DEPARTMENT OF PEOPLE AND ORGANISATIONS
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
MANAGING ORGANISATIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE UNIT HANDBOOK 2020-21
Unit Tutors: Name: Dr Milena Bobeva (unit leader) Name: Dr Manhal Ali Office: D150 (currently home working) Office: D116 (currently home working) Email: mbobeva@bournemouth.ac.uk Email: mali@bournemouth.ac.uk Disclaimer Information contained within this unit handbook is correct at the time of going to press (January 2021). However, some information may change and Bournemouth University reserves the right to make changes to procedures, regulations and processes subject to maintaining equivalent standards.
Table of Contents 1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
2
Unit Aim ........................................................................................................................................... 2
3
Intended Learning Outcomes ............................................................................................................. 2 3.1
The AACSB Assurance of Learning (AOL) Goals ....................................................................................2
4
Learning Environment ....................................................................................................................... 3
5
Indicative Content ............................................................................................................................. 4
6
Delivery plan ..................................................................................................................................... 5
7
Unit Assessment ............................................................................................................................... 6
8
7.1
Summative and formative assessment .................................................................................................6
7.2
Assessment Offences.............................................................................................................................6
7.3
Assignment 1 brief (groupwork) ...........................................................................................................7
7.4
Assignment 2 brief (individual work) ................................................................................................. 10
Unit Resources ................................................................................................................................ 12 8.1
Recommended reading ...................................................................................................................... 12
8.2
Recommended Journals ..................................................................................................................... 13
8.3
Other resources .................................................................................................................................. 13
1 Introduction Welcome to the “Managing Organisational and Individual Performance” (MOIP) unit. In this unit, you'll start by learning about how businesses (try to) measure their activities to improve operations, increase efficiency, and generate greater value. We will discuss theories, frameworks and models and seek to understand how businesses put these in practice. In the second part of the unit you will be focusing on business analytics and how to develop insights from data sets to support decision making.
Please find below a summary of the background of each member of the teaching team: •
Dr Milena Bobeva
Milena’s subject expertise is multi-disciplinary, with primary focus on managing organisational performance, business process optimisation, system analysis and design, information architecture and information systems management. Her professional practice includes system analyst and designer, a focus that she has maintained throughout her professional career and covered in her doctoral thesis “Information Management for Business Networks”. Applied research features prominently in Milena’s work with her latest projects have been on experiential project-based learning, developing student employability through co-creation and co-production with staff, reverse mentoring as a strategy for cross-generational learning and learning gains. The outcomes have been reported through a variety of channels. Milena is a Chartered Manager for the Chartered Management Institute (CMI). She is also a Senior Fellow for the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA), now Advance HE, and a reviewer for the Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, and a few conferences related to research methods, information and business management. Milena is currently an Associate Dean for Global Engagement in the BU Business School. •
Dr Manhal Ali
Dr Manhal Ali is a lecturer in Business Analytics and a visiting researcher at the University of Leeds. He is affiliated with the ESRC funded DIGIT research centre. Prior to this, he worked as Post-Doctoral Researcher at the Oxford Department of International Development, University of Oxford. He earned his PhD from the University of Manchester and MSc from the University of Bristol. His research interests are in the areas of managerial and organisational economics applied to healthcare, firm performance, Digital Economy, and applied Data Science. .
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 1
2 Unit Aim This unit aims to equip students with methods, techniques and skills to critically evaluate performance management practice and relevant performance metrics. It develops learner’s understanding of business intelligence and business analytics, and their ability to derive insights from a pool of data to inform effective decision making. Significant reference is also made to building competencies for responsible development of organisational and individual performance.
3 Intended Learning Outcomes Having successfully completed the unit, students are expected to: 1. demonstrate critical understanding of business intelligence, business analytics, risk and performance metrics; 2. be able to evaluate appropriate methods and analytical tools to critically appraise organisational performance and design feasible management solutions for enhancing business performance; 3. evaluate current practice and design ways to effectively translate and cascade down strategic objectives and performance metrics to objectives for business units, departments, teams and individuals; 4. demonstrate a critical understanding of how strategic human resource management can responsibly develop organisational and individual’s performance.
