Please make sure there are 8-10 references. I have also provided you with an old assignment so you have an idea. Thanks
MMH231 T2 2019 Assessment 1 Part A FINAL Deakin's Bachelor of Commerce and MBA are internationally EPAS accredited. Deakin Business School is accredited by AACSB. MMH231 – Managing and Rewarding Performance Trimester 2, 2019 Assessment 1 – Part A: Case Study Report Groups of Two DUE DATE AND TIME: Week 8, 06/09/2019, 11:59PM AEST PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: 30% HURDLE DETAILS: N/A Learning Outcome Details Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO) ULO 1: Analyse and review a business scenario applying performance management principles and recommendations based on theoretical understanding of managing and rewarding performance GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities GLO5: Problem Solving Assessment Feedback: In normal circumstances, students who submit their work by the due date can expect to receive their marks and feedback on CloudDeakin in no more than 15 working days after submission. Description / Requirements Aim: The aim of this assessment is to review the performance management and reward programs in an organisation of your choice. In groups of two you will need to review, the organisation’s: • Performance management program • Reward management system Then your group will develop recommendations for the organisation based on the theoretical models of performance management and reward management to improve the current program. Page 2 of 5 Task Structure 1. Select an organisation. It may be your own workplace or one that can provide you with good access to performance management and reward practices information. It does not have to be a large organisation. You may use the public websites of your chosen organisation to research some aspects of the assessment task. 2. Some organisations may not want to be identified in your report. For this reason please anonymise the organisation when writing your report by including the following statement: Please note: This report and any additional information obtained for this report will not be used elsewhere nor shared with any other organisation. The report will only be read by the members of the student group conducting the investigation, and the students’ lecturers/tutors/markers within the teaching team. 3. Your report must contain: • Title page – indicate the word count on this page • Executive summary • Table of contents • Introduction (100 words) • Background information on the organisation (100 words) • Performance management practices (600 words) • Reward management practices (600 words) • Analysis of fit with current theoretical models and systems for performance management and reward (900 words) • Recommendations and conclusions (200 words) • References • Appendices 4. Research Points/Questions The following is a list of points/questions you might consider using to frame your research. N.B. Some of these points/questions may not be appropriate for the type of organisation selected. You may wish to develop further questions not listed here that you consider appropriate. You may need to re-word the questions if you are asking the questions directly of someone in the organisation. If you are using questions not listed here please send them to your Campus coordinator for review, prior to beginning your research. A copy of all questions asked should be located in an appendix. Performance Management: • What is the purpose of the organisation’s performance management? • Describe the organisation’s performance management system. Page 3 of 5 • What are the links between the performance management (PMS) and organisational strategy and/or other organisational functions. • Are performance reviews conducted formally or informally? Describe the process. • Does the organisation use a rating scale to assess staff performance? If so, what criteria are used? • Is this system used across the organisation, or do different departments/divisions use different staff performance assessment methods? • Do staff receive quantitative and/or qualitative feedback on their performance review? • Which areas of the performance review are reported quantitatively and which qualitatively? • What types of outcomes can staff expect from their performance review? • Do staff provide feedback on any aspect of the PMS? If so through what mechanisms? • What benefits have the organisation derived from its current PMS? • Have any negative/positive consequences resulted from the introduction of a PMS? For example, any adverse/fortuitous organisational cultural impacts? • Is the organisation considering any changes to its performance management system? If so, for what reasons? • What general comments can you make about the organisation’s PMS? • What insights (if any) did your investigation into the PMS provide? Reward: • What is the purpose of the organisation’s reward management? • How do the organisation’s rewarding practices link to organisational strategy and/or other organisational functions? • When considering direct financial rewards what types of rewards (base pay, performance based pay) does the organisation use? What are the advantages and disadvantages of these types of pay from the organisation’s perspective? • What role does rewarding play in motivating staff? • What internal and external factors impact on the reward strategy of the organisation? • Does the organisation focus more on incentives, or on rewards, to achieve its performance objectives? • What are the indirect financial benefits available to staff? Why have you chosen to offer these? Are they available to all staff? • If staff were asked, what might they say are the non-financial (intrinsic) benefits of working in this organisation? • Are there any issues around rewarding that are challenging for the organisation? If so, what are they and why are they challenging? • What environmental factors (internal and external) impact on your reward management decision-making? • What general comments can you make about the organisation’s rewarding policy and practices? Page 4 of 5 • What insights (if any) did your investigation into the organisation’s rewarding policy and practices provide? Type of Assessment: Group Report Word limit: 2500 words Formatting: 1.5 line spacing; 12 point font; Times New Roman or Arial Reference style: Students must correctly use the Harvard style of referencing. Type of the File: MS Word Document Only, PDF is not accepted. Submission Instructions Submit your individual reflection (Assessment 1 – Part A) in MS Word format via the corresponding category under the “Assessment” menu on the MMH231 CloudDeakin Unit site. Both group members’ names and student numbers MUST be included in the title page of the report. You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until the marked assignment has been returned to you. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy. Any work you submit may be checked by electronic or other means for the purposes of detecting collusion and/or plagiarism. When you are required to submit an assignment through your CloudDeakin unit site, you will receive an email to your Deakin email address confirming that it has been submitted. You should check that you can see your assignment in the Submissions view of the Assignment dropbox folder after upload, and check for, and keep, the email receipt for the submission. Notes • Penalties for late submission: The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked. You will receive 0% for the task. 'Day' means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after the due date. • For more information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the document Your rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unit in the first folder next to the Unit Guide of the Resources area in the CloudDeakin unit site. • Building evidence of your experiences, skills and knowledge (Portfolio) - Building a portfolio that evidences your skills, knowledge and experience will provide you with a valuable tool to help you prepare for interviews and to showcase to potential employers. There are a number of tools that you can use to build a portfolio. You are provided with cloud space through Page 5 of 5 OneDrive, or through the Portfolio tool in the Cloud Unit Site, but you can use any storage repository system that you like. Remember that a Portfolio is YOUR tool. You should be able to store your assessment work, reflections, achievements and artefacts in YOUR Portfolio. Once you have completed this assessment piece, add it to your personal Portfolio to use and showcase your learning later, when applying for jobs, or further studies. Curate your work by adding meaningful tags to your artefacts that describe what the artefact represents. MMH231 Assessment 1 Part A FINAL 2019 MMH231 Managing and Rewarding Performance Assessment 1 Part A – Case Study Report (Group) 30% Performance Indicators YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD MEETS STANDARD EXCEEDS STANDARD Fail (N) Not attempted/Needs improvement Pass (P) Satisfactory Credit (C) Good Distinction (D) Very good High Distinction (HD) Excellent CRITERIA Investigation and explanation of the organisation’s performance management system (GLO1) (weighted score: 20) Demonstrates no understanding of the organisation’s performance management system or related contextual factors. (0) Demonstrates a very limited, inadequate or inconsistent understanding of the organisation’s performance management system or related contextual factors and/or often provides an account that is inconsistent. (1-9.9) Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the organisation’s performance management system with evidence of some relevant contextual factors and provides a basic description that is mostly consistent with some errors. (10- 11.9) Generally, demonstrates a good level of understanding of the organisation’s performance management system with evidence of mostly relevant contextual factors and