MGT303 Leading and Implementing Organisational Change ASSIGNMENT for MAY SUBMISSIONS

Faculty of Business and Technology

School of Business

MODULE CODE: MGT303

MODULE TITLE: Leading and Implementing Organisational Change

MODULE LEADER: Meg Eghebi

ASSIGNMENT TITLE: ASSIGNMENT 1 of 1

SUBMISSION DATE: Friday 16th May 2025, 23:59 UK Time

CONTRIBUTION OF THIS ASSIGNMENT TO THE OVERALL MODULE MARK (%): 100%

Turnitin Submission

PLEASE READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION CAREFULLY. This assignment contributes 100% to your final module mark.

All assignments submitted to Canvas will automatically be checked by the Turnitin system which will produce a report on the level of similarity within the assignment. Only assignments submitted through CANVAS will be marked. Any other submission, including submission to your study centre in hard copy will be treated as a non-submission.

It is advisable to retain a copy of your assignment for you own records.

Your mark and feedback will be made available to you electronically once the internal moderation process has taken place, you should note that at this stage marks are still subject to external examiner and academic board approval.

Summative ‘end’ assessment – The assignment is one piece of work

Background:

You are required to write a 3000-word (+/-10%) report, in which you must identify, diagnose, analyse, implement a plan, and evaluate the application of contemporary change management practice, concepts and models in leading and managing change, in relation to a listed company located in your area. The business report is designed to allow you to develop and apply skills, knowledge and understanding to create the ‘Business Case study’ in managing and leading change, as well to sparkle your potentials and ability in building essential employability dimensions, e.g. creating a business proposal, business change brainstorming, presenting business intelligence, conducting business research, etc.

Discuss your choice of company with the module tutor prior to any form of navigating your research journey.

At the end of the report, you also would make robust recommendations to highlight how change management could be led and implemented within the chosen organisation; this should be supported by offering an ‘action plan’ in the appendices section. This ‘action plan’ should highlight how and when the change project should be scheduled, implemented and executed. The timeframe could be shown in a “GANTT Chart” showing how it would be achieved.

In producing the report, you should ensure you have:

– provided a company overview as background information about the company selected, e.g. mission, vision, business history & nature, strategy, core values, etc

– analyzed and diagnosed information to establish what the change management practice/behaviour is i.e., compare and contrast the organisation current practices/behaviour, approach to change against a range of thoughts, concepts, models and frameworks covered within the module.

– based on your analysis, identified the strengths and weaknesses within the organization and related this to any approaches to managing and leading change (including the people aspects e.g., creating readiness and overcoming resistance)

– Identified what the organization needs to do in terms of ‘implementing any change’ by creating a change plan i.e., discuss improvement plans in terms of a move from current practice/behaviour to new practice/behaviour… supported with an ‘Action Plan’ that clearly articulates the short- and medium-term actions, required to enhance the organisation in using different approaches in managing and leading change.

– offered brief discussion around how any identified change can be made sustainable ‘or stick’ to its business development.

Project components and Structure

You MUST follow the following theme-based sub-sections outlined in a ‘report style’ format:

– Title page (e.g. your name, student number, programme of study, module title, module code and module tutor name, word count and date of submission)

– Table of contents (with appropriate page numbers)

– An introduction

– The main body of the report is separated by the following sub-headings:

o Identify a “business change” practice/behaviour within the Hong Kong based organization o Discuss why this change is important, utilizing relevant change models/concepts to offer a justified need for the ‘change’; e.g., PESTLE, SWOT, Force-field Analysis, Kotter’s 8 steps concept, etc.)

o Critically debate the organization’s current business position regarding ‘readiness for change’ and how this may be achieved/improved

o Identify and justify the approach used in initializing the change (i.e.

planned/emergent/hybrid model)

o Evaluate the implementation of change i.e. identify/justify a model associated with planning and implementing of any business practice/behaviourial changes analysed in earlier sections of the report

o Discuss various approaches in making an informed choice around managing any perceived/predicted change resistance during the change process.

o Debate any ethical, responsible and sustainable change approaches to ensuring the planned change will ‘stick’ i.e., remain over time.

– Summary and Recommendations – identify any key strategic/operational aspects the research has suggested – what the organization needs to do, to implement any identified ‘change’ – the recommendations should be supported by an “action plan” feasible for implementation.

– A comprehensive bibliography that demonstrates your research (should be in-line with the latest version of the ‘Harvard Referencing’ guidelines suggested by Sunderland)

– Appendices (any relevant attachments including the ‘Action Plan’ of the report) Remarks: All components (sections) must appear in the main body of the report.

Formative Assessment Support

The summative ‘end’ assessment will be developed using a formative assessment support approach in the form of a reflective ‘Learning Log’. This will be developed, discussed and reviewed every week; to record individual views/comments/understanding/discussion/debate/decision of relevant theme-based sections applicable to the chosen organisation, in your assignment. It aims to assist you to develop, enhance and complete your learning and assessment requirements in this module. The tutor will undertake to explain further details in each class contact of the module.

A Microsoft Word document can be utilise to record all your learning insights and observations through (but not limited to) … written narratives, personal vlogs, references to or even recordings of organisational stories (e.g. YouTube), photos, tables, theoretic models, etc. This should be done and developed on a weekly basis to monitor your work progress and learning interests.

Word limit

Your report word count must be stated on the title page of the report.