3.1 The AACSB Assurance of Learning (AOL) Goals The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) is a global, non-profit membership organization of educational institutions, businesses, and other entities devoted to the advancement of management education. Our Business School has achieved the AACSB accreditation in 2018. The accreditation process covered 15 standards, including Curricular Management and Assurance of Learning (AOL). The set of generic AOL Goals covers the array of knowledge, skills, attributes, behaviours and values that our graduates possess. The attainment of these goals is confirmed via the formative and summative assessment. The following represents a more specific mapping of how the learning outcomes and the assessment of this unit are mapped onto the AOL goals for postgraduate students. The abbreviations used are: I- introduced; R- reinforced and A- assessed.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 2
AOL Goals
MOIP Unit
Goal 1 - Our graduates will be highly competent communicators a) Communicate effectively by written means b) Communicate effectively by oral means
R, A R, A
Goal 2 - Our graduates will be capable, independent researchers
R, A
Goal 3 - Our graduates will have a critical understanding of responsible business practice
R
Goal 4 - Our graduates will have an in-depth understanding of their subject specialism in a global context
R
During your time with us in the BU Business School you will find that a number of your assignments will be assessed using both BU marking criteria and the AOL assessment criteria. The marking scale that we use for AOL is as follows: BU mark (at Postgraduate Level)
0-49.9%
50-69.9%
70-100%
AOL assessment rating
Does Not Yet Meet Expectations
Meets Expectations
Exceeds Expectations
It is important for you to be aware of the distinction between passing under BU assessment regulation and still ‘not yet met’ the AOL assessment threshold. If this is the case, you will still be able to progress, as you meet BU assessment requirements. However, you will be able to receive feedback to enable you to benchmark your performance against the AOL goals. If you have any questions about how AOL has been incorporated into the marking of one of your assignments, please contact the Unit Leader.
If you would like to learn more about The AACSB, you can visit their website at: http://www.aacsb.edu/ Alternatively you can contact our Director of Accreditation, Dr Elvira Bolat at ebolat@bournemouth.ac.uk
4 Learning Environment The unit will be delivered via a mixture of lectures and seminars, supplemented by workshops, formative assessment, on-line material, discussion sessions, case studies and a surgery. Students will also be encouraged to learn through sharing experience and diverse perceptions. Independent study will also be a key feature in developing critical analysis. This could be formatively assessed during some of the sessions. Students may also see the tutor during ‘Surgery Hours’ or by appointment. The Virtual Learning Environment (Brightspace) will be used to facilitate the sharing of ideas and research, group-based learning, and assessment. Guidelines in respect of any electronic resources will be provided by the tutors, in class and via the unit in Brightspace.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 3
You must acknowledge your source every time you refer to others’ work using the BU version of the Harvard Referencing system (Author-Date Method). Failure to do so amounts to plagiarism which is against University regulations. Please refer to www.bournemouth.ac.uk/library for the University’s guide to citation in the Harvard style. General academic support is available via the Academic Skills community on Brightspace. Students with specific learning difficulties or disabilities may contact the Disability and Additional Learning Support unit on http://studentportal.bournemouth.ac.uk/learning/als/index.html If you have any serious adverse circumstances that mean you cannot meet an assessment deadline and you wish to request an extension, you will need to request, complete and submit a Mitigating Circumstances Form for consideration to your Programme management, together with appropriate supporting evidence (e.g., GP note) normally before the coursework deadline. Further details on the procedure and the mitigating circumstances form can be found at www.bournemouth.ac.uk/student/mitigating. Please make sure you read these documents carefully before submitting anything for consideration.
