6613124_1981688274_AT7052ResponsibleLeadership-As
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Krishna Institute Of Engineering and Technology *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
502
Subject
Management
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
Pages
8
Uploaded by amitavamunsi17
Assessment Brief
–
Postgraduate
Page 1 of 8
Module Code:
AT7052
Module Title:
Responsible Leadership
Distributed on:
Week 1
Hand in Date:
Assignment A (part 1 and 2): Monday, 30 Oct 2023 (Teaching week 8)
Assignment B: Wednesday, 24 Jan 2024 (Assessment period)
General Information
Further information about general assessment criteria, referencing, plagiarism and academic integrity can be found on the e-Learning Portal (Blackboard)
site for the module. Students are advised to read and follow this information.
The assessment of the module will consist of two assignments: an individual exercise and research paper (60%), as well as a group assignment addressing
an organizational leadership dilemma (40%) - see details below.
Module Learning Outcomes (MLOs)
At the end of the module you will be able to:
1.
Critically evaluate responsible leadership theories
2.
Evaluate own leadership style using the developed informal leadership theory
3.
Creatively initiate, lead and drive leadership responses to sustainable issues
4.
Defend a choice of cultural intelligence, emotional intelligence and mindfulness into leadership capabilities and practices
Introduction
You will complete two assignments demonstrating your understanding and ability to apply your knowledge of responsible leadership.
Assessment Brief
–
Postgraduate
Page 2 of 8
Assessment A
–
Individual Assignment (60% of total marks), total word count: max. 3,200 words
Assessment A consists of two parts, to be completed in the first half of the course.
Part 1: Creating a Personal Leadership Portrait, max. of 1,200 words (30% of Assessment A). MLO 2
As a leader, it is important for you to share information about yourself with your team. Communicating your philosophy on leadership, as well as your
purpose, values, and expectations is a great way to build authentic relationships with your staff.
In this exercise you will be required to c
reate a Personal Leadership Portrait.
You need to reflect on your personal leadership portrait by answering these questions:
Cognitive: How do I know that I matter? How do I know that I am a leader?
Intrapersonal: Who am I as a leader? How do my identities and values shape what leadership means to me?
Interpersonal: Who are we (identity groups) as demographic groups? What relationships do I want to foster with others similar to and different from myself
through leadership?
Part 2: Own theoretical framework of leadership in 2,000 words (70% of Assessment A). MLO 1 and 2
Employing a critical analysis of leadership assumptions and theories, you will develop your own informal theory of leadership that addresses the current
trends of society. You will be expected to offer a conceptual framework which relates leadership development to theories of leadership, particularly in the
context of responsible and sustainable development. This assignment invites you to revisit the theories and debates we have covered in this module. This
is a research report and in comparison to Part 1 it requires academic references, in-text citations, and a reference list at the end. You will also be
evaluated on your systematic reasoning and your innovative application of literature.
You are limited to a word count of 2,000 words, excluding references, headings and appendices.
You will need to:
•
Critically self-reflect on your own leadership capabilities and craft a framework that you can use to guide your own practice of leadership.
•
Develop your own unique theoretical framework and give it a title.
•
Use visual representation to clarify and elaborate on your framework.
Marking Rubric on next page
Assessment Brief
–
Postgraduate
Page 3 of 8
Criteria
Scales
Assessment A
0-39%
Standard Not Met 1
40-49%
Standard Not Met 2
50-59%
Meets Standard 2
60-69%
Meets Standard 2
70-79%
Exceeds Standard 1
80-89%
Exceeds Standard 2
90-100%
Exceeds Standard 3
Leadership Portrait
(30%)
Portrait must include:
-Description of your
LS philosophy
-Key influencers
-Personal purpose
-Personal values
-Expectations
AoL Goal 3.3
Completely
insufficient portrait
description. Several
clear gaps in the
response across the
listed subject areas,
some or more of the
areas are covered in
completely insufficient
detail at the
descriptive level and
the evidence of wider
reading is non-
existent to limited.
Insufficient portrait
description. There
are several gaps in
the response across
the listed subject
areas. Evidence of
wider reading is very
limited.
