Please contact us for the assignment

$C:\Users\ada2\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\PV1CWJ8B\AIBS.png$

Glasgow School for Business and Society

HEURISTIC, PROSPECT AND HERDING FACTORS IMPACTING STOCK INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUALS INVESTORS

October 14, 2024

Department of Management & HRM

In partnership with

Ace International Business School

MODULE HANDBOOK

MANAGING PEOPLE IN GLOBAL ORGANISATIONS

MMN127141

2022/23Trimester B (May 2023)

Contents

1 Introduction to the Module 3

5.1 Assessment Deadline 8

5.2 Assessment Guidance 8

5.3 Important Information on Assessment Submission 16

6 Plagiarism and Using Turnitin to Improve Your Work 19

7 Student Feedback 21

8 Module Evaluation 22

9 Accessibility 22

Introduction to the Module

The main purpose of this module handbook is to provide you with a comprehensive guide for this module. In this handbook you will find information and advice that should prove helpful as you progress through the module.

The Aim of the Module

The aim of MPGO is to equip you with a comprehensive understanding of the key concepts, strategies and practices of managing people in global organisations to enable you to effectively manage people in a global context. The extent and reach of globalisation has brought into focus the role played by the skilled workforce in terms of securing and maintaining competitive advantage, as well as raising significant organisational, management and ethical challenges. The module assessment provides you with the opportunity to consolidate your learning on these issues and develop your ability to critique complex organisational problems.

Module Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of the module, students should be able to:

Critically analyse the aims of International Human Resource Management (IHRM) and its contribution to international organisational strategy and effective performance within a global context
Identify, analyse and articulate key challenges associated with managing people in global organizations
Critically evaluate organisational strategies for managing people in global organisations
Critically discuss practices and interventions utilised to effectively, efficiently and ethically manage people in global organizations.

Transferable Skills: Employability

The assignment for this module takes an ‘applied’ approach. This means you are expected to engage with theoretical concepts and academic studies for the purpose of informing International Human Resource Management strategy and practice. In this way, you should be able to develop your consultancy skills, adding value to the organisations you (will) work for.

In addition, there are several generic skills you should be able to develop:

Critical thinking and problem solving
Cognitive / intellectual skills
Knowledge and understanding of International Human Resource Management challenges, strategies and practices
Information retrieval and research skills
People management skills, particularly in forming organisational recommendations in relation to IHRM policy and practice
Communication skills, particularly in the medium of English academic essay writing
Independent working
Group working through in-class discussions
Leading and influencing others more effectively, through group discussions in class and individual coursework making organisational recommendations
IT skills in relation to the use of Word

Teaching and Learning Strategy

All learning materials will be made available on the GCULearn module shell. It is the student’s responsibility to check this site and engage with the weekly learning materials. While we recommend some specific source material for your further reading after the weekly class, you should also be able to carry out self-initiated reading by a) accessing the Resource List in GCULearn, and b) performing your own literature search via the university library search engine.

Recommended Books

The core textbook is available as an e-book through the Resource List and through the university library search engine:

Iles, P. and Zhang, C. 2013. International Human Resource Management: A Cross-Cultural and Comparative Approach. London: CIPD.

Other very useful textbooks include:

Brewster, C., Houldsworth, E., Sparrow, P., and Vernon, G. 2016. International Human Resource Management. 4^th ed. London: CIPD.
Edwards, T. and Rees, C. 2017. International Human Resource Management: Globalization, National Systems and Multinational Companies. 3^rd ed. London: Pearson
Reiche, B.S., Harzing, A.-W., and Tenzer, H. 2019. International Human Resource Management. 5^th ed. London: Sage.

Please also explore relevant academic journals via the library ‘Browse Journals’ page, e.g.:

International Journal of Human Resource Management
International Journal of Management Reviews
International Journal of Training and Development

Further information is contained within the Module Descriptor. Please read this document carefully and if you have any questions, contact the module leader.

Module Team

The University is committed to ensuring that you are supported to achieve a successful outcome on your chosen programme and associated modules.

If you have a particular problem with the academic content of the module, please contact the module leader in the first instance. Further module contacts are detailed below.

AIBS Module Team

AIBS Module Leader	Email
Mr. Jayendra Rimal	[email protected]

GCU Module Leader

GCU Module Leader	Email
Dr Kate Boyle	[email protected]

External Examiner

The University attaches great importance to the role of External Examiners as a key means of assuring that academic standards are at an appropriate level, comparable to those of other higher education institutions and that assessment processes are rigorous and fair. External examiners also make a valuable contribution to the enhancement of programmes and their associated modules.

The External Examiner(s) for your module is Dr Panagiota Sapouna from Athens University of Business and Economics, Greece.

