MN7028NI Breakthrough Leadership Skills S25 (1st sit) QP CWK2

COURSEWORK QUESTION PAPER 1st sit

Spring 2025 Semester-long

Module Code:	MN7028NI
Module Title:	Breakthrough Leadership Skills
Module Leader:	Mr. Binaya Ratna Shakya (Islington College)

Coursework Type:	Individual Written Report – Reflection and PDP (2500 words)
Coursework Weight:	This coursework accounts for 70% of your total module grades.
Submission Date:	11 May 2025
When Coursework is given out:	10 March 2025
Submission Instructions:	Submit the following at the MySecondTeacher platform on a single PDF format. The following naming convention should be followed while submitting 1 x Final Submission PDF File name example: 12312324 Darshan Gyawali
Warning:	London Metropolitan University and Islington College take Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with sternly.

Section A: Learning outcomes of the assessments

The assignment addresses the following learning outcome/s of the module:

LO1. Critically evaluate approaches to leadership within business organisations

LO2. Demonstrate competency in the use of reflection for critical self-evaluation, learning and change

LO3. Demonstrate competency in critically evaluating their strengths and planning their own personal development for leadership including team working, inclusion, coaching and negotiation.

Section B: Introduction

This final assessment is designed to help you critically evaluate your leadership capabilities and develop a reflection report and comprehensive Personal Development Plan (PDP) based on insights gained from the module. By utilising Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), you will reflect on your strengths, identify areas for development, and apply relevant theories and concepts from the course to enhance your leadership skills.

Section C: Assessment Strategy

Self-Evaluation Report:

Tool Application: Complete the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) test at 16personalities.com to assess your leadership attributes.
Reflection: Write a reflective analysis detailing your significant strengths, and areas of improvement. Include personal insights on how these factors influence your leadership style and effectiveness.

Integration of Theoretical Concepts:

Theoretical Application: Write an analysis integrating relevant theories from the module. Discuss how these theories apply to your strengths and areas of improvement.
Critical Evaluation: Provide a critical evaluation of how theoretical concepts can address your areas of improvements and optimise your strengths.

Personal Development Plan (PDP):

Goal Setting: Develop a comprehensive PDP with clear goals, action steps, and strategies for improvement. Ensure that your PDP includes aspects such as team working, inclusion, coaching, and negotiation. Hint: Use S.M.A.R.T goal setting criteria.
Timeline and Metrics: Incorporate a timeline and metrics to evaluate your progress.

Report Requirements:

The report should be approximately 2500 words in length.
Properly cite and reference the sources used in your research.
Include relevant data, statistics, and examples to support your analysis and recommendations.

Section D: Assessment submission

The student must work individually to develop the answers to the given assignment. There is no tolerance for COLLUSION.

The student should submit one final file in a pdf format to MySecondTeacher on the given deadline. The report must not exclude 2500 +/- 10% words and must use standard English language.

Standard University regulations regarding plagiarism will apply and be rigorously enforced. This includes the use of published secondary research (e.g. mintel, etc.) without acknowledgement and/or interpretation. The course tutor will also apply penalties to submissions which in his/her sole opinion show evidence of collusion.

Section E: Recommended Table of contents

1. Introduction

2. Self-Evaluation

3. Reflection on Self-Evaluation

4. Integration with Theoretical Concepts

5. Personal Development Plan (PDP)

6. Conclusion

7. References

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

The presentation will be evaluated on the basis of the following criteria:

Effective Application of the Tool for Self-evaluation
Use of academic theories and models to build arguments in reflection report
Quality of Personal Development Plan
Clarity and Coherence in Discussion
Clear organisation and formatting of the report
Referencing and Academic Rigour

Section G: Marking Scheme Template

Items	Weight
Application of the Tool for Self-evaluation	20%
Integration with academic theories and models	20%
Personal Development Plan	20%
Clarity and Coherence in Discussion	20%
Clear organisation and formatting of the report	10%
Evidence of research (In-text citations and List of Reference)	10%

Section H: Recommended Reading for references

Core Text:

Deresky, H (2016) International Management: Managing Across Borders and Cultures, Text and Cases, Global Edition, Pearson Education Limited

Other Texts:

Amatori F, and Colli A (2011) Business History Complexities and Comparisons, Abingdon, Routledge,
Cherniss, C, & Goleman, D (eds) (2001), The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace: How to Select for, Measure, and Improve Emotional Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and Organizations, New York, NY., John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated,
Connor, M, & Pokora, J (2012), Coaching And Mentoring At Work: Developing Effective Practice, Berkshire, McGraw-Hill Education,
Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2009). Clever: leading your smartest, most creative people. Boston, Mass, Harvard Business Press.
Goffee, R., & Jones, G. (2006). Why should anyone be led by you: what it takes to be an authentic leader? Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press.
Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mckee, A. (2007). The new leaders: transforming the art of leadership into the science of results. London, Sphere.
Harvard Business Review et al. (no date) HBR’s 10 Must Reads on Negotiation. Harvard Business Review Press
Hayes, J. (2018) The Theory and Practice of Change Management. 5th Ed. Basingstoke. Palgrave MacMillan.
Helfat, C.E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D. and Winter, S.G., 2009. Dynamic capabilities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
House, R. J. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications.
Jackson, T. (2011) International Management Ethics: A Critical, Cross-cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511975585.
Kirton, G, & Greene, A (2015), The Dynamics of Managing Diversity: A critical approach, Taylor & Francis Group, Milton.
Kotter, JP (2012), Leading Change, With a New Preface by the Author, Boston: Perseus Book LLC (Ingram).
Schein, EH, & Schein, P (2016), Organization Culture and Leadership, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
Senior, B., Swailes, S., Carnell, C. (2020) Organizational Change. Harlow: Pearson
Visser, M. (2011). The Female Leadership Paradox: Power, Performance and Promotion. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.

