Assignment specs PDF

Preview

Summary

Assignment specs...

Description

MGMT20001 ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR Semester 2, 2019 Due: Monday 5pm 19th August. Submit as one document via LMS www.lms.unimelb.edu.au Overall word length: 1,300 words. Word count INCLUDES: in-text citations and reference list.

Individual Assignment - Worth 10% of the total mark for the subject This assignment asks you to analyse a case, drawing on academic literature to answer three questions. In order to answer the questions, you must read the Case Study LIBERAL INC. below You must include all of the required readings in your response. In addition to the required readings, you must use at least four articles from academic peer-reviewed journals. You will be given assistance in how to find and reference such sources in the skill-building sessions held in Week 2 of Semester. Case Study: LIBERAL INC. Peter and Scott have been members of the Liberal Inc.’s top management team for a long time. In fact, they have been rivals for many years and both have coveted the CEO’s position. Scott joined the company straight out of university and he has a particular outlook on management shaped by years of working under a former “old school” CEO, Tony. Peter, in contrast, had a successful career as a senior officer in the Queensland police before joining Liberal Inc. quite late in his working life. Scott was appointed to the CEO position ahead of Peter in 2018 and this caused quite a lot of friction in the top management team and beyond. This was also a time when Liberal Inc. was some way behind main rival Labor Corp. in terms of market share but Scott’s strategy of focusing on the weaknesses and limitations of the then market leader’s products soon reversed this situation and by 2019, in a stunning turnaround, Liberal Inc. was back in front. Scott attributed this reversal to his managerial techniques. He had adopted a command-andcontrol approach where all important decision-making was undertaken by him and then relayed to his colleagues in the top management team in the form of very rigid policies and procedures. These slowly filtered down the levels the organization until they finally reached the foot soldiers who actually had to sell Liberal Inc.’s products. Those subordinates who did not meet the expectations set by Scott were treated as trouble-makers and they were quickly sidelined. This seemed to work very well when Liberal Inc. was behind Labor Corp. but as business improved, Scott increasingly had very little regard for his colleagues’ feelings and seemed surprised when they were unable to keep up with his punishing pace and high expectations (Scott was famous for getting up every morning at 5am and spending two hours going through his in-box). Worse, Scott was unaware of the rumblings of discontent in his top management team and beyond; it was as if his commitment to his managerial approach made him oblivious to the ideas and suggestions of colleagues. His view was that, so long as the business was doing well, why should anyone complain? It wasn’t long, however, until Liberal Inc. was again behind Labor Corp. in terms of market share but, instead of adapting to the changing market conditions, Scott’s response was to redouble his 1

efforts to control his colleagues and stamp out what he saw as dissent. While this was going on Peter was offering an alternative management approach, first in private and then in a much more public manner. Peter had also been very “old school” in his management approach but he had taken a few classes at Big End of Town Business School and had warmed to their teaching about empowerment, inclusion, and participation. His vision now was to be a CEO who would consult with his colleagues at all levels of the organization and tap into their valuable expertise and experience in order to make decisions that everyone could support. But for Peter it wasn’t just an exercise in ensuring conformity and “buy-in”; he truly seemed to believe that Liberal Inc. could become a better and more competitive business by being inclusive and listening to the needs of its employees and customers. This had very broad appeal inside and outside the business so, without any warning, in early 2020 Scott was unceremoniously dumped in a boardroom coup and replaced by Peter. Unusually, however, Scott was allowed to stay on in Liberal Inc. rather than being pushed out completely. This was presented as a reward for his near miraculous turnaround of Liberal Inc.’s fortunes back in 2019 but, in reality, it was done to placate a large minority of employees who still thought his management approach was the best for the business and its customers. For a brief period Peter’s new approach appeared to work. Liberal Inc.’s market share increased quickly to unprecedented levels and there seemed to be a new kind of optimism within the top management team and throughout the business as a whole. At first, Peter was true to his word and decision-making was much more participative. Everyone (apart from Scott and his mates, of course) felt great coming to work. In short, morale was high as if a breath of fresh air had blown right through Liberal Inc. It was as if things had really changed and most people felt that they were making a worthwhile contribution to the business. Better still, business was booming but, just as quickly as things improved, they started to go backwards again. Some products were rushed to market and had to be recalled immediately when they proved to be faulty. Once again, Labor Corp. was taking the lion’s share of the market and, even worse, start-ups like One Nation and the Green Co-Op were beginning to chip away at the Labor/Liberal duopoly, much like Aldi was threatening Coles and Woolworths. Worse still, the consultation process promoted by Peter turned out to be really poorly thought-out and messy in operation. People quickly realized that, despite the appearance of being involved in decision-making, it was more just window dressing; the real decisions were being made by Peter and Liberal Inc. felt just as autocratic as it was under Scott. Some people even began to think the unthinkable and openly talked about a return to Scott in the CEO’s role. After all, a resurgent rival—One Nation—appeared to be becoming successful again under a charismatic and populist leader! Question 1 (approx. 300 words) It appears that Peter has had something of an epiphany after going to Big End of Town Business School and changed his management approach. Drawing on the material from MGMT20001 and any other sources you think appropriate, identify the management approach espoused by Peter BEFORE and AFTER his conversion. Be sure to focus on matters of organization and process rather than personality. Question 2 (approx. 300 words) Analyze the ideological bases for these contrasting management approaches? Here you should focus on why, above and beyond any claims of superior effectiveness, Peter felt it was a good idea to change his management approach. 2