Please note that External Examiners have a specified term of office which means they may be subject to change within the duration of your studies.

The details of the external examiner are for information only. It is inappropriate for students to make direct contact with external examiners, in particular regarding their individual performance in assessments. If you have a concern about your performance, please note the policies relating to Fit to Sit, Appeals, and Complaints.

Module Structure

Week No.	Syllabus Theme	Topic
1	Theme 1: The International Context of Managing People in Global Organisations	Introduction to MPGO & The Role of IHRM
2		The Global Labour Market: Environmental Analysis
3		The Challenges of Managing People in Global Organisations: Cultural Analysis
4	Theme 2: The Organisational Context of Managing People in Global Organisations	Managing People in MNCs, Supranational and Third Sector International Organisations
5	Theme 3: Global People Management Strategies and Practices	Managing Diversity in a Multicultural Workforce
6		Developing Responsible Global Leaders
7		International Human Resource Development
8		Managing the Performance of a Global Workforce
9		Comparative Employment Relations
10		Global Talent Management, incl. Planning, Recruitment & Selection
11		Global Rewards – Attracting and Retaining Talent through Employer Branding
12	Themes 1, 2 & 3	Module Consolidation and Assignment Support

Preparation

A single lecture or seminar on a topic cannot cover everything you ought to know, you are expected to undertake reading both before and after lectures and seminars etc. to deepen your understanding of the topic. In particular, in seminar groups prior reading and preparation will allow you to contribute fully to discussions and take full advantage of the learning process.

GCU Learn

GCU Learn provides access to a range of additional module materials such as slides/visuals from lectures, web links relevant to the topic, further reading and details of seminar and assessment tasks. It is not, however, a replacement for timetabled class contact.

It also provides access to other features to help you manage your studies, including setting and tracking tasks and keeping a calendar. You will find a lot of useful study information there.

You should get into the habit of logging on to GCU Learn every day.

As GCU Learn is a web-based system, you can access it through any computer that is connected to the Internet. Click on GCU Learn to access from this document; or click on the GCU Learn link from the Student home page.

Assessment

In accordance with the University’s Digital Assessment Policy and Online Similarity Checking Policy all standard academic summative submissions of written assessment, i.e. those that are primarily text-based, will be submitted through similarity-checking software, such as Turnitin. This is applicable to written assessment submissions at all SCQF levels. You may be asked to submit your written assessment online through similarity-checking software, such as Turnitin.

Support and guidance in understanding and interpreting a Turnitin originality report from induction onwards, can be accessed through PLATO, the online plagiarism tutorial http://plato.gcal.ac.uk/.

Where plagiarism is detected this will be dealt with under the Code of Student Conduct.

The GCU Assessment Regulations define plagiarism as “the deliberate and substantial unacknowledged incorporation in a student’s work of material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another”. In other words, passing someone else’s work off as your own. This includes material from books, journals and the web, as well as from friends or others.

Therefore, you are reminded that all work submitted must be your own and, unless instructed otherwise, you must provide answers in your own words. When submitting any assessments, you are confirming that you understand and are complying with this guidance

Plagiarism is a very serious offence and students are reminded that an academic irregularity, in breach of the Code of Student Conduct (e.g. plagiarism, collusion etc.), can result in severe penalties.

As per GCU Assessment Regulations, students must not attempt to use the same substantive piece of coursework to meet the assessment requirements of another item of coursework, dissertation or project. In a situation where an Assessment Board believes there is evidence that a student has attempted to use the same substantive piece of work for more than one item of coursework, the matter will be dealt with as Plagiarism and pursued in line with the Code of Student Conduct.

The following statement should be incorporated into any piece of coursework submitted by a student:

“This piece of coursework is my own original work and has not been submitted elsewhere in fulfilment of the requirement of this or any other award.”

Assessment Deadline

For this module the schedule of submission of the summative assessment is detailed below.

Submission Date	Type of assessment	Form of assessment	Length	Weighting
Friday 22^th September 2023 by 1pm (week 17)	Summative	Essay	3000 words	100%

Submission Date

Type of assessment

Form of assessment

Length

Weighting

Friday 22^th September 2023

by 1pm

(week 17)

Summative

Essay

3000 words

100%

Assessment Guidance

The assessment for this module will consist of a 3000 words essay, and your answer should meet all of the learning outcomes of the module as below.

Module Learning Outcomes:

1. Critically analyse the aims of International Human Resource Management (IHRM) and its contribution to international organisational strategy and effective performance within a global context

2. Identify, analyse and articulate key challenges associated with managing people in global organizations

3. Critically evaluate organisational strategies for managing people in global organisations

4. Critically discuss practices and interventions utilised to effectively, efficiently and ethically manage people in global organisations.

Your submission deadline is as follows:

TOPIC – ASSIGNMENT QUESTION

The essay takes an ‘applied’ approach. This means you are expected to engage with theoretical concepts and academic studies for the purpose of informing International Human Resource Management strategy and practice. In this way, you should be able to develop your consultancy skills, adding value to the organisations you (will) work for. More precisely, you are asked to critically discuss an IHRM strategy and practice with a view to making recommendations on how best to implement it in a global organisation operating between two specific countries. Please ensure you do not select a topic which could overlap significantly with your dissertation, as you cannot be assessed for the same piece of work twice.

Accordingly, you should answer the following question:

‘Critically discuss and evaluate the approach a global organisation headquartered in Country X could take in implementing strategies and practices around (1) equality and diversity management OR (2) leadership OR (3) human resource development OR (4) performance management OR (5) employment relations OR (6) talent management OR (7) rewards management within its subsidiaries in Country Y. Your answer should conclude with recommendations’.

All students should critique:

International Human Resource Management theory, e.g. IHRM models and strategies, convergence/divergence approaches, ethical debates etc. as appropriate. Remember, human resource management is not the same as business management or domestic HRM. IHRM concerns the approaches to managing employees in organisations across different countries and your critical discussion should reflect the nuances of this.
One specific IHRM strategy and practice with attention to literature on the challenges of implementing it within an international context, i.e. one out of: (1) equality and diversity management; (2) global leadership; (3) international human resource development; (4) global performance management; (5) international employment relations; (6) global talent management; or (7) global rewards. You can narrow the IHRM strategy and practice into an area which is more specific. This can be done at your discretion, depending on your area of interest and the amount of depth you think is appropriate. Please see your lecture material on each topic from weeks 5-11 for ideas. For example, global talent management could be narrowed down to specific elements such as talent attraction, recruitment or selection if desired.

The IHRM strategy and practice of two separate countries with attention to organisational, cultural and environmental analysis as appropriate for the topic area. You should select two countries (Country X being the parent country, and Country Y being the host country) where you think you will achieve a suitable contrast of IHRM approach, e.g. from two separate continents.
Specific organisational recommendations. You should imagine that you are acting as a HR Consultant for a global organisation which wants to implement the HRM policy and practice in its foreign subsidiaries, coming up with and critiquing your specific recommendations.

WRITING THE COURSEWORK:

You must write a 3000 word (+/- 10%) essay. Your essay should reflect both taught and self-directed learning. Weeks 1-4 of the programme are designed to give you the foundations of IHRM issues and you are expected to draw on your learning from Weeks 1-4 in your essay where appropriate. You are also expected to draw on your learning from one of weeks 5-11 of the programme which align to the specific HRM functions / topic area you have chosen to discuss. You must also engage in your own further reading of textbooks, peer-reviewed journal articles and reports as appropriate.

You must write your essay using the following structure only:

Question Title (please write your question out in full at the top – not included in your word count)
Essay (including introduction, main body, conclusions and recommendations all without headings or subheadings) (3000 words +/-10%)
References (not included in word count, Harvard style, all named authors)

You must not add in headings, subheadings or appendices. We expect you to write in paragraph structure with appropriate links between paragraphs, i.e. essay writing style. Your essay should flow as one whole piece of work so that the reader is able to ascertain a clear line of argument with no breaks of thought. Please use the MPGO Essay Marking Criteria below for guidance on expected areas of coverage when writing your essay. If you are struggling with how to structure and order your ideas, you may wish to use the marking criteria as a guide in this respect.

Content	MPGO Essay Marking Criteria	Main Purpose
Title	Title is customised from the question wording to reflect the required content, e.g. ‘A critical discussion and evaluation of the approach Coca-Cola (headquartered in the US) could take in implementing human resource development strategies and practices in its Nigerian subsidiaries, with recommendations’.	To clearly reflect the scope of your essay for the reader
Introduction	Written introduction develops a rationale for discussing IHRM, the specific HRM strategy and practice, the two selected countries, and industry/sector/organizational context(s) or case study if chosen with references to academic literature. Due attention to the definition and scope of both IHRM and the specific HRM strategy and practice is evidenced. Essay aim and contents are outlined.	To introduce the key elements of your topic (from your title) To define and scope key concepts To justify why your chosen topic and countries are important to discuss To clearly state the aim and outline of your essay for the reader
Critical Discussion (Module Learning Outcomes 1 & 2)	Critical evaluation of appropriate IHRM aims, strategies and approaches (e.g. convergence / divergence, and ethnocentrism / polycentrism) with consideration of ethics, and supported by critical discussion of relevant theory / debates. Critical discussion of the relevant challenges in implementing the chosen HRM strategy and practice within an international context.	To debate which overall IHRM strategy is potentially the best choice considering the different academic and ethical arguments. To further relate / link these arguments to the particular challenges associated with managing your chosen HRM function within an international context / across different countries generally. To critically discuss rather than simply describe, e.g. compare and contrast authors, debate for and against, debate advantages and disadvantages, and add depth. To give you the theoretical understanding and arguments which can later be applied to your chosen case below.
Critical Contextual Analysis & Evaluation (Module Learning Outcomes 3 & 4)	Relevant cultural and environmental analysis as appropriate to inform a critical evaluation of strategy and practice in specific relation to the chosen HRM function, selected countries, and industry/sector/organizational context(s). Application and critique of convergence / divergence and ethnocentrism / polycentrism or related approaches in relation to the specific context is considered.	To answer: Bearing in mind the industry / sector / organizational context(s) you have chosen, which cultural / environmental factors most impact the way your two countries carry out your chosen HRM function? – how so? – to what extent? (Use PESTLE, Hofstede and additional academic literature as your evidence base) What are the implications? Comparing and contrasting your two countries along the different dimensions and elements, and considering different arguments and perspectives from literature, to what extent is there a cultural fit of HQ practices to the subsidiary in relation to your chosen HRM function? And, therefore, considering earlier arguments (see Critical Discussion section) to what extent do you think, for example, an ethnocentric or polycentric strategy would be suitable in this case?
Conclusions and Recommendations (All Module Learning Outcomes)	Conclusions are soundly grounded in the preceding discussion. Recommendations are sensible and practical, showing cultural and ethical sensitivities. Awareness of potential challenges and limitations evidenced, again, based on preceding arguments.	To answer the main question by selecting key arguments already made in the main body of the essay (without adding any new information).
Academic Presentation	Discussions are theoretically robust and well scoped. Application, detail and depth shows evidence of synthesis from a wide range of appropriate reading. Observes academic style and essay writing conventions. Excellent structure and cohesion between paragraphs. Progressive argument / idea development. Excellent citation and referencing style with no errors (Harvard style). Spelling, phrasing and grammar are exemplary.	To ensure academic rigour and quality To demonstrate Masters level standards of written communication To avoid the risk of plagiarism

SOURCES OF GUIDANCE AND FEEDBACK

MPGO Essay Guidance:

You are encouraged to use the guidelines given with this coursework document and on GCULearn, as well as attend any assessment clinics and support sessions that are provided by the module tutor. Please ask your AIBS MPGO tutor if you need some more guidance or clarification.

Researching Your Essay:

You are expected to utilise the MPGO module site (including the Resource List) and be creative in conducting your own literature search through the library search engine to access the relevant material you need. If you would like further advice on how to research your essay, please visit the library website and look at information on Using the Library and Subject Help.

Referencing Your Essay:

Please visit the library’s Cite them Right online tool for help and examples on how to use and format within-text citations, as well as reference lists. You should select Harvard referencing, use ‘et al.’ within the text for 4 or more authors, and state all named authors in the list at the end. If citing a source second-hand, this should be kept to a minimum as you should be self-selecting, reading and synthesising a unique mixture of original sources for yourself. Please note that using too many second-hand references could lead to an investigation of plagiarism. If you do need to use a second-hand reference, this should be made transparent, for example, ‘(Brown, 2015, citied in Arthur, 2020)’, or ‘Arthur (2020) argues that Brown (2015)…’. In these examples, both Brown and Arthur would appear fully listed as separate entries in the reference list at the end.

Marking Your Essay

Essays are marked with reference to the above marking criteria for each element as well as the general Masters’ marking guidelines (Appendix 2). You must ensure you read both sets of marking criteria to help achieve optimum marks.

The overall pass mark for the module is 50%. Successful completion of the written coursework will demonstrate a student’s fulfilment of the module learning outcomes. Any student who fails the module in their first diet is permitted to resubmit at the resit diet.

Please note that all assessments are sampled and cross-marked, and are subject to final confirmation by the External Assessor who will moderate coursework scripts to ensure standards are equivalent to other Universities in the UK.

Feedback on Your Essay for Continuing Development

Your feedback will be available online and you will be able to access it via the assignments tab in GCULearn. Generally, module tutors will annotate your coursework and provide a feedback summary. It is your responsibility to access GCULearn and obtain the feedback. Please use the feedback to help you develop your academic writing skills for future assignments.

Important Information on Assessment Submission

This module makes use of the Grade Mark online assessment system on GCULearn. This means that all assignments must be submitted electronically and all feedback will be provided electronically via GCULearn.

Accordingly, you must submit your work as outlined below:

You must submit an electronic copy on the GCULearn site (via the assignment tab) for the relevant module, and
Your electronic submission must include the following at the start of the document:
- an Avoiding academic irregularity: plagiarism/ghost-writing checklist (Appendix 1)

This is available on GCU Learn for you to download and incorporate at the front of your electronic coursework document.

Please ensure that the file uploaded is saved as a ‘Word’ document.

Extensions

All coursework should be submitted by or before the stipulated dates, unless an extension has been agreed beforehand with the AIBS Global MBA Programme Manager, Mr Rohit Sharma.

Whilst it is expected that you will submit your assessment(s) on time, there may be occasions when you face difficulties which are beyond your control. In these circumstances you may wish to seek an extension to the date of submission. You should contact your module leader in the first instance.

Please note that extensions are generally only granted for 3 reasons:

Medical reasons supported by a doctor’s certificate
Extenuating personal circumstances
Extraordinary work commitments supported by letter from employer

If you require an extension you must request one in writing, by email, in advance of the submission deadline. The request should be sent to the AIBS Global MBA Programme Manager. Extensions are not granted automatically and are normally only given if students meet one of the criteria outlined above.

Full details on the process can be found in section 10 of the University Assessment Regulations.

Module staff will not accept coursework directly from students. Please do not hand/ email your coursework directly to your tutor.

If you encounter problems when submitting your work electronically, please contact the AIBS Global MBA Programme Manager, Mr Rohit Sharma as soon as possible to notify them of your issues and any action you are taking to rectify. Please remember that it is your responsibility to ensure you retain access to GCU Learn throughout your studies and seek help from the Base should you have access issues.

If you are unable to submit your work electronically you must contact IT support on email [email protected]. You should also email your AIBS tutor and AIBS Global MBA Programme Manager as soon as possible to notify them of your issues and any action you are taking to rectify them. Please remember that it is your responsibility to ensure you retain access to GCULearn throughout your studies and seek help from IT should you have access issues.

If the AIBS Global MBA Programme Manager believes that the students cannot successfully complete the necessary work in the available time, even with an extension, they may advise the student to submit a Fit to Sit form (see 5.4)

Students who do not submit either for the submission date or for an extended deadline without prior agreement with the module leader/ nominee will be deemed to have failed that submission and will be required to resubmit if another attempt is available to the student.

Number of Attempts

Students are allowed two attempts at each piece of coursework. Students failing to reach the minimum standard of 50% for the module on the first attempt will be required to conduct further work and resubmit for the next Assessment Board. Students failing the module after the second submission would be deemed to have exhausted all attempts on the module (see Glasgow Caledonian University’s Assessment Regulations).

Non-Submission of Coursework

Failure to submit the assessment on the stipulated due date, or an extended deadline without prior agreement with the module leader/nominee will be deemed to have failed that submission and the non-submission being treated as an attempt.

5.4 Fit to Sit

In the normal course of events, the University operates a ‘Fit to Sit/Submit’ approach to student assessment, with a default assumption that any student undertaking a piece of assessment, is declaring that they are fit to do so. Any mark and/or attempt at assessment will stand, unless a student has indicated that they were not ‘Fit to Sit/Submit’. A student can declare themselves unfit from 5 days prior the date of assessment, and up to 2 days after they sat/submit (subject to any approved exception). The Fit to Sit policy can be found on the Policy & Procedures web page.

Please note that if a student sits/submits and subsequently declares themselves unfit, it will result in their work not being marked and no feedback given, with an NS (non-submission) recorded.

IMPORTANT – Information that must be provided when any declaration of being unfit to sit/submit is made. Please note that a failure to enter these details accurately in your declaration may lead to your declaration not being processed. The form can be accessed here

Module Code: MMN126829 NEPA

Module Title: Managing People in Global Organisations

Module Leader: Rohit Sharma

Module Leader Email: [email protected]

Penalty for Exceeding Stipulated Word Count

The word count requirements for all assessments is clearly stipulated in the module handbook. The word count relates only to the main content of the assessment; title page, contents page, abstract/executive summary (if relevant), reference list and appendices are not included in the word count. Students should ensure that the word count is clearly presented on the front cover/title page of all assessments submitted.

In the event a student has been found to exceed the upper limit of tolerance of +10% allowed in assessments, the final mark of the assessment will be subjected to a penalty and a 10% deduction of mark will be imposed. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that the word count restrictions are strictly adhered to.

Plagiarism and Using Turnitin to Improve Your Work

You must use the Harvard Referencing system. An on-line referencing guide can be accessed here. Referencing is important to evidence your arguments, enhance your work and avoid plagiarism.

Additionally, in submitting your work online your electronic material will be processed through Turnitin software in GCULearn to ascertain whether or not there is a suspicion of plagiarism.

Plagiarism is interpreted in its widest sense and includes self-plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered to be either the unacknowledged incorporation of the academic material (published or unpublished) of another person or persons, or the re-use of a student’s own previous written work or data presented for assessment on a previous occasion (self-plagiarism). Depending on the circumstances it may be classified as poor academic practice, minor offence of plagiarism or a major offence of plagiarism.

Examples of Plagiarism include:

use of another person’s academic material (writing, drawings, ideas, and data) without reference or acknowledgement;
summarising another person’s written material by changing some words or altering the order of presentation without acknowledgement;
use of the ideas of another person without acknowledgement of the source;
copying the work of another student with or without that student’s knowledge;
use of commissioned material, without reference or acknowledgement – often termed ghost writing;
use of additions or corrections by a proof reader with relevant knowledge in the subject;
collusion with another student or other students;
self-plagiarism (as defined above).
reproduction of model answers, in whole or in part, from any source in assessments and examinations.

If plagiarism is suspected, Module Leaders will follow the plagiarism regulations as they are set out here.

We set the system to allow you to use the Turnitin software on your draft coursework prior to submitting your final pieces of work. In doing so we hope this will help develop your academic writing and referencing skills as you progress your studies. To utilise the system, you simply upload your work to the “draft” submission section and the system will provide you with a report which highlights any matches to the work of others. You should then interrogate this report and utilise the results to improve your work.

Here are some points to note when interrogating your report:

Look beyond the overall % score – you need to look at the composition of the score, is it made up of many small matches or a few high matches. E.g. an 8% match with another student’s or your own previously submitted work may not present a high overall % score but when interrogated as an individual match is high.
Look at the structure of the of the highlighted matches:
- Is it merely the author and year that is highlighted or have you used the authors words without quotation marks?
- Small phrases which are highlighted can be acceptable but large sections of text e.g. sentences/paragraphs are unacceptable.
Where there are matches such as those outlined above you should either paraphrase (rewrite in your own words) or use quotation marks and reference correctly.

Student Feedback

All modules adhere to the GCU Policy on Student Performance Feedback. The key principles of the policy are that:

Feedback should be based on discussion, face to face or online, between you, your fellow students and staff. This dialogue is an important part of your learning and also helps academic staff to shape their teaching.
To support your future learning, feedback should review your performance, your strengths and areas for improvement; should clarify what is expected of you academically and help to identify areas for further learning and development.
Feedback on coursework should normally be provided to you within three working weeks of coursework submission deadlines.
Feedback should be based on clear assessment criteria, which are made available to you in advance of undertaking your assignment or examination.
Feedback can be provided in a variety of different forms: written, for example by comments made on your assignment itself or on a feedback sheet; electronic, for example by email or through GCU Learn, verbal, for example in lectures, seminars or one-to-one and small group meetings with your tutor. Feedback can also be provided by your fellow students and through self-reflection. Written feedback should use plain English and be clear and legible. It should also be responsive to any particular needs you have in terms of its accessibility.
Feedback, in its variety of different forms, should be provided throughout your module and, where possible, build on feedback provided on earlier performance.
Feedback should be provided on all your assignments, whether formative or summative, examinations, and group as well as individual contributions to a module.
The variety of different forms of feedback should ensure that you have easy access to your feedback whether you are full-time, part-time, distance or work-based.

Module Evaluation

Student Staff Consultative Groups (SSCG)

Student Staff Consultative Groups are one of the principal mechanisms used within the University to evaluate the student experience on programmes and associated modules, and to communicate to students, details of actions resulting from the evaluation.

The purpose of the Student Staff Consultative Group is:

to act as an effective and representative consultative forum in which students and staff meet to discuss matters of mutual interest and concern at both programme and module level
to provide an opportunity to obtain views representative of students on all levels and modes of the programme, and to take these into account in contributing to the programme monitoring and development processes
to provide feedback to students on how the programme, or the University more widely, has responded to concerns raised by students.

Module Feedback

In addition to the Student Staff Consultative Group, GCU formally collects student feedback on two occasions. Once during the delivery of the module during a midway pause for feedback. Student engagement in midway feedback is particularly important in that it allows module teams to be alerted to student views and to respond in an agile manner. This feedback can be obtained via a variety of tools and your module leader will let you know how this will be managed for this module.

End of module feedback is gathered via GCU Learn and this is only an important part of enhancing the delivery of the module and student experience. Module leaders are asked to allow some time during a lecture or seminar to encourage students to complete module evaluation surveys. It is the responsibility of the module leader to ensure that such feedback is incorporated into the module evaluation process.

Accessibility

GCU Learn Module-Level Accessibility Statement

The University has an accessibility statement specific to learning and teaching relating to the GCU Learn platform (Blackboard), third-party plug-ins and content uploaded by staff and students. You can read the statement in full using this link to the GCU Learn Institution Page.

GCU Learn enables you to download your module content in five different formats, depending upon your learning preferences and requirements. You can learn more about how to access the different formats in this module via this video.

Reporting issues with accessibility in this module

If you are experiencing issues accessing content within a module, please contact your Module Leader in the first instance. If you are a student with existing arrangements or reasonable adjustments, please contact the GCU Disability Service.

We’re always looking to improve the accessibility of this website. If you find any problems not listed on this page or think we’re not meeting accessibility requirements, contact: [email protected].

APPENDIX 1: Avoiding Academic Irregularity Checklist

Department of Management and HRM

Avoiding academic irregularity: plagiarism/ghost-writing checklist

COURSEWORK SUBMISSION COVER SHEET

Before you submit coursework, in accordance with University regulations, you should be able to confirm that the coursework that you are submitting is your own original work and that you have:

read and understood the guidance on academic irregularity and plagiarism in the module handbook;
clearly referenced, both within the text and on the end reference page/s, all sources used in the work;
based your work on academic sources from academic search engines such as the American Business Index (ABI). Student sources should not be used;
used inverted commas and the full reference details (including page numbers) for all text quoted from books, journals, web-based other sources;
provided the sources for all data in tables and figures that are not your own work;
not made use of the work of any other student(s) past or present without acknowledgement. This includes any of your own work that has been previously, or concurrently, submitted for assessment, either at this or any other educational institution, including school;
not sought or used the services of any professional agencies such as ghost writers or other individuals, to produce this work;
retained all the material collected in the process of developing your coursework; and
in addition, you understand that any false claim in respect of this work may result in disciplinary action in accordance with University regulations.

Remember, the Learning Development Centre offers advice on academic writing.

Please tick to confirm that you have observed the points above in your coursework and submit a signed copy of this complete form (2 pages) with your coursework submission.

Name:
Student ID Number:
Degree Programme:
Module Title:
Module/Seminar Tutor:
Date:
Word Count: (MUST BE STATED)
This is my own original work; it has not been submitted elsewhere in fulfilment of the requirements of this or any other award. I agree that tutors can make this work (either original or on-line version) available to future student cohorts as an exemplar of this assignment, on the understanding it will be anonymised with no reference to myself or any case study organisation utilised. Signed ………………………………………………………………………………

Appendix 2: Indicative Guide to Assessment Criteria for Masters Level Modules

Students’ final marks will normally have the majority of the characteristics in the final mark range

Characteristics	Distinction Level (70% and >)	Very Good Pass (60-69%)	Satisfactory Pass (50-59%)	Marginal Fail (45-49%)	Clear Fail (< 45%)
Introduction/ Contextual Framework	Demonstrates excellent ability to place HR topic/ question within a wide organisational and contextual framework.	Demonstrates a very good ability to place HR topic/ question within a wide organisational and contextual framework.	Demonstrates an acceptable level of ability to place HR topic/ question within a wide organisational and contextual framework.	Demonstrates difficulty in placing the HR topic/ question within a wide organisational and contextual framework (e.g. fails to identify context and/ or omissions are apparent).	Inability to place the HR topic/ question within a wide organisational and contextual framework.
Scope of knowledge, understanding & application	Displays exceptional breadth of knowledge, understanding & application of all aspects of the HR topic/ question. Has critical awareness of current published research in both highly research based and applied articles/ reports.	Displays very good breadth of knowledge, understanding & application in most, but not all aspects of the HR topic/ question. Has comprehensive, but not always ‘critical’ awareness of current published research in both highly research based and applied articles/ reports, however some reliance on textbooks is evident.	Displays broadly competent breadth of knowledge, understanding & application in most, but not all aspects of the HR topic/ question. Has satisfactory level of awareness of some of current published research in both highly research based and applied articles/ reports however at times is reliant on one source above other. Answer can be superficial at times with occasional factual omission(s) and/ or mistake(s). May demonstrate an over reliance on textbooks.	Displays simplistic and rather superficial breadth of knowledge, understanding & application in most, but not all aspects of the HR topic/ question. Has limited level of awareness of some of current published research in both highly research based and applied articles/ reports, possibly with some glaring errors. Demonstrates heavy reliance on textbooks as source.	Displays wholly simplistic and superficial breadth of knowledge, understanding & application in most aspects of the HR topic/ question. Relies on low level sources (if any) and demonstrates a definite unfamiliarity with topic that doesn’t meet required standards.
Characteristics	Distinction Level (70% and >)	Very Good Pass (60-69%)	Satisfactory Pass (50-59%)	Marginal Fail (45-49%)	Clear Fail (< 45%)
Depth and linkages (where relevant) Critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation	Demonstrates outstanding depth, and (where relevant), integrative links across the various areas of the organisation(s) and HR subject area. Critically analyses, synthesises and evaluates a range of relevant information such as specialised theories, principles and concepts, utilising where appropriate, models and frameworks into an evidence-based arguement.	Demonstrates very good depth, and (where relevant), some integrative links across the various areas of the organisation(s) and HR subject area. Very good analysis, synthesis and evaluation of most of the possible range of relevant information such as specialised theories, principles and concepts. Utilises as appropriate, models and frameworks into an evidence-based argument however some issues remain unexplored.	Develops adequate depth, and (where relevant) alludes to possible integrative links across the various areas of the organisation(s) and HR subject area. Does attempt basic analysis, synthesis and evaluation of some of the possible range of relevant information such as specialised theories, principles, concepts, models and frameworks. Relatively rare use of evidence-based argument and some issues do remain unexplored.	Little evidence of real depth in understanding, with no attempt to refer (where relevant) to possible integrative links across the various areas of the organisation(s) and HR subject area. Relies largely on description but does attempt to refer to a limited range of relevant information (such as specialised theories, principles, concepts, models and frameworks). A significant number of issues remain unexplored and there is little/ no attempt to develop/ argue a case.	Evidence of misunderstanding, personal prejudices/ opinions that are not justified/ related to reading. Does not identify (where relevant) possible integrative links across the various areas of the organisation(s) and HR subject area. Descriptive, superficial/ anecdotal in nature. No attempt to refer to relevant specialised theories, principles, concepts, models and frameworks. A large number of issues are not referred to / explored. No attempt is made to develop/ argue a case
Critical reflection on current work experience/ application	Clear evidence of critical reflection. Application of theory to current work experience/ practice is excellent.	Some evidence of reflection but not always critical on the application of theory to current work experience/ practice.	Some limited evidence of reflection (but not critical) on the application of theory to current and/ or prior work experience/ practice.	Attempts reflection but is unconvincing. Very limited ability to apply theory to current and/ or prior work experience/ practice.	Limited/ no attempt to reflect or apply theory to current and/ or prior work experience/ practice.

Characteristics

Distinction Level

(70% and >)

Very Good Pass

(60-69%)

Satisfactory Pass

(50-59%)

Marginal Fail

(45-49%)

Clear Fail

(< 45%)

Marshalling of data and structure

Marshalls data and structures it appropriately to develop (from introduction to conclusion) a clearly logical flow with excellent cohesion between sections.

Draws appropriate logically derived and fully justified conclusions and inferences. Recommendations are focused, relevant and convincing.

Marshalls data and structures it appropriately to develop (from introduction to conclusion) a mostly logical flow with generally good cohesion between sections.

Draws apposite, largely logical and justified conclusions and inferences. Recommendations are for the most part, focused, relevant and convincing.

Competent marshalling of data and structure although at times this may not be entirely satisfactory. Does generally flow but not always a good cohesion between sections.

Does draw some appropriate conclusions and inferences but not all are fully justified/ logically derived. Recommendations make sense but are not always relevant/ practical.

Endeavours to marshal data and structure but overall effect is unsatisfactory. Some difficulties in terms of flow and cohesion between sections.

Attempts to draw some appropriate conclusions and inferences but they are generally not justified/ logically derived. Recommendations, if present, seem like ‘wish- lists’ with little clear idea about implications for organisation/ link to issue(s) identified.

Evident difficulty in structure, flow and cohesion between sections.

Relies on unjustified assertions which mean that conclusions and/or inferences are invalid/ irrelevant. Does not generate recommendations, or where attempt is made, resorts to simplistic recipies for action that are naïve.

Academic style and presentation.

Observes academic style. Excellent referencing and cross referencing with no errors. Spelling and grammar are exemplary.

Observes academic style. Very good referencing and cross referencing with few errors. Very few spelling and grammar errors.

Readable, but doesn’t always observe academic style. Satisfactory referencing and cross referencing with a number of errors apparent. Some spelling and grammar errors.

Presentation is generally poor and doesn’t follow academic style. Minimal referencing and cross referencing with errors apparent. Regular evidence of spelling and grammatical errors.

Presentation is poor with no attempt to follow an academic style. No referencing and cross referencing apparent but where found, is incorrect. Reader unfriendly, with serious errors in spelling and grammar.

Adapted from ABS Benchmarks for Masters Business and Management, QAA Framework for HE qualifications; CIPD 2010; SHEFC 2010