Journals:

Academy of Management Journal
Harvard Business Review
Human Resource Management International Digest
Human Resource Management
Journal of Leadership Studies
Journal of Organisational Behaviour
People and Strategy

Websites:

www.globeproject.com
www.hofstede-insights.com
www.hrps.org
www.institutelm.com

Section H: Assessment Grade Description

Mark	Achievement level
Distinction	85-100%	Outstanding work showing extensive knowledge and understanding of an extensive range of relevant international business management trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, theories and data. Exceptional ability to analyse, synthesise, and evaluate. Solutions and recommendations demonstrate strong ethical appreciation and deep understanding of the need for corporate responsibility. Evidence of extensive reading, study and sense making beyond the course content, and of independent thought. Writing that is fluent, clear, concise and grammatically correct. Tables, diagrams and other figures are highly effective in supporting the text and presenting key messages. Numeric analysis that is complete and free from errors with application of methods that may be insightful or original A submission that is focused and relevant to the task, comprehensive, accurate, and presented in a very professional manner. Excellent use of digital technology. Demonstrates strong ability to pursue research at Doctoral Level. Comprehensive, error free citations and reference list.
Distinction	70-84%	Excellent work showing extensive knowledge and understanding of a considerable variety of international business management trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, theories and data. Good analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Solutions and recommendations demonstrate ethical appreciation and awareness of the need for corporate responsibility. Evidence of substantial reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and of independent thought. Writing is fluent, clear, concise and grammatical. Strong use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages. Numeric analysis that is complete and mostly free from errors with appropriate application of methods. A submission that is relevant to the task, comprehensive, accurate, and presented in a well-structured and organised manner. Good use of digital technology. Demonstrates the ability to pursue research at Doctoral Level. Comprehensive citations, and correct use of the Harvard style in the reference list.
Merit	60-69%	Good work showing wide knowledge and understanding of an extensive range of relevant business trends, scenarios, issues, concepts, and theories. Some analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Ethics and corporate responsibility questions are considered. Questions of ethics and corporate responsibility are addressed appropriately. Reference made to relevant course material with evidence of some reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and some independent thought. Writing is clear, mostly concise, and has few grammatical errors. Good use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages. Numeric analysis that is complete and mostly free from errors with relevant and effective application of methods. A submission that is relevant to the task though less than completely comprehensive, is mostly accurate, and is well presented. Mostly good use of digital technology. Effective use of citations and a complete reference list. Some minor errors in use of the Harvard style
Pass	50-59%	Adequate work showing reasonable knowledge and understanding of relevant business issues, concepts, and theories. Limited analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. There is some clear but limited consideration of ethics and corporate responsibility. Little or no evidence of reading, study and sense making beyond the course content and little or no independent thought. Writing is less than clear, is not concise and has some grammatical errors. Some use of tables, diagrams and other figures in supporting the text and presenting key messages. Numeric analysis that is mostly complete and free from significant or critical errors with appropriate application of methods A submission that is mostly relevant to the task and reasonably accurate, but not very comprehensive and with some errors and shortcomings of presentation, structure and organisation. Basic use of digital technology in the creation and presentation of the work. Adequate citation and reference list. Some errors in use of the Harvard style and some missing citations.
Fail	40-49%	A weak piece of work showing only limited knowledge and understanding of course content with substantial errors or omissions. Mainly descriptive with little or no analysis, synthesis and evaluation, and no independent thought. Ethical and corporate responsibility issues are not considered. Evidence of a range of sources but with reliance on inappropriate sources without critical evaluation. Writing is not clear and has frequent grammatical errors. Numeric analysis that is mostly complete but contains errors with significant effect, or methods that are applied inappropriately Much of the submission is not relevant to the task. Lacking professionalism, weak presentation, poorly structured and organised. Ineffective use of digital technology in the creation of the work. Limited citation and reference list.
	30-39%	A poor piece of work with extensive errors and omissions, badly written and ungrammatical. A little relevant material but poorly presented with little evidence of understanding. Weak use of digital technology.
	0-29%	A very poor piece of work lacking in understanding and with serious errors and omissions but with evidence of some knowledge vaguely relevant to the question.

End of the Document

Comments 7

tm4lf says:

2 weeks ago

cost of clomiphene tablets where buy generic clomiphene tablets buying generic clomiphene no prescription can i buy generic clomiphene without dr prescription can i get generic clomid without rx can i get generic clomid without insurance how to buy cheap clomiphene no prescription

cheap cialis online canada says:

1 week ago

This is a keynote which is in to my heart… Diverse thanks! Unerringly where can I upon the connection details due to the fact that questions?

does flagyl cause headaches says:

1 week ago

The reconditeness in this piece is exceptional.

jiarh says:

6 days ago

order azithromycin 250mg for sale – buy ciprofloxacin 500mg for sale order generic metronidazole 400mg

jgu37 says:

5 days ago

buy rybelsus no prescription – rybelsus 14 mg ca buy cyproheptadine 4mg sale

adiv9 says:

3 days ago

order domperidone online – tetracycline 250mg for sale purchase cyclobenzaprine online

mkdi2 says:

22 hours ago

inderal 10mg us – buy generic plavix 150mg buy methotrexate 5mg generic