your work using the correct file format, unreadable files will receive a mark of zero.
  • Please present the Reflective Account as a Word document .doc or docx. PDF documents will not be accepted.
  • You need to acknowledge how you have used any AI tool by inserting a table as per the example below before your list of references:

Tool

How used in this assignment

e.g. ChatGPT-3.5

Suggestions of  topics

e.g. Microsoft Copilot

Consolidating notes

Etc.

 
  • All work submitted after the submission deadline without a valid and approved reason (see below) will be given a mark of zero.
  • The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you can’t submit your coursework by the deadline – these events should be beyond your control and not easy to predict.  If this happens, you can apply for an extension to your deadline for up to five days, or if you need longer, you can apply for a deferral, which takes you to the next assessment period (for example, to the resit period following the main Assessment Boards). You must apply before the deadline.

You will find information about the process and what is or is not considered to be an event beyond your control at https://share.coventry.ac.uk/students/Registry/Pages/Deferrals-and-Extension.aspx

  • Students MUST keep a copy and/or an electronic file of their assignment.
  • Checks will be made on your work using anti-plagiarism software and approved plagiarism checking websites.

Marking and Feedback

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked by the module team. Provisional grades will be released by the module team upon completion. Feedback will be provided by the module team alongside grades release.

How will I receive my grades and feedback?

Feedback can be accessed on the Turnitin submission link through the rubric/form and feedback summary in the comment box, on the left side of the page.

Your provisional marks and feedback should be available within 2 weeks / 10 working days.

What will I be marked against?

Details of the marking criteria for this task can be found at the bottom of this assignment brief.

Assessed Module Learning Outcomes

The following module learning outcomes are assessed in this task:

1. Critically analyse and evaluate organisational leadership perspectives based on the theory and practice.

2. Synthesise learning from a range of sources to demonstrate an evidence-based perspective on leadership.

3. Critically evaluate current leadership practice in international organisations.

Assignment Support and Academic Integrity

If you have any questions about this assignment please see the Student Guidance on Coursework for more information.

Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar:

You are expected to use effective, accurate, and appropriate language within this assessment task.

Academic Integrity:

The work you submit must be your own, or in the case of groupwork, that of your group. All sources of information need to be acknowledged and attributed; therefore, you must provide references for all sources of information and acknowledge any tools used in the production of your work, including Artificial Intelligence (AI). We use detection software and make routine checks for evidence of academic misconduct.

Definitions of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and collusion can be found on the Student Portal. All cases of suspected academic misconduct are referred for investigation, the outcomes of which can have profound consequences to your studies. For more information on academic integrity please visit the Academic and Research Integrity section of the Student Portal. We strongly suggest you regularly save your work to your university OneDrive account.

Support for Students with Disabilities or Additional Needs:

If you have a disability, long-term health condition, specific learning difference, mental health diagnosis or symptoms and have discussed your support needs with health and wellbeing you may be able to access support that will help with your studies.

If you feel you may benefit from additional support, but have not disclosed a disability to the University, or have disclosed but are yet to discuss your support needs it is important to let us know so we can provide the right support for your circumstances. Visit the Student Portal to find out more.

Unable to Submit on Time?

The University wants you to do your best. However, we know that sometimes events happen which mean that you cannot submit your assessment by the deadline or sit a scheduled exam. If you think this might be the case, guidance on understanding what counts as an extenuating circumstance, and how to apply is available on the Student Portal.

Administration of Assessment

Module Leader Name: Edison Lami

Module Leader Email: ae1218@coventry.ac.uk

Assignment Category: Artefact

Attempt Type: Standard

Component Code:  Cw1

Assessment Marking Criteria

 

Theory, concepts and models

Analysis, evaluation and application

Critique, conclusions and recommendations

80 to 100%

Evidence of exceptional research beyond the immediately relevant literature, using a range of methodologies and demonstrating a thorough understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the Leadership.

Exceptional understanding of knowledge and subject specific theories and concepts with evidence of originality and autonomy.

Presentation:

The presentation is exceptionally coherent, with effective and logical progression throughout; cohesive, with clear links between ideas and sections throughout.

Arguments are exceptional, nuanced and well supported by a wide variety of literature.

The work demonstrates exceptional research design appropriate for PG study and is an outstanding piece of work with the potential for publication/impact.

 

Exceptional level of synthesis and application of effective and ethical research practices. Insightful and perceptive analysis that demonstrates both the depth and breadth of the issues with excellent examples.

Exceptional integration of theory into practice such that new contributions to knowledge are emergent.

 Presentation:

All content relevant, explained and appropriately supported.

Strong evidence of argument critical analysis throughout

Non- verbal communication and visuals are used exceptionally effectively to communicate key points and engage the listener.

Well-developed problem-solving skills with an exceptional ability to apply learning resources.

Demonstrates creativity and a high degree of originality and autonomy.