Question 3 (approx. 200 words) On the matter of effectiveness, it appears that neither Scott’s or Peter’s approach worked particularly well. How would you explain this? Question 4 (approx. 200 words) If you were appointed CEO of Liberal Inc. what would you do to reverse the company’s declining market share? Be sure to focus on internal matters of management and organization rather than actual products. Required Readings: 1. McShane et al. (2016). Introduction to the field of organisational Behaviour. In McShane et al (Eds. 6), Organisational Behaviour: Emerging Knowledge. Global Insights. (pp. 238). Australia: McGraw-Hill. 2. Freedman, D. H. (1992). Is management still a science? Harvard Business Review, 20(6), 26-32. 3. Coy, P. (2007) Cog or CoWorker? BusinessWeek, 58-60. 4. Miller, D., & Form, W. H. (1964). Chapter 15: The evolution of managerial philosophies. In Industrial Sociology: An introduction to the sociology of work relations (pp. 643-686). New York: Harper & Row Publishers.

INSTRUCTION: Please read and follow carefully.

Structure/Formatting Write your response to each question in paragraphs. Label your response to each question clearly using headings. Use double-spacing, and 12 pt font size. Assessment criteria/feedback sheet You will be assessed using the following criteria: • Appropriately addressing the assignment questions • Understanding of the theories • Definition of terms/concepts • Analysis and evaluation of the theory to answer questions • Relevant and original argument incorporating reading and research to develop your argument • Use of research beyond set or recommended readings (at least 4 additional to the required reading listed above) • Written style: expression, spelling and grammar • Structure: all parts of the questions are answered. Correct use of paragraph structure. • Referencing and Citing correctly using the APA referencing system Cover page 3

Include a front page on your assignment as the first page of your assignment and fill in the relevant details: full name, student number, subject code and name, due date and assignment name. If you do not include these details, we cannot mark your assignment. The Assignment Cover Template i s available on the OB LMS page under the links Assessment Information > Individual Assignment > Assignment Cover Template. Referencing All material used must be correctly cited and referenced, using the APA Referencing System which includes: • In-text citations in the body of your short answer questions • A reference list as the last page of your assignment (listing only the references you have cited). • Material that has not been referenced correctly may be considered to be plagiarised, and as such may be penalised. We will also look for evidence that material included in the reference list has been used in the assignment. Including references that have not been used may also result in your assignment being penalised. There is a link to the APA Referencing System Guideline on OB LMS pager under the links Assessment Information > Individual Assignment > APA referencing style guide If you would like to find out more about Academic Integrity, take a look at the Academic integrity Module available on the home page of the LMS. Plagiarism and collusion Please note: Your assignment will also be screened for plagiarism using the Turnitin software program. More information about the university’s policy and the Turnitin program is available from the following website: http://academichonesty.unimelb.edu.au • Presenting material from other sources without full acknowledgement (referred to as

plagiarism) is heavily penalised. Penalties for plagiarism can include a mark of zero for the piece of assessment or a fail grade for the subject. • Plagiarism is the presentation by a student of an assignment identified as his or her own work

even though it has been copied in whole or in part from another student’s work, or from any other source (e.g. published books, web-based materials or periodicals), without due acknowledgement in the text. • Collusion is the presentation by a student of an assignment as his or her own work when it is, in fact, the result (in whole or in part) of unauthorised collaboration with another person or persons. Both the student presenting the assignment and the student(s) willingly supplying unauthorised material are considered participants in the act of academic misconduct. • The Academic Skills unit has prepared a help sheet on avoiding plagiarism. Word count • Total word limit 1,300 (word count INCLUDES: in-text citations and reference list) 10% either way is acceptable (penalties apply for exceeding the word limit – refer to course outline). • Please note: In-text Citations and Reference list are INCLUDED counted in the word count. 4

Assignment extensions and penalties for late submissions Late submission of an assignment is permitted only where an extension has been granted. Requests for an extension can be made via the OB LMS - a link to the online application form can be found in the Assignment Extension tab. All requests for an extension must be made prior to the assessment due date. • Unless an extension has been granted, penalties to the assessment will be applied. • To ensure equality for all students, assignments must be completed within specified time limits. Late submissions will attract a marking penalty where approval for late submission has not been given. Assignments that exceed word limits may also attract a marking penalty. • Penalties for late submission: The mark a student is awarded for their work will be reduced by 5% for each day the work is late. • Assignments that exceed the word limit by more than 10% may attract a marking penalty of 10% of the marks that would otherwise have been awarded. • Assignments that exceed the word limit by 25% or more may attract a higher penalty, including a cap on the maximum grade awarded, unless a student gains an exemption. • For example, an assignment with a limit of 2000 words will be marked down by 10% if there are more than 2200 words. If there are 2500 words or more, the maximum result that may be awarded is an H2B. Special consideration • Students who have been significantly affected by illness or other serious circumstances during the semester may be eligible to apply for Special Consideration. Students apply for Special Consideration through My Unimelb via the Apply for • Special Consideration link under Exams and Assessment in the Admin tab. • You must submit your online application no later than 4 working days after the due date for submission or examination of the particular component of assessment, to which your application refers.

5

Submission instructions. Please read and follow carefully. • The LMS allows you to submit your assignment online from home or from any of the student

labs on campus. • You can access the Assignment Submission function by clicking on the ‘Assessment

Submission’ tab in the navigation menu of the OB LMS page. • Please note that you are required to keep a copy of your assignment after it has been submitted, as you must be able to produce a copy of your assignment at the request of your tutor or lecturer at any time after the submission due date. • Assignment submission guidelines can be found here: http://fbe.unimelb.edu.au/csc/assessment/submission.

6...