5 Indicative Content • • • • • • • •
The spectrum and objectives of performance and risk management; Performance Management toolkit: theories, frameworks, methods and tools for measuring and managing risk and performance; standard deviations and significance; correlation and causality; performance metrics, key performance indicators, key risk indicators and practical implications of their use; interpretation of performance metrics and dashboards. Strategic HRM Managing Performance
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 4
6 Delivery plan Week
Date/Time
Topic
1-Feb-21, 9-11am
Introduction to the unit; The spectrum and objectives of performance and risk management
Milena Bobeva
4 Feb 2021, 12-2pm
MOIP Performance Management Assessment case study; Q&A session
Milena Bobeva
08-Feb-21, 9-11am
Performance Management toolkit: theories, frameworks, methods and tools for measuring and managing risk and performance
Milena Bobeva
11-Feb-21, 12-2pm
Performance metrics, key performance indicators, key risk indicators and practical implications of their use
Milena Bobeva
15-Feb-21, 9-11am
Introduction to Analytics and Analytics with EXCEL
Manhal Ali
18-Feb-21, 12-2pm
Workforce Diversity: Visualising Data - an Introduction to Analytics with EXCEL
Manhal Ali
22-Feb-21, 9-11am
Visualising aggregated data
Manhal Ali
25-Feb-21, 12-2pm
Retention Policies: Visualising Conditional Variables
Manhal Ali
w/c 25-Feb21 during surgery sessions
Performance Management coursework: Progress Review Milestone (Formative assessment)
31
32
Tutor
33
34
35
Milena Bobeva
1-Mar-21, 9-11am
Rewarding Team Performance and Best Practices: Group Differences - an Introduction to Tests
Manhal Ali
3-Mar-21
By 12 noon - Submitting the Performance Management assignment (presentation slides with notes, an infographic and annotated reference list) 2-5pm – Presentations to client
Brightspace assignment submission box
4-Mar-21, 2-5pm
Investigating Equal Opportunities: Correlations and Regressions
Manhal Ali
8-Mar-21, 9-11am
Understanding Employee Engagement: Designing and Analysing Employee Surveys
Manhal Ali
11-Mar-21, 2-4pm
Assignment review
Manhal Ali
36
28
26-Mar-21
by 12 noon - Business Analytics Assignment
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
Brightspace assignment submission box
page 5
7 Unit Assessment 7.1 Summative and formative assessment The summative assessment includes these deliverables that contribute towards the award of credits and the final unit mark. These normally marked on a scale of 0 to 100, with 50% being the Pass mark. -
Assignment 1 (groupwork) contributes 40% to the final unit mark. It assesses Intended Learning Outcomes 2 and 3. Assignment 2 (individual work) is worth 60% of the final unit mark. It tests the attainment of Intended Learning Outcomes 1 and 4.
In addition to the feedback to the summative assessment, you will also be given formative feedback in class, during meetings with unit tutors and/or online, for example in the form of constructively critical comments to discussions, group work, presentations, quizzes or mock assessments.
7.2 Assessment Offences The University has an Assessment Offences Policy (6H - Academic Offences: Policy and Procedure for Taught Awards), a copy of which can be found on the University web site (http://studentportal.bournemouth.ac.uk/help/rules-regulations/)in the Section on Academic Offences. It is your responsibility to familiarise yourself with this policy and seek clarification if necessary. If an offence is suspected, you may be subject to the procedures outlined in the Policy. You are especially reminded of the importance of referencing your work properly using the BU version of the Harvard Referencing system and of the potential consequences of plagiarism. PLAGIARISM IS A SERIOUS ACADEMIC OFFENCE AND MAY INCUR SEVERE PENALTIES BEYOND A FAIL GRADE. Bournemouth University reserves the right to use electronic means to identify plagiarism. If you have any queries regarding the Assessment Offences Policy, you should speak to the unit tutor and/or the MBA Director. Further guidance on the assessment process and regulations could be found in the Assessment section on the Student Portal (http://studentportal.bournemouth.ac.uk/help/rulesregulations/index.html )
Disclaimer: The information provided in the Assignment Briefs in this unit handbook (version 1, January 2021) is correct at time of publication. In the unlikely event that any changes are deemed necessary, they will be communicated clearly via e-mail and/or Brightspace and a new version of this assignment brief will be circulated.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 6
7.3 Assignment 1 brief (groupwork)
Assignment Brief Programmes
Level: 7
Master of Business Administration Unit Name: Managing Organisational and Individual Performance
Unit Tutors: Dr Milena Bobeva Dr Manhal Ali
Assignment Markers: Dr Milena Bobeva Dr Manhal Ali (2nd marker)
Member of staff from whom advice can be sought about the assignment: Milena Bobeva
Assignment Title:
Organisational Performance Management (group assignment)
