Posted: November 18th, 2022

BU7039 Understanding and Managing People Assessment

A: Assessment Details
Module Title Understanding and Managing People
Module Code BU7039
Component Number Assignment 1 of 1 (covering all learning outcomes)
Assessment Type, Word Count & Weighting Individual essay and reflection (100% – 4,500 words)

B: Learning Outcomes

LO1: Critically apply a range of management theories to specific organisational challenges
LO2: Demonstrate a critical understanding of approaches to leadership in context
LO3: Critically evaluate how leadership approaches for employee retention and success, can be employed to respond to workplace challenges
LO4: Identify and design appropriate development plans in response to a learning intervention e.g. coaching and mentoring

C: Assessment Task

This assessment is based on a case study which provides a realistic business challenge and has five questions of equal value to answer.

Assessment Task:

The new leadership team at C&C (case study) have asked for your Helpance to conduct thorough analysis of the challenges that the business is facing. They would like you to provide an evidenced-based essay to help them to prepare for discussions at the next Board Meeting.

Case study:

Coffee and Cake (C&C) is a privately owned company that runs an established chain of cafes in sixty locations around the UK. Most are located on high streets and in shopping centres, but there are also units located in large railway stations and some airports. The company sells a wide variety of speciality coffees, cakes, sandwiches and other beverages. It markets itself as a sustainable business with high standards of business ethics, which the business is committed to.

Throughout the Twentieth Century there was a single C&C coffee house located prominently in Central London. This was then taken over by a by a company that was keen to profit from the fast growth in the UK’s coffee shop market. Much money was invested in building the chain and for several years good profits were made. After 2015 though, problems started to arise. Sales began to slump in a number of locations as competition from ambitious independents and other coffee shop chains became more intense. Issues arose concerning unpaid debts and the company started to struggle financially. By the time of the Covid pandemic it was in serious financial difficulty and in danger of becoming insolvent. In 2021 the company was sold to a consortium of four former C&C managers with finance largely provided by a venture capital fund. The aim of the new leadership and management team is to meet stakeholder expectations, reclaim its reputation and image and return to profitability in the next two years.

While there are many factors behind C&C’s recent poor performance, it is clear that poor management of people has been a major problem area for some time. Staff turnover was running at over 100% in 2019 and employee engagement levels have been very poor in several coffee shops for some years. Good evidence of these matters is found on the Glassdoor website where hundreds of current and former employees have written troubling reviews of their experiences working for the company. Overall ratings since 2015 have been below 3 out of 5, which is considerably lower than the scores typically achieved by C&C’s major competitors.

The following are a representative sample of some of the recent comments that have been left in the Pros and Cons section on Glassdoor:

“Lovely regular customers. Met some good friends”
“Friendly and supportive staff who were happy to swap shifts. Tips”
“Staff discount on cakes and food”
“The only good thing was that it was located only three minutes walking from the place that I used to live.”
“You learn basic management tasks and can improve your communication skills. Free lunch and cakes.”
“I guess it pays your bills if you’re single and live in shared accommodation” MAY 2021: “If you want a culture where the quality of the product, the customer, the brand and the staff are key to how the business works, avoid C&C.”
“Nothing at all was positive”
“No real opportunities for advancement”
“Never put enough staff on shift. Bad at giving breaks, you can work an 8-9 hour shift and not be given a 30-minute break. Never know when your shift will end.”
“Every unit is understaffed, always.”
“It was soul-destroying, you’re taken advantage of and paid very little and you are spoken to by management like you’re a child (in front of customers)”
“No gratitude for anything, lazy people get paid the same as hard working employees”
“Payroll is terrible, consistently mess up pay and will throw the blame on each other rather than own their own mistakes.”
“Head office only cares about the numbers, not the people”
“Some managers are controlling to the point of bullying. While others couldn’t care less. The unit managers and HQ are also incompetent. Nothing gets resolved quickly or accurately.”
“Horrible management, no training at all”
“Terrible company to work for expected to give absolutely everything for nothing in return. Won’t pay for overtime.”
“A lot of unfairness. If the manager is your friend you’ll have advantages Senior managers tend to be offensive and won’t think twice before humiliating you.”
“Customers can be super nasty. They will call you names and shout at you for the smallest things.”
“The staff at my store are nice. You get free food and drink, even though you aren’t officially allowed it. You get to keep your tips if you are a waiter.”
“Management are underqualified and not trained. Many health and safety violations, especially regarding food. Equipment doesn’t get fixed, and the lack of training means things break a lot”
“Management are more concerned about reaching unrealistic goals than the wellbeing of their staff or the quality of service provided Longstanding staff are not appreciated or rewarded. Low pay. Little to no training.”
“Rude customers sometimes, repetitive and same tasks most shifts”
“A very poor company on SOOOOO many levels – they won’t care about you – don’t go & work for them – they are full of the proverbial !!”

