MGMT6002 Influencing and Making Decisions Assessment Assignment One: Reflective Analysis

ASSESSMENT BRIEF

Subject Code and Title

MGMT6002 Influencing and Making Decisions

Assessment

Assignment One: Reflective Analysis

Individual/Group

Individual

Length

3000 Word Limit

Learning Outcomes

· Select and evaluate the usefulness of a range of decision making tools and reflect on your decision making styles and contrast with other styles and determine the respective levels of rationality and

intuition utilised

Submission

By 23:59 (SYD time) Friday of the end of Module 3

Weighting

50%

Total Marks

50 marks

Context:

The first half of this subject focuses on the individual and the specific processes—cognitive or otherwise—that individuals engage in when faced with a decision to make. Your task in this first assessment is to reflect on those processes in the context of your own experience and in accounts found in wider reading, and to identify and critique the specific models and frameworks available to you as a decision-maker.

Instructions:

Construct a reflective analytical report, founded on solid research of decision-making methods, models, frameworks and taxonomies found both in the subject and in wider scholarly reading you undertake.

The report is to be limited to 3000 words, exclusive of formal document sections (i.e. title page, executive summary, table of contents, references list, appendices, etc.), citations, tables and graphs. Students should submit one file through Turnitin.

There are a number of forms the report could take. The exact form the report will depend on the additional research the student will undertake; students should aim for the demonstration of deep learning, founded on theory through thorough reading of scholarly literature, rather than on getting any aspect of the brief ‘right.’

Students should commence this assignment early, keep regular backups and ensure they submit the correct, final version. Students should use this brief as the instruction set for the assignment requirements. Additionally, the rubric below can be used to describe what

unacceptable, functional, proficient, advanced and exceptional assignments might look like according to the criteria in the leftmost column of each row.

As this is a Masters level subject, students are expected to engage with high-quality academic journal articles, using the Torrens University Library. Textbooks, Wikipedia and, in general, anything that can be obtained through an open Google search page are considered supplementary material, unbecoming of a postgraduate.

Learning Rubrics

There are numerous ways to interpret the assessment brief. This rubric should not be used as a prescription or tick-the-box list of requirements but as a description of an amalgam of several possible interpretations and the standards they might take. The assessment will be graded holistically, based on the criteria in the leftmost column. Your interpretation may not match the rubric exactly as you may extend the requirements, using your initiative to demonstrate your mastery of the subject matter. Additionally, you may demonstrate elements described in the Advanced column and still be graded ‘Functional’ for one or more of the criteria (the reverse trend is also possible). Higher performing submissions will depend on wider reading, rather than on the rubric verbatim.

Assessment Attributes

Fail (Unacceptable)

Pass (Functional)

Credit (Proficient)

Distinction (Advanced)

High Distinction (Exceptional)

Analysis (30%)

The analysis is simplistic and does not tap into the richness of the situation.

Demonstrates limited awareness of or minimally analyses.

Identifies a process to address decision- making and demonstrates an ability to apply key frameworks and models. Identifies and successfully interprets key and pertinent issues of the brief.

Identifies a range of pertinent components of the brief.

Recommends processes to help make decisions and to continue to identify problem areas.

Demonstrates an ability to analyse dilemmas.

Assesses the capacity for continuing to operate manage, having made a decision.

Integrates understanding of the range of pertinent issues of the brief. Develops recommendations to address ambiguous issues. Understands limitations of identified models. Has the ability to assess an decision viability.

Demonstrates innovation in the range of pertinent components of the brief and communicates a critical understanding. Interprets a range of frameworks for future decision-making. Has the ability to assess decision viability as well as possibilities for reorganisation, considering the

present situation.

Argument cogency (30%)

The argument is simplistic and does not tap into the richness of the situation.

The argument can be seen to be based on logic and evidence.

Argument is critical, examining multiple viewpoints before concluding.

Uses a number of frameworks to inform and structure the

argument.

Demonstrates a consistent and sophisticated argument, founded on

theory and practice.

Assessment Attributes

Fail (Unacceptable)

Pass (Functional)

Credit (Proficient)

Distinction (Advanced)

High Distinction (Exceptional)

Presentation (20%)

The presentation is simplistic or is very difficult to follow. Numerous spelling or grammatical errors make readability cumbersome. Significant drafting or reworking is required.

Includes a one-page executive summary that features a full report summary as well as key report recommendations, enticing the reader to continue to read on.

Introduction sets the tone for the report, outlining objectives, assumptions and limitations. Conclusion rolls up arguments, providing useful, practical-based outtakes for the

reader.

Report is divided into headings, all exhibits are labelled and discussed, page numbers.

Conforms to spelling and grammar

conventions.

The report presentation is outstanding. It is professionally presented and could be considered consultant-grade quality. This will be used as a model

report.

Research (20%)

The student has made little or no attempt to incorporate high-quality sources. This key postgraduate skill will need to be developed in subsequent assignments.

Makes an attempt to use high-quality sources. May need to focus on referencing standard.

Has cited numerous high-quality sources using the Torrens University library databases.

Incorporates conventions and ideas of high- quality sources into the substance of

the report.

Demonstrates mastery of multiple high-quality external sources, offering balanced criticism and

critical thought.