Issue date: 1 February 2021
Submission date: 3 March 2021 (Wed) , by 12 noon
Weighting of this assignment: (as % of total coursework assessment for the unit)
40%
Submission arrangements: s The work has to be submitted by only ONE member of the group via the dedicated TurnItIn submissions box on Brightspace. In accordance with University regulations any coursework submitted after the due deadline will be regarded as late and awarded an appropriate mark. It is your responsibility to be aware of University Regulations relating to academic offences and to avoid committing them. The BU definitions and the penalties are listed in: Academic Offences: Policy & Procedure for Taught Awards If you are unable to submit your assignment on time due to medical or other exceptional circumstances you must complete a Exceptional Circumstances form PRIOR to the deadline and submit it for approval to the MBA Director, copying in the unit leader. Feedback method: Detailed feedback and your mark will be uploaded onto Brightspace normally within the period specified in the University Regulations. All assignments will be second-marked, and a sample of work, normally including all Firsts and Fails, as well as a selection of other work, will be externally moderated.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 7
Details of what you are expected to do: 1. Rationale The assignment is designed to provide an opportunity for experiential project-based learning in organisational performance management through collaboration with a local business. It is also focused on developing individual’s ability to contribute, in a constructive, pragmatic and proactive manner, to the effective management of group-based projects. 2. The learning outcomes being assessed This assignment assesses Intended Learning Outcomes 2 and 3 for the unit, i.e.:
2. To be able to evaluate appropriate methods and analytical tools to critically appraise organisational performance and design feasible management solutions for enhancing business performance. 3. To evaluate current practice and design ways to effectively translate and cascade down strategic objectives and performance metrics to objectives for business units, departments, teams and individuals. 3. Overview of the Assignment At the start of the unit, the cohort will be split into groups/teams of 3 to 5 students. Each team will be acting as a fictional consultancy company and will either be assigned specific aspects of a bigger project, or will be working on the same real-live problem/opportunity as the rest of the teams. Each ‘consultancy company’ is to offer a comprehensive analysis of the performance of a business function, product or service specified by a designated company (The Client). Using performance management theory and good practice, the team will be outlining key performance indicators, evaluating alternative solutions, and providing recommendations on how adopting these could impact on company performance. Funding opportunities for any future development should also be explored. The Client will introduce the company and the business problem or opportunity they’d like to explore during the first week of issuing the assignment. The teams will be provided with relevant company information and further details on the client requirements and expectations. Everyone working on the project might be asked to sign the client’s Non-Disclosure form. The project outcomes and project management arrangements will be presented to the client in person or via a recorded presentation. The group should offer a mechanism for addressing any questions on their work in real time, e.g. Q&A session in person, over a video-conferencing tool (e.g. Zoom) or other synchronous communication channels. At or before the presentation event, the client has to be sent a visual summary (a poster or an infographic) of the key project aspects covered during the presentation, incl. rationale, aim, objectives, method, findings and recommendations.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 8
4. Assessment criteria and weightings The deliverables will be assessed using a framework based on the BU generic assessment criteria (see Appendix A) with the following weightings:
•
•
•
Subject knowledge and understanding (40%) - evidence of factual and conceptual understanding of the subject, or of reading/research and the techniques and methods used to complete the work; Intellectual skills and ability to relate theory to practice (40%) - evidence of analysis and evaluation, ability to collate, categorise and apply ideas and information and to develop and sustain a coherent argument; quality of the recommendations; critical discernment of what information to include in the deliverables and how to present it in comprehensible manner; Professional approach, transferable skills, innovation and originality (20%) - structure and organisation of content, layout and formatting, use of visuals, command of syntax, language and grammar, in-text and end-of-text referencing.
The weighting of each deliverable is as follows: -
presentation - 80% visual summary – 20%.