Summarising and Paraphrasing the research findings/evidence in your assignment, is one of the useful writing skills students could acquire and demonstrate in preparing and writing the assignment.

The word limit is marked at 3,000 (+/-10%), which does not include:

– Title page

– Table of contents

– Bibliography

– Appendices

– Appropriate tables, figures, and illustrations

NOTE: in-text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g., “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011:123)] are included in the word count.

Submission of assessment

– Must use a Microsoft Word document to write and submit your report

– Follow the instructions stated above

– One [1] electronic copy of the work should be submitted via the module canvas site, ‘Turnitin submission link’. This must be done before the published submission deadline, stated by the lead tutor, via the module canvas pages.

– The University’s ‘Generic Assessment Criteria’ Table will be used to assess all assignment submission.

– Student formal feedback and results will be provided as per the university regulations. Feedback and comments on your report submission, will appear in the Speedgrader platform on the CANVAS platform. You can access the page on the module Canvas site.

Remarks: ANY marks released prior to the Programme Assessment Boards (PAB), are not deemed final grade until all submitted work has been subjected to ratification and verification at the PAB. Individual student grades may therefore change depending on the outcome of the PAB.

Assignment submission extensions:

The Module Leader, or nominated representative, has the authority to grant an extension on any special grounds, acceptable under the University academic rules, guidelines and regulations. Please consult your academic advisor if you need to do so.

Referencing your work:

Have appropriate references been included in the report? Has a recognised referencing system been used for notation? (See relevant section in the Guide to Basic Study Skills)

The University of Sunderland adopts a ‘Harvard’ referencing method, ONLY. No other method of referencing should be used in your submission work. The ‘Harvard’ method of referring to publications and arranging references uses the author’s name and the publication date. References are listed at the end of the document in alphabetical order, by author’s name. The general format of a journal reference is shown below:

Smith, J. (1999) How to succeed! Journal of Entrepreneurs, 1(2), p. 34-56

Author’s name and initials are listed first, followed by year of publication in brackets. Then there is the title of article and the journal where the article appears, which is underlined or in italics. Finally, state the volume and issue Number (in brackets) along with the pages where the article can be located.

Academic Integrity and Misconduct:

Any work submitted is subject to the University’s rules and procedures governing infringement of assignment regulations.

Your attention is drawn to the University’s stated position on plagiarism.

THE WORK OF OTHERS, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE ASSIGNMENT MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO ITS SOURCE (a full reference list must be submitted as prescribed in the assignment brief).

Please note that this is intended to be an individual piece of work. Action will be taken when a student is suspected of having plagiarised, colluded, or engaged in any dishonest practice. Students are referred to the University regulations on plagiarism and other forms of academic irregularity which can be read in

the Student Handbook – link via the ‘Programme’ and ‘Module’ Canvas sites. Students must not copy or collude with one another or present any information that they themselves have not generated.

Generic Assessment Criteria – Undergraduate

These should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working and related to the assessment criteria for the module.

		Categories
	Grade	Relevance	Knowledge	Analysis	Argument and Structure	Critical Evaluation	Presentation	Reference to Literature
_Pass	86 – 100%	The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also ample excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
	76-85%	^{The work examined is outstanding and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification.}There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be outstanding in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
	70 – 75%	^{The work examined is excellent and is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the}qualification. There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
	60 – 69%	Directly relevant to the requirements of the assessment	A substantial knowledge of strategy material, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and issues therein	A good strategic analysis, clear and orderly	Generally coherent and logically structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s)	May contain some distinctive or independent thinking; may begin to formulate an independent position in relation to strategic theory and/or practice.	Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable format	Critical appraisal of up to-date and/or appropriate literature. Recognition of different perspectives. Very good use of source material. Uses a range of sources
	50 – 59%	Some attempt to address the requirements of the assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages	Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant strategy material, with intermittent evidence of an appreciation of its significance	Some analytical treatment, but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks clear analytical purpose	Some attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency, with issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in simplistic terms	Sound work which expresses a coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical conformity to one or more standard views of strategy.	Competently written, with only minor lapses from standard grammar, with acceptable format	Uses a variety of literature which includes some recent strategic texts and/or appropriate literature, though not necessarily including a substantive amount beyond library texts. Competent use of source material.
	40 – 49%	Some correlation with the requirements of the assessment but there are instances of irrelevance	Basic understanding of the strategy but addressing a limited range of material	Largely descriptive or narrative, with little evidence of analysis	A basic argument is evident, but mainly supported by assertion and there may be a lack of clarity and coherence	Some evidence of a view starting to be formed but mainly derivative.	A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader	Some up-to-date and/or appropriate literature used. Goes beyond the material tutor has provided. Limited use of sources to support a point.

_Fail	35 – 39%	Relevance to the requirements of the assessment may be very intermittent, and may be reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms	A limited understanding of a narrow range of strategic material.	Heavy dependence on description, and/or on paraphrase, is common	Little evidence of coherent argument: lacks development and may be repetitive or thin	Almost wholly derivative: the writer’s contribution rarely goes beyond simplifying paraphrase	Numerous deficiencies in expression and presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic or repetitious style	Barely adequate use of literature. Over reliance on material provided by the tutor.
	35 – 39%	The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
	30 – 34%	The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.
	15-29%	^{The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few of the}learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
	0-14%	The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.