Assessment Questions:

LO1: Critically apply a range of management theories to specific organisational challenges.

1. The leadership team believe that the world of work has changed over recent years in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. For example, the role of technology has changed the way businesses operate, the economy has provided opportunities for some businesses whilst for others they have not survived, social issues and ethical practices seem to be receiving more attention, placing pressure on organisations to operate in fair and ethical ways. The leadership also believe that expectations of employees have shifted, and traditional leadership styles are being questioned, which will affect the way organisations lead and manage their people.
Assessment Task: (20%) Construct an evidenced-based critical discussion to demonstrate how leadership and management approaches affect the performance of people and as such the performance of the organisation.

LO2: Demonstrate a critical understanding of approaches to leadership in context.

2. The management team at C&C acknowledge that the leadership needs to change, they want to build a team that is motivated, engaged with their work and committed to the organisation. To make sure they make the appropriate choice, they have asked for a critical Assessment of the current leadership approach.
Assessment Task: (20%) Using your analysis in (1), critically evaluate the existing leadership and management approach at C&C, and the impact this has had on the retention and performance of employees and as a result the performance of the business.

LO3: Critically evaluate how leadership approaches for employee retention and success, can be employed to respond to workplace challenges.

3. The leadership are conscious that the turnover is high which is likely to be affecting the quality of customer service and affecting profitability. They are looking to assess the extent to which a new approach leading and managing people would help to reduce the high staff turnover, retain valuable workers.
Assessment Task: (20%) Using your analysis in 1 and 2, critically evaluate the effectiveness of leading and managing people at C&C to retain employees and achieve organisational aims and objectives.

LO4: Identify and design appropriate development plans in response to a learning intervention e.g. coaching and mentoring

4. The leadership are aware that some learning and development is required to help drive future change. They would like some guidance on learning and development good practice that would address the challenges and to drive the business aims and objectives.
Assessment task: (20%) Using analysis in (3) critically assess the key learning and development requirements for the leaders and managers at C&C and justify how this would help to retain valuable employees and drive business success.

5. Assessment task: (20%) Reflecting on your learning throughout this module critically assess:
(i) Which session was especially valuable and helped you to develop the discussion in your assessment?
(ii) To what extent did this and/or another session expand or challenge your current thinking?
(iii) What did you find difficult about this assessment, what skills do you intend to develop for future assessments?
(iv) What could you do to benefit more from the sessions, identify what you will do to improve your learning experience in future sessions?

D: Specific Criteria/Guidance

Your work will be marked according to the following criteria (it is important that you familiarise yourself with the marking rubric for guidance, as it applies to each question, along with details of your work will be assessed).

• Demonstrate a critical understanding of approaches to leadership and management of people (20%)
• Critically evaluate current leadership and management approaches and the impact on employee retention and business success, in response to people management challenges (20%)
• Critically evaluate a new approach to leadership and management to improve employee retention and achieve business success, in response to people management challenges (20%)
• Identify appropriate learning interventions to address identified challenges (20%)
• Critical reflection: Personal and Professional application and Assessment (20%)

Essay structure
• The assessment structure should have the following sections:
o Title page
o Introduction (gives context to your essay)
o Main body (critical analysis of the topics, each assessment question could be used for the topic headings within this section, with numbered sub-headings)
o Conclusion
o Full reference list at the end of the assessment
o Appendix (only if necessary)
• Write in full sentences and construct paragraphs around the issues and topics you discuss. You can use some bullet-points but try not to rely on this too much as it can restrict your ability to present an analytical discussion which is required at master’s level study.
• It is recommended that a minimum of 30 sources are referenced. Use credible academic sources where possible, e.g. textbooks and journal articles.

Your essay should refer to and be informed by relevant academic theory, models and literature throughout, to present evidenced-based discussions.