Normally all members of the team will receive the same mark. Individual students may have marks deducted on the basis of evidenced feedback from the team and on tutor’s observations of low contribution, weak commitment and/or poor engagement with the group project.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 9
7.4 Assignment 2 brief (individual work)
Assignment Brief Programmes
Level: 7
Master of Business Administration Unit Name:
Unit Tutors:
Managing Organisational and Individual Performance
Dr Milena Bobeva Dr Manhal Ali
Assignment Markers:
Member of staff from whom advice can be sought about the assignment: Manhal Ali
Dr Manhal Ali; Dr Milena Bobeva (2nd marker)
Assignment Title: Analytics (individual assignment) Issue date: 15 March 2021
Submission date: 26 March 2021, by 12 noon
Weighting of this assignment: (as % of total coursework assessment for the unit)
60%
It is your responsibility to be aware of University Regulations relating to academic offences and to avoid committing them. The BU definitions and the penalties are listed in: Academic Offences: Policy & Procedure for Taught Awards If you are unable to submit your assignment on time due to medical or other mitigating circumstances you must complete a Exceptional Circumstances form PRIOR to the deadline and submit it for approval. Feedback method: Electronic individual feedback will be uploaded onto Brightspace You will normally receive your mark and feedback within the period specified in the University Regulations. Detailed comments on the assessment will be provided, and everything submitted will be taken into consideration. A sample of assignments will be ‘live’ second-marked, and a sample of work, normally including all Firsts and Fails, as well as a selection of other work, will be externally moderated.
Details of what you are expected to do: 1. Rationale The assignment gives you the opportunity to apply your knowledge on analytics to a HR business case. 2. The learning outcomes being assessed This assignment assesses Intended Learning Outcomes 3 and 4 for the unit.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 10
3. Overview of the Assignment The individual assignment will be a report of 2000 word (+/- 10%) demonstrating the ability of the student to evaluate and analyse a problem related to a data set by means of analytical methods learned during the unit. The students will be introduced to a fictional company that has designed and run an employee survey to solve current HR challenges. The survey is linked to financial and performance records of the company. Each student will be issued with a unique variation of a simulated dataset. Students write a report addressed to the Board of Directors. The report should include a short description of the background of the problem, a brief report of the data preparation, analysis, and interpretation of the results with recommendations for actions. In addition, students should critically evaluate the quality of the questionnaire and the analysis for its purpose. The analysis should include descriptive statistics, tests, correlation and regression. The report should follow a classic structure including an executive summary as well as a log about data preparation as appendix. The log should be user friendly with appropriate illustration to enable a reproduction of the analysis with the same results. 4. Assessment criteria and weightings Please note that these marking criteria are only a guideline. The marks shown are the maximum possible for a particular section of your assignment. The final marks allocated for each section will be at the sole discretion of the unit tutors and will vary depending on the quality and content of each individual assignment. • Context (10%) – should give the reader a clear indication of the background along with suitable references which would form part of a concise literature review • Data analyses (15%) – introduce, present and analyse the dataset, including the reliability of the measures and visualising the key patterns • Interpretation (30%) – critical evaluation of the results of tests, correlation and regression analysis with use of appropriate graphs and tables • Recommendation (15%) – effectively discuss consequences for the firm and precisely state them in the executive summary • Quality of dataset (10%) – critically discuss the appropriateness, weaknesses and strength of the dataset and the analysis • Data log (10%) – providing a detailed log on how you have analysed the data. That should enable readers to repeat the analysis with the same results • Professional presentation of essay (10%) The formatting of the work should be 1.5 line spacing in a San Serif font such as Arial 11 font size.
