Essay
Value: 50%
Length: 2500 words
Task
Why is resistance to change frequently demonised as a problem that must be managed? What are the ethical implications of this and how else can resistance be understood?
Please read the following guidelines attend to the marking rubric:
You may use examples from your own organisation to illustrate your essay.
1) Drawing on your subject material and wider reading from the academic literature, identify and examine why change is resisted, and why resistance is problematised as something to be managed.
2) From a critical perspective, examine the relationship between power and resistance in the context of organisational change.
3) Analyse the ethics of the managerial and of resistant positions.
4) Assess the implications of the managerial and of resistant positions for achieving an effective change management programme.
5) Draw conclusions that summarise your work and address the essay question.
6) You must follow an essay structure that is at a minimum an introduction; a main body that outlines the argument, analyses the material you have researched and assesses this according to the guidelines above, and a conclusion. Your writing style must follow professional literacy: Citations and a final reference list that follows the APA 6 guidelines accurately; the quality of writing and presentation: use of topic and linking sentences, and of connected paragraphs; accurate mechanics (spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.); use respectful language to discuss all people; avoid emotive language; employ inclusive, non-sexist language; not opinionated, i.e. support observations with evidence. A minimum of twelve citations/references should be used.
Rationale
As for Assessment 2.
Marking criteria
201360 MGT540 Management of Change: Assessment 3 Marking Rubric
| Assessment Criteria | Fail
(0 – 24.5) |
Pass
(25 – 32) |
Credit
(32.5 – 37) |
Distinction
(37.5 – 42) |
High Distinction
(42.5 – 50) |
| 1)
Drawing on your subject material and wider reading from the academic literature, identify and examine why change is resisted, and why resistance is problematised as something to be managed.
10 marks |
The identification is inaccurate, inadequate, insufficient and unclear. Lacks relevant information and evidence upon which to base the examination.
0-4.9 |
The identification is generally clear and accurate; sufficient but basic; over-reliance on the textbook. Appropriate but limited information and evidence used to support the examination.
5-6.4 |
The identification is significant but limited. Some other sources used. Examination is based on sound and significant evidence but understanding is limited.
6.5-7.4 |
Comprehensive substantial
identification. Draws significantly on additional material; makes substantial use of citations. Examination is based on comprehensive evidence; thorough understanding demonstrated . 7.5-8.4 |
Outstanding and
insightful identification. Exemplary use of additional material and citations to support the work. Examination is outstanding and insightful, original, sophisticated.
8.5-10 |
| 2)
From a critical perspective, examine the relationship between power and resistance in the context of organisational change.
10 marks |
Examination is inaccurate, inadequate, insufficient and is unclear.
0-4.9 |
Examination is generally clear, accurate and sufficient.
5-6.4 |
Sound examination that is significant but limited. Requires greater support from the literature.
6.5-7.4 |
Comprehensive examination with substantial support
from the literature and substantial use of references.
7.5-8.4 |
Outstanding,
insightful, original. Sophisticated analytical and critical examination. Outstanding use of references.
8.5-10 |
| 3)
Analyse the ethics of the managerial and of resistant positions.
10 marks |
Lacks relevant evidence upon which to base the analysis. The analysis is inaccurate, inadequate, insufficient, and unclear. Is descriptive, not analytical.
0-4.9 |
Appropriate but limited evidence used to support the analysis. Analysis is generally clear and substantiated, however is predominantly more descriptive than analytical.
5-6.4 |
Analysis is based on sound and significant evidence but understanding is limited.
6.5-7.4 |
Analysis is based on comprehensive evidence.
Understanding is substantial.
7.5-8.4 |
Analysis is
outstanding; understanding is insightful, original and sophisticated.
8.5-10 |
| 4)
Assess the implications of the managerial and of resistant positions for achieving an effective change management programme. 10 marks |
Assessment is inaccurate, inadequate, insufficient, unclear.
0-4.9 |
Assessment is generally clear, accurate and sufficient.
5-6.4 |
Assessment is solid and significant but with limitations.
6.5-7.4 |
Assessment is comprehensive with implications clearly identified and examined.
7.5-8.4 |
Outstanding and insightful.
Sophisticated insight into implications.
8.5-10 |
| 5)
Draw conclusions that summarise your work and address the essay question
5 marks |
Unsubstantiated, invalid conclusions based on anecdote and generalisations. Theory and literature not used to support conclusions. Weak relations drawn between theory and practice.
0-2.45 |
Limited evidence from the theory and literature used to support the conclusions. Fair demonstration of relations between theory and practice.
2.5-3.2 |
Conclusions are supported by evidence from the theory and literature. Adequate demonstration of relations between theory and practice.
3.25-3.7 |
Comprehensive summary of the arguments based on the theory and literature, demonstrating comprehensive relations between theory and practice.
3.75-4.2 |
Analytical and
clear conclusions that are well grounded in the theory and literature. Demonstrates outstanding and insightful relations between theory and practice.
4.25-5 |
| 6)
Structure and style: Follows an essay structure. Writing style must follow professional literacy: Citations and a final reference list that follows the APA6 guidelines accurately; accurate mechanics: spelling, grammar, punctuation etc A minimum of 12 references used
5 marks |
Lacks structure. Poor sentence and paragraph construction. Language not professional, inclusive or respectful. Paragraphs off the point with inadequate ability with grammar, inappropriate vocabulary and poor
spelling. Insufficient referencing.
0-2.45 |
Structure is apparent, fair use of topic and linking sentences, and paragraphs. Adequate level of professional language achieved. Adequate ability with grammar, spelling and vocabulary. Referencing lacks specificity.
2.5-3.2 |
Clear structure. Adequate use of sentences and paragraphs. Solid level of professional language used. Paragraphs succinct. Good ability with grammar, vocabulary and spelling. Significant but limited referencing.
3.25-3.7 |
Excellent structure. Comprehensive use of sentences and paragraphs. Good Use of topic and linking sentences. Professional literacy well demonstrated. Substantial ability with grammar, spelling and vocabulary. Ample relevant accurate referencing.
3.75-4.2 |
Exemplary structure, with impeccable use of topic and linking sentences, and of connected paragraphs. Sophisticated level of professional language achieved.
Excellent usage of professional literacy; grammar, vocabulary and spelling. Impeccable referencing. 4.25-5 |
| Total marks /50 | Comments:
|
||||
Presentation
As identified previously.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]