 

Exceptional work demonstrating a very high degree of understanding, creativity and criticality. Exceptional critique of the research data.

Demonstrates exceptional judgement based on arguments consistently supported by relevant literature. Logical, nuanced and complex argument presented.

Presentation: 

Demonstrates a creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context that enables new contributions to knowledge including proposals for future research. 

Completed to a very high degree of accuracy, proficiency and autonomy. Exceptional communication and expression with evidence of professional skill set.

Verbal communication is exceptionally effective, and delivery is exceptionally intelligible and paced appropriately throughout.

Use of vocabulary allows for precise and nuanced communication of the topic.

Use of language expresses intended meanings effectively and appropriately throughout.

70 to 79%

Excellent research beyond the immediately relevant literature, using a range of methodologies demonstrating a thorough understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter.

Excellent understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories and concepts with evidence of considerable originality and autonomy.

Presentation:

The presentation is entirely coherent, with effective and logical progression throughout; cohesive, with clear links between ideas and sections throughout.

Excellent arguments, nuanced and well supported by a wide variety of literature. 

The work demonstrates excellent research design appropriate for PG study and is an outstanding piece of work with the potential for publication/impact.

 

Excellent synthesis and application of effective and ethical research practices. Insightful and perceptive analysis demonstrating both the depth and breadth of the issues with excellent examples.

Presentation:

All content is relevant, explained and appropriately supported. Strong evidence of argument critical analysis throughout

Excellent integration of theory into practice.

Clear evidence of problem-solving skills and an excellent ability to apply learning resources. 

Demonstrates creativity, originality and autonomy.

 

 

Excellent work clearly evidencing understanding, creativity and criticality. Excellent critique of the research data.

Demonstrates coherent argument and interpretation consistently supported by relevant literature. Logical, nuanced and complex argument presented.

Presentation:

Demonstrates an excellent creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context including proposals for future research.

Completed with accuracy, proficiency and considerable autonomy. Excellent communication and expression with evidence of professional skill set.

Non-verbal communication and visuals are used entirely effectively to communicate key points and engage the listener. Verbal communication is entirely effective, and delivery is entirely intelligible and paced appropriately throughout.

The use of vocabulary allows for precise and nuanced communication of the topic.

The use of language expresses intended meanings effectively and appropriately throughout.

60 to 69%

Extensive research, using established methodologies accurately, beyond the recommended minimum with little, if any, irrelevant material present. A very good understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter.

Presentation:

The presentation is coherent, with effective and logical progression throughout; cohesive, with clear links between ideas and sections throughout.

Very good understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories and concepts with some originality and autonomy.

Very good research design appropriate for PG study and very good arguments, nuanced and well supported by a variety of literature.

 

 

Very good level of synthesis and analytical skills and application of effective and ethical research practices. Analysis demonstrating both the breadth and depth of the issues. Well chosen, well justified and insightful examples provided.

Presentation:

All content is relevant, explained and appropriately supported. Strong evidence of excellent argument critical analysis throughout

Very good integration of theory into practice. 

Demonstrates some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills and a very good application of learning resources.

 

Very good work demonstrating strong understanding of theories, concepts and issues with clear evidence of criticality. Very good critique of the research data.

Demonstrates coherent, substantiated, supported argument and interpretation. Logical and nuanced argument presented.

Presentation:

Demonstrates a very good creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context. Sense is made of the issues identified with the support of relevant literature including some proposals for future research.

Completed with accuracy, proficiency and autonomy. Very good communication and expression with evidence of professional skill set.

Non-verbal communication and visuals are used effectively to communicate key points and engage the listener. Verbal communication is effective, and delivery is intelligible and paced appropriately throughout.

The use of vocabulary allows for precise and nuanced communication of the topic.

The use of language expresses intended meanings effectively and appropriately throughout.

 

50 to 59%

Thorough research undertaken accurately using established methodologies and drawing on a good range of relevant literature. Enquiry beyond that recommended may be present.

Some errors may be present and some inclusion of irrelevant material. A good understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter 

Presentation:

The presentation is almost always coherent, with effective and logical progression, almost always cohesive, with clear links between ideas and sections.

Good understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories and concepts with indications of originality and autonomy.

Good research design appropriate for PG study and arguments well supported by a variety of literature.

 

 

Good synthesis, analytical skills and application of effective and ethical research practices. Analysis demonstrating both the breadth and depth of the issues. Well chosen, well justified examples provided.

Presentation:

Most content is relevant, explained and appropriately supported. Evidence of argument and critical analysis. 

Good integration of theory into practice.

Demonstrates some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills though with inconsistencies. A good ability to apply learning resources.

 

 

Good understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues with some criticality. Fair critique of research data.

Demonstrates logical argument and interpretation with supporting evidence.

Presentation:

Demonstrates a good creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context. Consistent attempts to make sense of the issues identified with the support of relevant literatures. Some suggestions for future research.