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 11
8 Unit Resources 8.1 Recommended reading Part 1: Performance Management Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Joo, H. 2013. Avoiding a 'me' versus 'we' dilemma: Using performance management to turn teams into a source of competitive advantage. Business Horizons, 56(4), 503-512. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2013.02.004 Aguinis, H., Joo, H., & Gottfredson, R. K. 2011. Why we hate performance management— And why we should love it. Business Horizons, 54(6), 503-507. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.06.001 Baker, R.J. 2006. Measure that matters to customers: using key predictive indicators. Wiley. Buckingham, M. and Goodall, A. 2015. Reinventing Performance Management. Harvard Business Review. April 2015. Cokins, G. 2010. Performance Management: Integrating Strategy Execution, Methodologies, Risk, and Analytics. New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bournemouth-ebooks/detail.action?docID=496003# Driouchi, T., & Bennett, D. J. 2012. Real Options in Management and Organizational Strategy: A Review of Decision-making and Performance Implications. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(1), 39-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00304.x Eckerson, W. 2010. Performance Dashboards: Measuring, Monitoring, and Managing Your Business, John Wiley & Sons. Epstein, M. J., & Manzoni, J.-F. 2006. Performance Measurement and Management Control: Improving Organizations and Society. Oxford: JAI Press Inc. Available from BU library via http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=173504&site=edslive&scope=site Hope, J. and Player, S. 2012. Beyond Performance Management, Boston Mass.: Harvard Business Review Press Hutchinson, S. 2013. Performance management. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 1992. The Balanced Scorecard--Measures That Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review, 70(1), 71-79. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. 1996. Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System. Harvard Business Review, 74(1), 75-85. Kaplan, R.S. and Norton, D.P. 2004. Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. Marr, B., 2012. Key Performance Indicators, London: FT Prentice Hall Meyer, M. 2002. Rethinking performance measurement: beyond the balanced scorecard, Cambridge, UK ; New York : Cambridge University Press Neely, A., (ed.), 2002. Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Paladino, B. 2011. Innovative corporate performance management: five key principles to accelerate results. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley, Available from BU library via www.ebrary.com Paladino, B., 2007. Five key principles of corporate performance management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Available from BU library via
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 12
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=185456&site=edslive&scope=site] Smart, A., and Creelman, J. 2013. Risk-Based Performance Management: Integrating Strategy and Risk Management: Palgrave Macmillan. Available from BU library via http://www.myilibrary.com?ID=549624 Stiles, P., Trevor, J., Farndale, E., Morris, S. S., Paauwe, J., Stahl, G., & Wright, P. 2015. Changing Routine: Reframing Performance Management within a Multinational. Journal of Management Studies, 52(1), 63-88. doi: 10.1111/joms.12111 Storey, J, Wright, P, and Ulrich, D 2009, The Routledge Companion To Strategic Human Resource Management [Electronic Resource] / [Edited By] Storey, J., Wright, P.M. and Ulrich, D.: London ; New York, NY : Routledge. Available from BU library as e-book. Sutherland, J. 2015. SCRUM: The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time, Crown Business, USA. Van Assen, M., van den Berg, G. and Pietersma, P. Walsh, C., 2014. Key Management Models, 3rd ed., London: FT Prentice Hall Part 2: Analytics Edwards, M.R. and Edwards, K., 2019. Predictive HR Analytics: Mastering the HR metric. Kogan Page Publishers. [Available as eBook] In addition to the above sources, the study on this unit will be supported by guided reading from monographs, journals, professional standards which can be located via the Library Catalogue and relevant online databases, e-journal and e-book collections.
8.2 Recommended Journals • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
British Journal of Industrial Relations Journal of Management Studies Academy of Management Journal Academy of Management Review Human Relations Human Resources Management Journal Human Resource Management (USA) Work, Employment and Society Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society International Journal of Human Resource Management Employee Relations Personnel Review Strategic Management Journal Human Resource Management Review Academy of Management Executive* Harvard Business Review* People Management*
8.3 Other resources -
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) online portal - www.cipd.co.uk
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 13
-
CMI members portal: http://mde.managers.org.uk/ The Balanced Scorecard Institute: http://www.balancedscorecard.org/ Top 5 Best Economic Statistics Books: http://www.econguru.com/top-5-besteconomic-statistics-books-reviewed/
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 14
Appendix A: Bournemouth University Generic Assessment Criteria Framework (Academic Year 2019-20) The University applies a pass mark of 50% to postgraduate provision (Level 7) as outlined in the Standard Assessment Regulations for taught programmes. ‘Formative’ assessments that do not contribute towards the award of credit but contribute towards learning may or may not be graded, though will receive written or verbal feedback. The statements below cover the full mark range from 0-100 and provide a description of students’ assessment performance against the same grade boundaries that are used to classify BU awards. The generic assessment criteria are as follows: - Subject knowledge and understanding - Intellectual skills - including analysis, evaluation, and critical judgement - Subject-specific skills - including applications and problem solving - Transferable skills - including communication and presentation Level 7: Grade Range Assessment criteria
/
Feedback
High Distinction (80%+) Exceptional work overall
Distinction (70-79%) Excellent work overall
Merit (60-69% ) Very good work overall
Pass (50-59%) Good work overall
Fail (40-49%) Basic work overall
Poor fail (0-39%) Insufficient work overall
The work demonstrates an exceptional in-depth knowledge across specialised and applied areas. There is clear evidence of very extensive independent study and thinking. The work is informed by the forefront of theoretical understanding in this field of study. Shows considerable mastery of facts and concepts.
The work demonstrates excellent in-depth knowledge across specialised and applied areas. There is clear evidence of extensive independent study and thinking. The work is at, or informed by, the forefront of theoretical understanding in the field of study.
The work demonstrates a very good in-depth knowledge across specialised and applied areas. There is clear evidence of extensive independent study and thinking, and of working at, or informed by, the forefront of theoretical understanding in this field of study.
The work demonstrates some in-depth knowledge across specialised and applied areas. There is some evidence of extensive independent study and thinking. In places the work is informed by current understanding in their field of study.
The work demonstrates a lack of in-depth knowledge across specialised and applied areas. There is insufficient evidence of extensive independent study and thinking. The work is not at the forefront of theoretical understanding in this field of study.
Future work could offer even further broader and deeper understanding.
A deeply analytical and critical approach to reading and research could help develop subject knowledge and conceptual understanding further.
In future work extensive knowledge could be demonstrated with even greater consistency to show detailed understanding of the current knowledge in this field of study.
In future work more detailed knowledge needs to be demonstrated with greater consistency to demonstrate understanding of the current knowledge in the field of study.
Further reading, research and independent study and thinking are needed to develop future work and demonstrate the work is at the forefront of theoretical understanding in the field of study.
The work demonstrates limited or no evidence of understanding of the subject. There is little or no evidence of extensive independent study and thinking, or relevant reading or research. The work demonstrates limited evidence of being at the forefront of theoretical understanding in this field of study. In future work significant further reading, research and independent study and thinking are needed to develop and demonstrate detailed theoretical understanding in the field of study.
Subject knowledge and understanding
Feedforward
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 15
Level 7 (Masters Level ) Grade Range
Feedback
High Distinction (80%+) Exceptional work overall
Distinction (70-79%) Excellent work overall
Merit (60-69% ) Very good work overall
Pass (50-59%) Good work overall
Fail (40-49%) Basic work overall
The work demonstrates an outstanding ability to deal with complexity, contradictions and incomplete information. Independent critical analysis of current research/knowledge and cogently argued alternative approaches are present. Confident and independent assessment, with clear justifications, effective synthesis and sound judgement, is demonstrated.
The work demonstrates a high level of confidence in dealing effectively with complexity, contradictions and incomplete information. The work shows evidence of synthesis, independent critical analysis of current research/knowledge, clearly argued alternative approaches, and the ability to reason in a clear and effective manner. The ability to independently assess own and others’ work with very clear justifications and sound judgement is demonstrated. In future work further synthesis and critical analysis could be demonstrated, along with providing further evidence of the ability to handle complexity.
The work demonstrates a very good ability to deal effectively with complexity, contradictions and incomplete data. Independent critical analysis of current research/knowledge and synthesis is demonstrated, and arguments consider alternative approaches. Assessment of own and others’ work with clear justification and sound judgement is evident.
The work demonstrates some limited ability to deal with some complexity, contradictions and incomplete information in the knowledge base. There is evidence of some independent analysis of current research/knowledge, synthesis of information and alternative approaches. Some independent assessment of own and others’ work with justification and appropriate judgement is demonstrated.
The work has demonstrated insufficient ability to deal with complexity, contradictions and incomplete information in the knowledge base. Independent critical analysis of current research/knowledge and alternative approaches is limited, as is the ability to synthesise ideas and assess own and others’ work with justification.
Poor fail (0-39%) Insufficient work overall The work demonstrates limited or no evidence of appropriate analysis. Current research/knowledge does not appear to be independently critically analysed. The work contains little or no synthesis and contains unsubstantiated opinions that appear to reflect a lack of familiarity with key concepts.
Future work could demonstrate confidence in handling complex ideas and contradictions. Extensive skills of analysis and synthesis could be developed along with wellevaluated assessment of own and others’ work.
Future work should demonstrate further ability to deal with complex ideas and contradictions. Skills of analysis and synthesis need to be developed along with well-judged assessment of your work and that of others.
Future work needs to demonstrate a greater level of critical analysis, backed up with the appropriate use of literature.
Future work needs to demonstrate a much greater level of critical analysis, backed up with the appropriate use of literature.
Intellectual skills - including analysis, evaluation, and critical judgement
Future work could offer an even deeper and more extensive critical approach with extended analysis and evaluation. Feedforward
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 16
Level 7 (Masters Level ) Grade Range
Feedback Subject-specific skills including applications and problem solving
High Distinction (80%+) Exceptional work overall
Distinction (70-79%) Excellent work overall
Merit (60-69% ) Very good work overall
Pass (50-59%) Good work overall
Fail (40-49%) Basic work overall
The work demonstrates independent synthesis of information and ideas to create new insights or original responses to problems that may expand or redefine existing knowledge and/or develop new approaches to unpredictable situations. The work demonstrates clear ability to undertake further specialist research and make significant contributions to the subject. Outstanding problem solving skills.
The work demonstrates an ability to independently synthesise information and ideas, to create a range of new insights/original responses to problems that may expand or redefine existing knowledge and/or develop new approaches to unpredictable situations. The work demonstrates a clear ability to undertake further specialist research. Outstanding problem solving skills are demonstrated. Future work could demonstrate further insights and innovative and original responses, along with higher levels of problem solving.
Independent synthesis of information and ideas is evident with new insights/original responses to problems and/or development of new approaches to unpredictable situations. The work demonstrates an ability to undertake further specialist research.
The work demonstrates independent synthesis of information and ideas and occasionally offers new insights and/or original responses to problems and/or develops new approaches to unpredictable situations.
The work does not demonstrate sufficient independent synthesis of information and ideas and offers few new insights/original responses to problems that expand or redefine existing knowledge. New approaches to unpredictable situations are not developed.
In future work extensive synthesis is needed, with highly developed problem solving skills and new solutions or ideas in relation to complex situations. The work is clearly communicated to specialist and nonspecialist audiences, with tightly structured, rigorous arguments which show a high level of academic development.
In future work more consistent synthesis is needed, with further new solutions or ideas demonstrated in relation to complex situations.
Future work needs to make much clearer links between theory and practice.
In future work clear links between theory and practice are needed.
The work effectively communicates ideas to specialist and nonspecialist audiences. It presents structured arguments that show a level of development
The work does not communicate the content effectively. The work is poorly structured or limited arguments may be present.
In future work could be communicated in a stimulating and rigorous style which demonstrates a high level of academic skill
In future work more clearly structured and effectively communicated ideas are needed to demonstrate a higher level of academic skill.
A clearer structure is needed, along with a more appropriate use of English. Developing skills in referencing is strongly recommended
The work is very poorly structured and presented in inappropriate English. References may be presented poorly or missing. The work may be incomplete or too brief. In future work a much clearer structure is needed, along with a more accurate use of English. Developing skills in referencing is strongly recommended.
Future work could demonstrate even further synthesis and additional innovation and insights. Feedforward
Feedback Transferable skills including communication and presentation
The work is effectively communicated to specialist and non-specialist audiences. The work is tightly structured, highly stimulating, and contains rigorous arguments that are likely to be at the upper limits of what is expected at this level.
The work demonstrates an ability to present confident, tightly structured, stimulating, and rigorous arguments that show a high level of academic ability.
Future work could offer even further well-structured and wellcommunicated arguments.
Future work could demonstrate very tightly structured, highly stimulating and very rigorous arguments and reasoning.
Feedforward
MOIP Unit Handbook: 2021, v1.0
page 17
Poor fail (0-39%) Insufficient work overall The work demonstrates limited or no evidence of the synthesis of ideas and placing them within an appropriate context. There are no original ideas or insights evident.