Overview In this assessment task, students are required to reflect on and discuss Deming’s observations on performance management. The student will analyse and synthesise relevant academic literature to support their argument. Learning Outcomes CLO 1 Compare international HR professional standards, and assess their application to an organisation drawing in theoretical constructs. CLO 2 Analyse and interpret the external and internal context in which HR professionals operate, and the impact on practice. CLO 4 Reflect and critique your developing professional practice
1 School of Management — BUSM4589 Professional Human Resource Management Practices Assessment 2: Managing Performance Module Assessment type: Essay Word limit: 2,000 (+/- 10%) Due Date: Sunday of Week 5, 23:59 Melbourne time Weighting: 40% Overview In this assessment task, students are required to reflect on and discuss Deming’s observations on performance management. The student will analyse and synthesise relevant academic literature to support their argument. Learning Outcomes CLO 1 Compare international HR professional standards, and assess their application to an organisation drawing in theoretical constructs. CLO 2 Analyse and interpret the external and internal context in which HR professionals operate, and the impact on practice. CLO 4 Reflect and critique your developing professional practice. 2 Assessment details Context ‘The merit rating nourishes short-term performance, annihilates long-term planning, builds fear, demolishes teamwork, [and] nourishes rivalry and politics. It leaves people bitter, crushed, bruised, battered, desolate, despondent, dejected, feeling inferior, some even depressed, unfit for work for weeks after receipt of rating, unable to comprehend why they are inferior. It is unfair, as it ascribes to the people in a group differences that may be caused totally by the system that they work in.’ Source: Deming, W.E ,Orsini, J. 2013. The essential Deming : Leadership principles from the father of total quality management. New York: McGraw-Hill. From The Merit System: The Annual Appraisal: Destroyer of People by W. Edwards Deming. As included in The Essential Deming (page 27). Also refer https://deming.org/quotes/10103/ Assessment Criteria − Key issues have been developed. − Analysis and synthesis of relevant academic literature used (12 academic references minimum). − Ideas and assertions substantiated through use of high-quality reference material and key academic − perspectives/views have been used. − The avoidance of opinions or arguments that are not substantiated by academic references. − Clear and comprehensive written style (spelling, grammar, syntax). The Essay Question to address: From your research to what degree are Deming’s observations contained in the quotation about performance management still true? How have some of these adverse outcomes been addressed in contemporary organisations? What HRM skills might be employed to avoid them? https://deming.org/quotes/10103/ 3 Referencing guidelines You must acknowledge all the courses of information you have used in your assessments. Refer to the RMIT Easy Cite referencing tool to see examples and tips on how to reference in the appropriated style. You can also refer to the library referencing page for more tools such as EndNote, referencing tutorials and referencing guides for printing. Submission format Upload as one single file via the Assignments submission page within Canvas. Academic integrity and plagiarism Academic integrity is about honest presentation of your academic work. It means acknowledging the work of others while developing your own insights, knowledge and ideas. You should take extreme care that you have: − Acknowledged words, data, diagrams, models, frameworks and/or ideas of others you have quoted (i.e. directly copied), summarised, paraphrased, discussed or mentioned in your assessment through the appropriate referencing methods, − Provided a reference list of the publication details so your reader can locate the source if necessary. This includes material taken from Internet sites. If you do not acknowledge the sources of your material, you may be accused of plagiarism because you have passed off the work and ideas of another person without appropriate referencing, as if they were your own. RMIT University treats plagiarism as a very serious offence constituting misconduct. Plagiarism covers a variety of inappropriate behaviours, including: − Failure to properly document a source − Copyright material from the internet or databases − Collusion between students For further information on our policies and procedures, please refer to the University website. Assessment declaration When you submit work electronically, you agree to the assessment declaration. http://www.lib.rmit.edu.au/easy-cite/ https://www.rmit.edu.au/library/study/referencing https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/rights-and-responsibilities/academic-integrity https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/assessment-and-exams/assessment/assessment-declaration 4 Assessment Criteria Criteria Ratings Pts HD D C P N Criterion 1 Key issues have been developed Has complied clearly excellently and comprehensively with what is required for this criteria. Has complied with a good level for what is required in this criteria. Has complied at an adequate level for what is required in this criteria. Has complied generally with a reasonable level for what is required in this criteria with some gaps. Has failed to grasp what was required in in this criteria. 