Sufficient portrait
description. Most
subject areas are
covered adequately.
There is some
evaluation, but further
critical analysis and
discussion is required.
Good portrait
description. The subject
areas are covered fully
and adequately.
However, there is
potential to consider
stakeholders in a
broader sense than that
presented, and the
supporting literature
could be from a wider
base.
Very good portrait
description that covers
each of the required
areas, in a critical and
evaluative manner.
Demonstrates a level of
wider reading beyond
the core literature of the
module and the portrait
considers the
perspective of multiple
stakeholders.
An excellent portrait
description that covers
each of the required
areas, is critical and
evaluative and is very
well explained.
Demonstrates a broad
level of reading from a
wide range of sources
and the portrait
considers the
perspective of a wide
range of stakeholders.
An outstanding portrait
description covering
the required subject
areas in a critical,
innovative, evaluative
manner that is very
well explained.
Demonstrates a very
broad level of reading
and the portrait
considers the
perspective of multiple
stakeholders.
Critical analysis of
leadership theories
and models
(20%)
Completely
insufficient analysis of
leadership theories
and models. No
discussion of
responsible
leadership
considering the
discussed topics in
the module.
Insufficient analysis
of leadership
theories and models.
Insufficient
discussion of
responsible
leadership
considering the
discussed topics in
the module.
Adequate analysis of
leadership theories
and models. Sound
discussion of
responsible leadership
considering the
discussed topics in the
module.
Good critical analysis of
leadership theories and
models. Good
discussion of
responsible leadership
considering the
discussed topics in the
module.
Very good critical
analysis of leadership
theories and models.
Very good discussion of
responsible leadership
considering the
discussed topics in the
module.
Excellent critical
analysis of leadership
theories and models.
Excellent discussion of
responsible leadership
considering the
discussed topics in the
module.
Exceptional critical
analysis of leadership
theories and models.
Sophisticated
discussion of
responsible leadership
considering the
discussed topics in the
module.
Developing
leadership
framework for
practice
(40%)
AoL Goal 3.4
Completely
insufficient application
of leadership theory
to develop your own
leadership framework
for practice.
Insufficient
application of
leadership theory to
develop your own
leadership
framework for
practice.
Adequate application
of leadership theory to
develop your own
leadership framework
for practice
considering current
trends of society.
Good application of
leadership theory to
develop your own
leadership framework for
practice considering
current trends of society.
Very good application of
leadership theory to
develop your own
leadership framework for
practice considering
relevant trends of
society.
Excellent application of
leadership theory to
develop your own
sophisticated leadership
framework for practice
considering relevant
trends of society.
Exceptional
application of
leadership theory to
develop your own
highly sophisticated
leadership framework
or practice considering
relevant trends of
society.
Structure,
presentation and
appropriate APA
citation
(10%)
Completely
insufficient attempt to
structure or present
appropriately. No
evidence or attempt
to reference using the
required APA style.
Insufficient effort to
present and structure
your work.
Insufficient evidence
of referencing using
the required APA
style.
Adequate effort to
present and structure
your work effectively.
Adequate evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Good evidence of effort
to present and structure
your work. Good
evidence of referencing
using the required APA
style.
Very good, well-
presented and
structured work. Very
good evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Excellently presented
and structured piece of
work. Excellent evidence
of referencing using the
required APA style.
Exceptionally well-
presented and
structured piece of
work. Exceptional
evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Assessment Brief
–
Postgraduate
Page 4 of 8
Assessment B - Group assignment: Leadership Dilemma in 2,500 words (40% of total marks) MLO 3 and 4
In this assignment, you will work in a group of no more than 3 students to solve a real-life or fictional business and leadership dilemma. You are asked to
identify a leadership dilemma of your choice, which can be sourced from the literature, media reports, your own work experience, or a fictional scenario
that illustrates a real-world issue. This assignment is to be completed during the last 2 weeks of the course.