Guidance for your personal reflection (assessment task 5)
You are expected to critically reflect on your learning experience and identify practical ways in how YOU can improve your learning in future sessions, for example:

• In what ways has your knowledge of relevant management theories and practices helped you to make sense of your learning experience on the module.
• Consider ways in which the understanding of yourself, and the practice of leading and managing people has changed or developed.
• Consider how you gained the learning, the processes of learning and to what extent you engaged with the learning materials and sessions.
• In what ways, and why, did the experience generate learning at the time? Did others contribute to your learning – either at the time or afterwards? What happened at the time? What did you feel? What did you think? What assumptions were you making?
• Has further reflection helped you to develop a deeper understanding of your learning experience to help improve this in the future? What could you do differently in the future to improve your learning experience?

E: Key Resources
Include recommended texts and peer-reviewed electronic sources which you expect students to use and can access.

Key Resources/Reading

Bratton, J., & Gold, J. (2017). Human resource management: theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter 1 “What is leadership: person, result, position or process?” in Grint, K. (2009) Leadership: limits and possibilities, Palgrave (scanned, currently under BU7404 Leading and Managing Ethically)

Chapter 5 “Leadership” in Rees, G. and French, R. eds. (2013) Leading, Managing and Developing People, 3rd edition, CIPD (currently no scanned copies but multiple copies in Queens Park library)

Alvesson, M., & Sveningsson, S. (2003a). Good visions, bad micro-management and ugly ambiguity: Contradictions of (non-) leadership in a knowledge-intensive organisation. Organization Studies, 24(6), 961-988.

Northouse, P. (2012) Leadership: Theory and Practice,

Chapter 2 The Apollo Syndrome, in Belbin, R. Meredith (2010) Management Teams (e-book)
Caplan, J. (2003) Coaching for the future: how smart companies use coaching and mentoring. London: CIPD
Clutterbuck, D. and Megginson,D. (2005) Making coaching work: creating a coaching culture. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Downey, M. (2004) Effective Coaching, 2nd ed. London: Texere.
Garvey B., Stokes P., Megginson D. (2014) Coaching and Mentoring, Theory and Practice 2nd Ed. Sage, London

Journals
• Industrial relations journal
• Journal of occupational and organizational psychology
• Management today
• People management
• Human resource management journal
Websites:

• Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
• CIPD Case Studies
• Chartered Management Institute
• Institute of Leadership and Management

F: Submission Guidance
• You must submit assessments in Microsoft Word, Microsoft PowerPoint or PDF format. More information, including the exact accepted file types, can be found here.
• The file must be no larger than 40MB.
• Your writing is expected to conform to Standard English in terms of spelling, syntax and grammar.
• You must include your Assessment Number (J Number) in the header or footer.
• Include your word count at the end of the assignment or the front cover.
• Set up your page for A4 paper in portrait style.
• The font size must be a minimum of point 12 Calibri (or equivalent) for the body of the assessment.
• Line spacing in the body of the assessment must be 1.5 lines.
• Number the pages consecutively.
• Students should submit work before 12 noon (unless otherwise specified) on the deadline date electronically via Moodle. Please follow the ‘Turnitin submission’ link on the module space and follow the on-screen instructions, paying particular attention to any specific instructions for each assignment.
• You must submit your work with the following details written on the first page:
– Title of your work
– Module title and code
– Module Leader and Seminar Tutor (if relevant)
– Number of words
– Your student assessment number (J Number)

Student work that does not have this information on will not be identifiable after marking has taken place and risks being recorded as a non-submission.

H: Rubrics and Criteria

Please see attached rubric (Appendix 5E).

Assessment Rubric – Appendix 5E
Distinction
90–100%
Distinction
80-89%
Distinction
70-79%
Merit
60-69%
Pass
50-59%
Fail
40-49%
Fail
30-39%
Fail
20-29%
Fail
10-19%
Fail
0-9%

Knowledge

Knowledge and understanding of the approaches and application of leading, managing and developing people in organisations.

Critical engagement with the sources used to answer the question. Insightful and sophisticated engagement with research and/or practice pertaining to field(s) and disciplines of study.

Sophisticated demonstration and application of knowledge, offering innovative and/or
original insights, possibly unparalleled in their application.

A sophisticated degree of synthesis, quite likely of complex and disparate material. Advanced engagement with
research and or practice pertaining to the field(s) and disciplines of study.