Expression and presentation mostly accurate, proficient, and conducted with some autonomy. Good communication and expression with appropriate professional skill set.

Non- verbal communication and visuals are used effectively to communicate key points and engage the listener. Verbal communication is effective, and delivery is intelligible and paced appropriately.

Use of vocabulary almost always allows for precise and nuanced communication of the topic. The use of language almost always expresses intended meanings effectively and appropriately throughout.

40 to 49%

Research scope sufficient and evidence of use of some established methodologies. Some irrelevant material likely to be present. Evidence of some understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter.

Presentation:

Presentation is often coherent, with logical progression evident, often cohesive, with links between ideas and sections evident.

Demonstrates an understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories sufficient to deal with concepts.

Adequate research design for PG study and arguments supported by a variety of literature

Adequate levels of analysis and synthesis demonstrated but with some lapses into descriptions or practice. Adequate application of effective and ethical research practices. Adequate number and/or depth of examples provided.

Presentation:

Adequate use of theory to make sense of practice.

Demonstrates some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills but with inconsistencies. A basic ability to apply learning resources.

Content relevant, explained and appropriately supported.

Some evidence of argument and critical analysis but ideas may be more descriptive than analytical

 

Meets the learning outcomes with a basic understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues. Basic critique of research data.

Demonstrates the ability to devise and sustain an argument with a basic level of criticality. Adequate logic but argument can sometimes be difficult to follow.

Presentation:

Some evidence of a creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context. Adequate attempt to make sense of the issues identified with the support of relevant literatures. Some suggestions for future research.

Expression and presentation sufficient for accuracy and proficiency. Sufficient communication and expression with basic professional skill set.

Non-verbal communication and visuals used in a limited way to communicate key points and engage the listener.

Verbal communication is not effective, and delivery of the presentation is often unintelligible and not paced appropriately.

Use of vocabulary allows for some effective communication of the topic.

Use of language often expresses intended meanings effectively and appropriately.

 

 

Fail

30, 35%

Little evidence of research and use of established methodologies.

Demonstrates a weak knowledge and understanding of key theories and concepts. 

Little understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter.

Minimal references to relevant literatures leading to unsupported assertions.

Presentation:

The presentation is incoherent and lacks a sense of progression, lacks any cohesion, leaving links between ideas completely unclear.

Research design may be inadequate and may not be appropriate for PG study.

Some relevant material present.

Deficiencies evident in synthesis, analysis and application of effective and ethical research practices with undeveloped examples provided.

Weak links between theory and practice.

Presentation:

Content not relevant or explained with little or no support, No real evidence of argument or critical analysis.

Very limited originality, creativity and struggles with problem-solving skills.

Limited ability to apply learning resources.

 

 

Fail - very limited understanding of relevant theories and concepts. Very limited critique of research data.

Arguments are weak and poorly constructed. Many unsupported assertions and judgements made.

Expression and presentation insufficient for accuracy and proficiency. Insufficient communication and expression and with deficiencies in professional skill set 

Presentation:

Lacks evidence of a creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context. Limited or no proposals for future research.

Fundamental errors and some misunderstanding likely to be present.

Little or no non-verbal communication and visuals do not engage the listener or are inappropriate. Verbal communication is limited, and the delivery of the presentation is unintelligible and inappropriately paced.

The use of vocabulary is insufficient to communicate the topic. The use of language does not express intended meanings.

 

Fail
0 to 29%

Little or minimal evidence of research and use of established methodologies and incomplete knowledge of the area. Limited evidence of reading.

Demonstrates an inadequate knowledge of key theories and concepts.

Presentation:

The presentation is incoherent and without a sense of progression, lacks any cohesion, leaving links between ideas completely unclear. 

Fails to demonstrate understanding of how the project fits into the wider context of the subject matter.

Research design inadequate and may not be appropriate for POG study.

 

Little or no synthesis, analysis and application of effective and ethical research practices but descriptive. Irrelevant or obscure examples provided.

Minimal or no links between theory and practice.

Presentation:

Content not relevant or explained with no support, No real evidence of argument or critical analysis.

Little evidence of originality, creativity and problem-solving skills.

Little evidence of ability to apply learning resources.

 

 

Clear failure demonstrating little or no understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues. Little or no critique of research data.

Arguments are very weak with little or no evidence of alternative view.

Little or no evidence of a creative and critically engaged command of the literature and context.

Presentation:

Serious and fundamental aspects missing.

Expression and presentation deficient for accuracy and proficiency. Insufficient communication and expression and with deficiencies in professional skill set.

No non-verbal communication and visuals do not engage the listener or are inappropriate. Verbal communication is limited, and the delivery of the presentation is unintelligible and inappropriately paced.

The use of vocabulary is insufficient to communicate the topic. The use of language does not express intended meanings.

 

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions