ASSIGNMENT DESCRIPTIONS
Team Case Assignment
There is one team case-based assignment in the course. Participants should only employ the case as the basis for their analysis and should analyze the case on its merits at that point in time. You can use research to give insights into your analysis but the facts in the case are the basis for the assignment. A case write-up will be 2,500 words (word count inclusive of the front cover and references) and an Executive Summary. The Executive Summary should be about a page in length and should cover the following elements: a statement of what is being investigated, the methods used in your investigation, findings and analysis, a brief summary of the recommendations and where appropriate an action plan. The role each person played in the case analysis should be briefly discussed at the end of the assignment and if any team member stood out in terms of their contribution (this is not counted in the overall word count). A paragraph is adequate for this and it does not count towards the final mark’ The sequence recommended for the executive summary is also a useful structure for the assignment itself.
The assigned case is: Satya Nadella at Microsoft: Instilling a growth mindset.
Assignment questions (5 questions)
- What was Nadella’s diagnosis of the problems at Microsoft?
- What actions did he take to address the problems and reposition Microsoft?
- How effective has he been? What additional challenges do you expect he will face?
- How would you describe Nadella as a leader?
- What is the prevalent mindset in your organisation or one that you have worked in or are familiar with.? What can you learn from Nadella about instilling a learning culture?
In general, a case write-up that meets all expectations is awarded the grade of 60%. To score better than this demands originality and evidence of a coherent team effort reflected in a very well-integrated and researched assignment.
The teams for the assignment are the same as those determined by the Course Leader.
General Marking criteria:
- Clear statement of objectives and purpose including and single paragraph executive summary
- Reference support (made use of outside readings and library databases)
- Effective use of theoretical constructs
- Original thinking built from existing knowledge (creativity and complexity)
- Organisation/flow of paper
- Analysis/depth of understating of subject (beyond mere description and superficial analysis)
- Conclusion/synthesis of main ideas (relevant, sufficient and with impact)
- Grammar/readability (punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, proof read)
- Format (clearly referenced, proper bibliography, proper citations)
- Appearance (professional cover page, typed, good graphics)
Referencing
Please reference your project bibliography for both the team case analysis using the Academy of Management Review style.
Individual Assignment: Critical situation analysis
All participants of the Leadership and Career Development course are required to complete an individual assignment, which consists of a paper of about no more than 3000 words (inclusive of references and cover page). The assignment requires you to present and analyze a mini-case based on a critical incident or organisational issue using the readings and/or class discussions. Choosing a case from your career experience is encouraged. The objective of the assignment is to provide you with practical experience in applying the tools, principles and theories discussed during the course. In general, a case write-up that meets all expectations is awarded the grade of 60%. To gain a higher mark will demand originality, insight, and the use of evidence-based research in your assignment.
Individual Critical Incident: All participants are required to complete an individual assignment, which consists of a paper of 2,500- 3,000 words (inclusive of references, appendices and executive summary). The assignment requires you to present and analyze a mini-case based on a critical incident or organisational issue using the readings and/or class discussions. The objective of the assignment is to provide you with practical experience in applying the organisational frameworks, principles and theories discussed during the course.
Step 1. Select a critical incident of a leadership, people or change issue from your work that involves and can be analyzed using more than one of the topics from the course (e.g., interpersonal interactions, leadership, power, group/team dynamics, culture, talent, commitment and/or engagement, the future of work). The incident can either be a past critical incident or a current one you are facing. The incident could be focused on your own individual work-related experience, for example, an incident that you have had at work recently that started negatively or poorly and (1) after much work, struggling and/or sacrifice ended positively or (2) ended negatively with conclusions or consequences that you are disappointed with. Or, the incident could involve a team issue that you have faced or are facing, or it could be concerned with an organisation-wide incident, for example, improving effectiveness, fairness, and alignment with strategy, culture, and/or other general and specific policies. This issue can be specific to one part of the company (e.g., a certain unsatisfactory process or policy needing a response) or can be of broader strategic concern relating to leadership and people inks with the strategies of your company.
Step 2. Describe the background and context of the incident or issue. Below are some ideas and questions to consider for this step. This step is NOT the focus of the assignment. Give only as much detail as is needed to understand the overall context of the situation. This section should only be approximately 15 – 20% of the assignment (400 words) or less. Critical Incident: Reconstruct the event in your mind by going over when it happened, over how long of a period did it last, what was going on around you, who was involved and how it began. Recall it in as much detail as you can. (a) Frame the situation: when did it happen, why did it happen, who was there? (b) Describe the observable events: What happened? What was the order of the event? Who said/did what? What were the immediate outcomes? (c) Describe your thoughts during the events: What were you thinking and feeling but didn’t say? Team or Organisational issue: Briefly describe the current situation. Describe the critical details that are necessary to understand the context in which the issue is taking place. (a) Frame the situation within the business context. What is the issue and how does it relate to strategic issues within the organisation? Try to explain how the current situation came to exist. (b) Describe the specifics of the issue, policy, procedure, etc. Briefly describe the “facts” of the situation or the requirements of the policy or procedure. What is keeping the current situation as it is? (c) What are the pros and cons of the situation? What are the consequences of the issue?
Step 3. Write an analysis of the incident or issue. Use concepts (e.g., theories, frameworks, models, etc.) from the readings and/or class discussions to discuss the incident or situation. A useful framework or model will help you to extrapolate from the specific “facts” of the incident or situation. That is, “to extrapolate” means “to infer (an unknown) from something that is known.” In this case, the “known” are those things described in Step 2. Use the concepts from the class to infer new understanding or meaning about the incident or situation. For example: (a) Are there new terms or definitions that help you better understand what happened or what is happening? (b) Do the frameworks give you possible “missing pieces” that give a more complete picture of the context and/or dynamics of the situation? (c) Do the frameworks help you look at the situation from another point of view? (d) Do the frameworks make predictions of alternative outcomes that are possible if other actions, behaviours, policies and/or strategies had been pursued in the situation?
The main purpose of the assignment is for you to demonstrate an understanding of the frameworks and to apply them to your current work. You are also encouraged to read independently to supplement your knowledge of frameworks which may help you to analyse the critical incident.
Step 4. Using the information written in Steps 2 and 3, describe how the situation could have been handled differently that may have been an improvement. Are there things that you could have done to improve the situation or outcome? If the situation is a current policy or way of working, then what needs to be changed and why? What are your final conclusions based on your analysis? NOTE: Steps 3 and 4 should be the main focus of the assignment. It is very important that you integrate concepts, frameworks, theories, etc. into an analysis. Show that your analysis in Step 3 leads to your conclusions and/or recommendations in Step 4 based on concepts from the course.
The general marking criteria listed for the case analysis apply to this individual assignment also.
General Marking criteria:
- Clear statement of objectives and purpose including and single paragraph executive summary
- Reference support (made use of outside readings and library databases)
- Effective use of theoretical constructs
- Original thinking built from existing knowledge (creativity and complexity)
- Organisation/flow of paper
- Analysis/depth of understating of subject (beyond mere description and superficial analysis)
- Conclusion/synthesis of main ideas (relevant, sufficient and with impact)
- Grammar/readability (punctuation, spelling, sentence structure, proof read)
- Format (clearly referenced, proper bibliography, proper citations)
- Appearance (professional cover page, typed, good graphics)
Referencing
Please reference your project bibliography for the individual critical incident using the Academy of Management Review style.