Accomplished demonstration of knowledge, contributing towards innovative and/or
original insights.

Extremely high degree of synthesis of research material. A high degree of engagement with research and/or practice pertaining to field(s) and disciplines of study.

Excellent demonstration of
knowledge, with the possibility for new insights.

A high degree of synthesis relating to research material. Sustained engagement with
research and/or practice pertaining to disciplines of study.

An assured understanding of
current problems, supported by critical analysis with the potential for new insights.

A sustained application and depth of research material and accuracy in detail. Engagement with relevant knowledge pertaining to discipline and key issues.

Satisfactory understanding and conceptual awareness enabling
critical analysis.

Response is appropriate and addresses the range of learning outcomes, where the knowledge is accurate. Work may lack sustained depth. Unsatisfactory engagement with relevant knowledge pertaining to discipline and key
issues.

Insufficient understanding and conceptual awareness of knowledge(s)
pertaining to the field.

Response does not address
the full range of learning outcomes, inaccurate and/or
missing knowledge at times. Inadequate coverage of relevant issues, inconsistent understanding shown.

Inadequate understanding of underpinning issues, weak and underdeveloped analysis.

Response does not address learning outcomes, inaccurate
and missing knowledge. Lack of relevant research and little understanding shown.

Very weak understanding of key issues, work lacks critical oversight.

Substandard engagement with research material, misunderstanding evident. Severely lacking in relevant
research and underpinning knowledge.

Slight understanding of key
issues, little attempt at critical analysis.

Slight engagement with
research material, inaccurate knowledge and misunderstanding throughout. Negligible understanding of key
issues, which is likely to show no critical analysis or engagement with the learning brief.

No engagement with research tasks.

Distinction
90–100%
Distinction
80-89%
Distinction
70-79%
Merit
60-69%
Pass
50-59%
Fail
40-49%
Fail
30-39%
Fail
20-29%
Fail
10-19%
Fail
0-9%

Analysis

Critical analysis and interpretation.

Critical Assessment of leading, managing and developing people, in response to the business challenge in the case study provided.

Appropriate analytical discussion and interpretation of source material.
A sophisticated command of imaginative, insightful, original
or creative interpretations.

An unparalleled level of analysis and Assessment.

A sophisticated cogent argument offering new and original contributions to knowledge. Advanced command of imaginative, insightful, original
or creative interpretations.

Accomplished level of analysis and Assessment.

A highly developed cogent argument with the potential to bring new and original contributions to knowledge. An excellent command of imaginative, original or creative interpretations.

A high degree of analysis and Assessment.

A sustained argument with the
possibility for new insights. A convincing and sustained command of accepted critical positions.

A developed conceptual understanding that enables the student to find new meanings in established hypotheses.

A developed and sustained argument with the possibility for new insights. An ability to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively.

A satisfactory Assessment of current research and critical scholarship in the discipline.

Ability to devise a coherent critical/ analytical argument is supported with evidence. A lack of ability to deal with complex issues.

Judgements not fully substantiated and understood.

The ability to construct an argument is underdeveloped and not supported fully with
evidence. A lack of ability to deal with complex issues.

Judgements are not substantiated or understood
and the critical position is not made clear.

Weak interpretation of research and work is not supported with evidence. Very weak analysis, possibly limited to a single
perspective.

Substandard argument, work lacks scholarly analysis and interpretation.

Episodes of self- contradiction and/or confusion. Slight indication of ability to
deal with key issues.

Slight analytical engagement and reflection, work lacks criticality throughout.

Lacks evidence, work shows
self-contradiction and
confusion. Negligible coverage of learning outcomes.

No attempt to interpret research material.
Communication and expression

Communication skills: written vocabulary and academic style.

Communication of intent, adherence to academic protocols. A sophisticated response, the academic form matches that expected in published and professional work.

Mastery and command of specialist skills pertaining to the academic form.

Fluent and highly coherent, scholarly expression. Persuasive articulation, were
the academic form largely matches that expected in published work.

Accomplished command of specialist skills pertaining to the academic form, discipline, and context(s); A high degree of skill, the academic form shows exceptional standards of presentation or delivery.

A high command of specialist skills pertaining to the academic
form, discipline, and context(s). Secure and sustained expression, observing appropriate academic form.

Fluent and persuasive expression of ideas, work shows flair.

Assured interpretation of the
style and genre, content, form
and technique for specialist and
non-specialist audiences as appropriate. Good expression, observing appropriate academic form.

Predominantly accurate in spelling and grammar, ideas communicated appropriately and satisfactorily.

Satisfactory application of specialist skills with effective technical control. Unsatisfactory demonstration and application of key communication skills and academic form.

Recurring errors in spelling and grammar, ideas limited and underdeveloped, possibly poor paraphrasing.

Skills demonstrated are insufficient for the task and work
may lack technical judgement. Significant errors evident in the academic form.

Weaknesses in spelling and grammar, lacks coherence and structure, possibly poor paraphrasing.

Work lacks technical judgement. Very weak observation of academic conventions.

Severe deficiencies in spelling
and grammar and expression undermine meaning, possibly poor paraphrasing.

Substandard relationship between content, form and technique. Slight observation of academic conventions.

Weak expression, mostly
incoherent and fails to secure meaning, poor paraphrasing.

Slight engagement with the work. Negligible observation of academic conventions.

Incoherent and confused expression, poor paraphrasing.

No discernible demonstration of key skills (pertaining to the discipline);

No engagement with the work.
Page 8 of 9
Distinction
90–100% Distinction
80-89%
Distinction
70-79%
Merit
60-69%
Pass
50-59%
Fail
40-49%
Fail
30-39%
Fail
20-29%
Fail
10-19%
Fail
0-9%

Reflection

Critical personal and professional reflection

Intellectual engagement with the processes by which the work is realised. Insightful response to critical self- Assessment, reflecting exemplary professional and/or personal standards of engagement and conduct
throughout.

Sophisticated application
of reflective practice to create new insights
pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future Advanced level of critical
self-Assessment, reflecting professional and/or personal standards of
engagement and conduct throughout.

Accomplished application
of reflective practice to create new insights
pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future A high degree of critical
self-Assessment, reflecting professional and/ or personal standards of engagement and conduct.

Excellent application of reflective practice to create new insights pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future An assured level of self- Assessment, reflecting sustained professional and/or personal standards
of engagement and
conduct.

Assured application of reflective practice to create new insights pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future

A satisfactory self-Assessment, reflecting appropriate standards of professional and/or personal engagement and conduct;

Satisfactory engagement with reflective practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future Unsatisfactory self-Assessment of professional and/or personal engagement and
conduct.

Unsatisfactory engagement with reflective
practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future Weak self- Assessment of professional and/or personal
engagement and conduct.

Weak engagement with reflective practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future Very weak self- Assessment
of professional and/or personal
engagement and conduct.

Substandard engagement with reflective
practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future

Slight evidence of self-Assessment of professional and/or personal engagement and conduct.

Slight evidence of engagement with reflective
practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future Negligible evidence of self- Assessment of professional and/or personal engagement and conduct.

No engagement with engagement with reflective
practice pertaining to own learning, currently and in the future
Sources

Academic referencing skills

Reading and use of appropriate sources.

Accurate and consistent acknowledgment and referencing of sources. Extensive range and sophisticated use of appropriate sources.

Unparalleled standard of research both in breadth and depth, which demonstrates a very high intellectual engagement and rigor. Extensive range and use of appropriate sources.

Extremely well referenced research both in breadth and depth, which demonstrates high intellectual engagement and rigor. Substantial range and sophisticated use of sources.

Well- referenced research both in breadth and depth, which demonstrates clear intellectual rigor. An assured range of reading,
with sustained reference to key and core texts. The work may include current research
at the leading edge of the discipline.

Very good referencing in breadth and/or depth, which shows a very good level of intellectual rigor.
Sources acknowledged appropriately according to academic conventions of
referencing. A satisfactory range of core and basic texts, which references current research in
the discipline.

Sources acknowledged appropriately according to academic conventions of referencing.

The work may contain minor errors and be limited in breadth, depth and intellectual rigor. Insufficient range of source reading of core and basic
texts.

Sources not acknowledged in line with academic conventions of referencing. Reading material is
inadequate and may not
include core and basic texts.

Sources inaccurately referenced. Very weak engagement with source reading of core and
basic texts.

Inconsistent and/or limited referencing of sources. Severely lacking source
reading.

Sources either not present
and/or not referenced. Negligible attempt to identify
source material.

No indication of source
reading.
Page 9 of 9

Order | Check Discount

Tags: BU7039 Understanding and Managing People Assessment