8.0 to >6.39 Pts 6.39 to >5.59 Pts 5.59 to >4.79 Pts 4.79 to >3.99 Pts 3.99 to >0 Pts 8.0 Criterion 2 Demonstrates analysis and synthesis. Demonstrates analysis and synthesis. Demonstrates analysis and synthesis. There is an imbalance between description and Largely descriptive, lacking Independent analysis and Analysis and synthesis of relevant academic literature Constructs an evidence-based Constructs an evidence-based Constructs evidence-based analysis and synthesis in the synthesis of arguments derived used (12 academic references minimum) argument, drawing on academic and argument, drawing on academic and argument and the exercise of evaluation and use of referenced from referenced literature, evaluation professional sources. Uses the professional sources. Uses the independent judgment. There are literature. This may lead to some of claims. The line of argument is difficult referenced literature referenced literature gaps in evaluation of arguments driven to interpret by the to develop the student’s own voice to develop the student’s own voice claims and in the use of the more by the author’s claims. Number of reader. in constructing an in constructing an referenced literature references is argument. (Minimum references argument. (Minimum references to develop some arguments. Number questioned along with superficial use. observed). observed). of references are adequate. 8.0 to >6.39 Pts 6.39 to >5.59 Pts 5.59 to >4.79 Pts 4.79 to >3.99 Pts 3.99 to >0 Pts 8.0 5 Criterion 3 Ideas and assertions substantiated through use of high-quality reference material and key academic perspectives/views have been used. Ideas and assertions within the student’s text are comprehensive, and demonstrate academic integrity, and conforms with academic conventions including accurate referencing. Ideas and assertions within the student’s text are generally comprehensive, demonstrate academic integrity, and conforms with academic conventions including accurate referencing. Minor errors or omissions occur which detract to an extent from the quality but do not seriously impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or the demonstration of academic integrity. Ideas and assertions within the student’s text exhibit gaps and are comprehensive to satisfactory level and demonstrate an adequate level of academic integrity, and generally conforms to academic conventions including accurate referencing. Several concerning errors or omissions occur which detract to an extent from the quality but and at times may impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or the demonstration of academic integrity. Ideas and assertions within the student’s text exhibit gaps and are comprehensive to a passable level and demonstrate some appreciation of subject matter and issues pertaining to academic integrity, and often conforms to academic conventions including accurate referencing. The frequency of concerning errors or omissions detract from the quality but and at times impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or the demonstration of academic integrity. Fails to meet criteria for a pass as outlined in the columns to the left. 8.0 to >6.39 Pts 6.39 to >5.59 Pts 5.59 to >4.79 Pts 4.79 to >3.99 Pts 3.99 to >0 Pts 8.0 6 Criterion 4 The avoidance of opinions or arguments that are not substantiated by academic references. Outstanding – all assertions, statements and arguments are substantiated using academic conventions. Excellent with a few errors but in the main assertions, statements and arguments are substantiated using academic conventions. Adequate with numerous errors but in the main assertions, statements and arguments are substantiated using academic conventions. At a pass standard but at times concerns are identified but shows a sufficient capacity to obtain a pass by the capacity to make assertions, statements and arguments are substantiate d using academic conventions but too many gaps were shown. Fails to meet criteria for a pass as outlined in the columns to the left. Evidence of lack of understanding of subject (minimal or inadequate comprehension and little or no application) and inability to identify issues. Often inadequate in depth and breadth. Sometimes incomplete or irrelevant. 8.0 to >6.39 Pts 6.39 to >5.59 Pts 5.59 to >4.79 Pts 4.79 to >3.99 Pts 3.99 to >0 Pts 8.0 Criterion 5 Clear and comprehensive