COURSEWORK QUESTION PAPER:  Re sit

Spring 2023 Semester-long

Module Code:	HR4053NI
Module Title:	Managing People in Organisations
Module Leader:	Shilpa Dhakal (Islington College)

Coursework Type:	Individual Coursework consisting of a set of cumulative weekly tasks to build on HR concepts and knowledge
Coursework Weight:	This coursework accounts for 100% of your total module grades.
Submission Date:	TBA
When Coursework is given out:	TBA
Submission Instructions:	Submit the following to Islington College RTE department as per the instruction1xPDF file File name: 12312324 Dhruva John
Warning:	London Metropolitan University and Islington College takes Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with sternly.

© London Metropolitan University

Individual coursework 1:

Project: Individual workbook consisting of a set of cumulative weekly tasks to build on HR concepts and knowledge (100 marks)

Section A: Learning outcome of the assessment

LO 1. To understand and evaluate the meaning and nature of a range of relevant people management practices that organisations can implement to effectively manage the workforce.

LO 2. To develop knowledge and skills to function as an effective people manager

Section B: Introduction

The module has one summative component which requires the student to develop student workbook/handbook based on your reflection upon the learning developed from the lectures, tutorial and in-class discussion. 

This will not only test students understanding of the issues in people management, allowing for difference at industry level (LO1) but will also ask students to reflect on the professional ‘people management’ skills they have developed on the module (LO2). For example, reflective of their leadership and team working style, or how ‘difficult’ it is to construct a structured interview to select the ‘perfect employee’.

The workbook is based on seminar activities so students will receive formative feedback on their ideas from teaching staff in class on a weekly basis – so attendance is paramount to get the most out of this module. Seminar leaders will offer support for academic writing and referencing and there will be the opportunity for formative feedback on the assignment.

These tasks must represent the work of individual students and references to published works must be cited.  Plagiarism constitutes an examination offence and if discovered will render a student(s) liable to the appropriate provisions of the University’s Examination Regulations.

Task details

Section C: Assessment Strategy

Student need to develop the HR plan of the organization called “Cadbury”

The report should cover the following 

1. Company profile and reason for choosing the company
2. Analysis of Organisational Plans and Objectives
3. Analysis of Human Resources Inventory
4. Assessing Future Supply and Demand
5. Matching Supply and Demand
6. Establishing an Action Plan using the THREE HR theories or concepts learned in the module
7. Self-Reflection (Each group members 150 words) about the module.

Section C: Assessment Strategy

Student need to submit all the questions answers assigned in Section B. The word limit of each answer should be between 250-300 words. Student need to cite the relevant theory to support their points and illustrate with empirical evidence using Harvard referencing. 

Section D: Assessment Submission

You need to submit a digital copy of each task to RTE in one single file as the guideline provided here. Take help from your module lecturer or tutor for this. The college will not accept any printed copies for this assessment. 

Use correct cover page and name convention to submit the single file to RTE. 

Word count for the individual report: 250-300 words per questions

URL: To be provided later before the submission.

Section E: Marking Criteria: How you will be evaluated?

The grade will be awarded based on the following marking Criteria for a Individual written workbook

• Introduction
• Critical analysis
• Use of Related Examples
• Use of Relevant theory
• Writing Structure
• Conclusion
• Citation and Referencing
• Formatting (Arial, Font Size: 10, Line Spacing 1.5,

Section F: Recommended Table of contents

N/A

Section G: Recommended Reading for references

• Huczynski, A., Buchanan, D.A. and Huczynski, A.A., 2013. Organizational behaviour (p. 82). London: Pearson.

• Redman, T., Wilkinson, A., and Dundon, T. 2016. Contemporary human resource management: Text and cases. Pearson Education.

• Edwards, M.R. and Bach, S., 2012. Human Resource Management in Transition. Managing Human Resources: Human Resource Management in Transition, pp.1-17.

Section H: Assessment Grade Description

GSBL UNDERGRADUATEGENERAL GRADE DESCRIPTORS

	Level 3/4	Level 5	Level 6
General	Acquisition of broad knowledgeEvaluate informationUse information to plan, develop and problem solve	Generate ideas through analysing conceptsDemonstrate a command of specialised skillsFormulate responses to well defined and abstractAnalyse and evaluate information	Critically review, consolidate and extend a body of knowledge using specialised skillsCritically evaluate concepts and evidence from a range of sourcesTransfer and apply skills and exercise significant judgment in a range of situations
70-100 (A)	Very goodDemonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communication very clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations.	ExcellentAdvanced scholarshipGoes beyond the material providedExcellent link to researchExcellent analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalExcellent evidence of preparationComprehensive and critical understanding of the topicExcellent ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyExcellent organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations.	Excellent – Outstanding (for use at far end of range)Outstanding understanding, exploration and insightStrong evidence of originality and development of own ideasDevelop a highly complex argumentOutstanding ability to communicate topics clearly and conciselyAdvanced organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations.References well utilised and critiqued
60-69 (B)	Very goodDemonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluationUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communication clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). Minimal or no errors in reference list or citations.	Very goodDemonstration of very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluationUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communication clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). Minimal or no errors in reference list or citations.	Very GoodAdvanced scholarshipGoes beyond the material providedVery good link to researchVery good analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalVery good evidence of preparationComprehensive and critical understanding of the topicVery good ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyVery good organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations.
50-59 (C)	Adequate – SatisfactorySome analysis but limitedSome insight and exploration of ideasSound conclusionsNo significant inaccuracies or omissionsSome analysis, evaluation or synthesis of informationLacking clarity at timesSome evidence of preparationReferencing is sound. Mostly appropriate sources. Numerous errors or inconsistencies	Adequate – SatisfactorySome evidence of thinking independently to develop own ideasEvaluation of relevant theories or literatureReasonable ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyReport information in a structured wayUse of an appropriate formatQuite comprehensive knowledgeSatisfactory evidence of preparationSatisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.Numerous but minor errors in references	Adequate- SatisfactoryEvidence of thinking independently to develop own ideasEvaluation of relevant theories or literatureAbility to communicate clearly and effectivelyReport information in a structured wayUse of an appropriate formatReasonably Accurate, quite comprehensive knowledgeSatisfactory evidence of preparationCoherent and well presented – minor errorsSatisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.Minor errors in references
40-49 (D)	All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Insufficient analysis, evaluation or synthesisLimited application of theories/knowledgeAn awareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with weak standard of presentationNumerous aberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources	All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Weak or no analysis, evaluation or synthesisSome application of theories/knowledgeAn awareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with weak standard of presentationAberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources	All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Weak or no analysis, evaluation or synthesisSome application of theories/knowledgeAn awareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with weak standard of presentationAberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources
Condoned Pass 30-39 (R2/F1)	Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors	Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors	Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors
Under 30 (R2/F2)	Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors	Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors	Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with many significant errors
(0%)	No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted	No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted	No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted

End of the Document