For example, the Dutch
restaurant chain “The Avocado Show”
has the stated aim to promote more healthy and sustainable food by featuring avocado
prominently on their menu, and by offering less meat and more vegetarian dishes in their restaurants. However, avocadoes do not grow in the Central
European temperate climate and need to be imported from tropical and subtropical regions where commercial avocado farming has been linked to
unsustainable land practices, water shortages for the local population and environment, and environmental degradation. To offer truly sustainable food,
restaurants need to consider their entire supply chain, not just the type of produce that are offered on the menu.
For your chosen leadership dilemma, imagine yourselves as a group of consultants, and provide an analysis of the leadership dilemma and
recommendations for a solution by including and considering the following aspects:
•
Describe the dilemma (5%)
•
Present rationality for change (15%)
•
Propose potential solutions and justification (20%)
•
Discuss ethics, CSR and other issues (20%)
•
Map out implementation (10%)
•
Structure, APA referencing (10%)
•
Peer Assessment (20%)
Your analysis should consider the following, but not limited to, the accurate and creative application of theories of leadership and responsible change
management, global sustainability, cultural awareness and any further discussions that have been covered in the module.
You will be assessed individually by the course facilitator and peers in your group (please see the peer assessment model, below).
Assessment Brief
–
Postgraduate
Page 5 of 8
Submission of Assessment:
All assignments should conform to the following specification:
•
Word-processed in Arial 11pt, 1½ spacing
•
Pages should be numbered
•
Assignments A and B should be submitted as two separate documents.
All assignments must be submitted online via the Turn-it-
in submission link found in the ‘Assessment’ tab on the
left-hand
menu of the module’s dedicated
blackboard site. You should include your Group number on the form, if appropriate.
Marking rubric on next page
AT7052
Page 6 of 8
Assessment B Marking Rubric
Criteria
Scales
Assessment B
0-39%
Standard Not Met 1
40-49%
Standard Not Met 2
50-59%
Meets Standard 1
60-69%
Meets Standard 2
70-79%
Exceeds Standard 1
80-89%
Exceeds Standard 2
90-100%
Exceeds Standard 3
Describe the
dilemma (5%)
Completely insufficient
description of
dilemma. Clear gaps
and incoherent
analysis.
Insufficient analysis
and discussion of
dilemma.
Adequate description
of dilemma, but
argument is not
coherent.
Good critical
description of
leadership dilemma,
but not all facets
considered.
Very good critical
description of
leadership dilemma.
Adequate discussion of
contextual issues.
Excellent critical
description of dilemma.
Excellent discussion of
all contextual factors
impacting dilemma.
Outstanding critical
description of
dilemma. Outstanding
discussion of all
contextual factors
impacting dilemma.
Present
rationality for
change to a
sustainable
issue (15%)
Completely insufficient
description of
rationality for change.
Clear gaps and
incoherent analysis.
Insufficient analysis
and description of
rationality for
change.
Adequate analysis
and description of
rationality for change,
but argument is not
coherent.
Good critical analysis
and description of
rationality for change,
but not all factors
considered.
Very good critical
analysis and
description of rationality
for change. Adequate
discussion of
contextual issues.
Excellent critical
analysis and description
of rationality for change.
Excellent discussion of
all contextual factors
impacting change.
Outstanding critical
analysis and
description of
rationality for change.
Outstanding
discussion of all
contextual factors
impacting change.
Propose and
defend
potential
solutions (20%)
Completely insufficient
application of
knowledge to develop
solutions. Proposed
solution shows no
evidence of divergent
thinking, uniqueness
and novelty. Solution
may be impractical or
unrealistic.
Insufficient
application of
knowledge to
propose solutions
Proposed solution
shows no evidence
of divergent
thinking, uniqueness
and novelty.
Solution may be
impractical or
unrealistic.
Adequate application
of knowledge in
development of
solutions. Proposes a
novel and practical
solution to the
problem. Little or no
divergent or
contradictory thinking
is evident.
Good application of
knowledge in
development of
solutions. Proposes
and describes a novel
solution which is
applicable the problem
with limited divergent
thinking evident.
Displays divergent
thinking and very good
application of
knowledge. Considers
and rejects less
acceptable approaches
to solving problem.
Proposes and
describes a unique or
unexpected solution to
the problem, which is
both appropriate and
feasible.
Embraces divergent
thinking in application of
knowledge. Proposes
and eloquently
describes a selection of
unique or unexpected
solutions to the problem,
which are both relevant
and viable. Recognizes
consequences of
solution and can
articulate reason for
choosing proposed
solution
Exceptional
application of
knowledge and
demonstration of
divergent thinking.
Proposes and
eloquently describes a
selection of unique or
unexpected solutions
to the problem, which
are both relevant and
viable. Recognizes
consequences of
solution and can
articulate reason for
choosing proposed
solution
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
AT7052
Page 7 of 8
Criteria
Scales
Assessment B
0-39%
Standard Not Met 1
40-49%
Standard Not Met 2
50-59%
Meets Standard 1
60-69%
Meets Standard 2
70-79%
Exceeds Standard 1
80-89%
Exceeds Standard 2
90-100%
Exceeds Standard 3
Ethics, CSR,
and other
issues (20%)
Does not identify the
ethical issue(s). Is
unable to identify
some of the
professional and/or
contemporary
stakeholder issues or
does not recognise
relevant decision-
making dilemmas.
Struggles to or is
unable to identify
the ethical issue(s).
May identify some of
the professional
and/or
contemporary
stakeholder issues
or recognises
relevant decision-
making dilemmas
but fails to clearly
describe them.
Can identify/ name the
inherent ethical
choices and
implications involved
in the professional
and/or contemporary
situation.
Can identify/ name the
inherent ethical
choices and
implications involved
in the professional
and/or contemporary
situation.
Clearly identifies the
inherent ethical choices
and implications
involved in a
professional and/or
contemporary situation.
Understands the effects
of perspective, context,
personal views, and
laws.
Clearly identifies the
inherent ethical choices
and implications
involved in a
professional and/or
contemporary situation.
Brilliantly demonstrates
an understanding of the
effects of perspective,
context, personal views,
and laws.
Outstanding
identification of
inherent ethical
choices and
implications involved
in a professional
and/or contemporary
situation. Brilliantly
demonstrates an
understanding of the
effects of perspective,
context, personal
views, and laws.
Map out
implementation
(10%)
Completely insufficient
mapping of how to
implement change.
Insufficient
application and
mapping of how to
implement change
Adequate mapping of
how to implement
proposed solutions.
Good mapping of how
to implement
proposed solutions
and sufficiently
explained.
Very good mapping of
how to implement
proposed solutions and
well explained.
Excellent mapping of
how to implement
proposed solutions and
very well explained.
Exceptional mapping
of how to implement
proposed solutions
and outstanding
explanation.
Structure,
presentation
and
appropriate
APA citation
(10%)
Completely insufficient
attempt to structure or
present appropriately.
No evidence or
attempt to reference
using the required
APA style.
Insufficient effort to
present and
structure your work.
Insufficient evidence
of referencing using
the required APA
style.
Adequate effort to
present and structure
your work effectively.
Adequate evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Good evidence of
effort to present and
structure your work.
Good evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Very good, well-
presented and
structured work. Very
good evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Excellently presented
and structured piece of
work. Excellent evidence
of referencing using the
required APA style.
Exceptionally well-
presented and
structured piece of
work. Exceptional
evidence of
referencing using the
required APA style.
Team
Contribution
(20%)
based on Peer
Assessment
model
AoL Goal 2.1
Completely insufficient
participation,
motivation, and
contribution.
Insufficient
participation,
motivation, and
individual
contribution is not
evident.
Participation in the
team discussions and
weekly activities
related to teamwork is
demonstrated. Work
shows evidence of
individual contribution.
Regular participation
in the team
discussions and
weekly activities is
demonstrated. Work
shows evidence of
individual contribution
that is equal to that of
other team members
Regular and active
participation in the
team discussions and
weekly activities is
demonstrated. Work
shows clear evidence
of individual
contribution that is
equal to that of other
team members
Regular and proactive
participation in the team
discussions and weekly
activities is evident.
Demonstrates
leadership and
commitment to team
goals. Work shows clear
evidence of individual
contribution that is equal
to that of other team
members.
Regular and proactive
participation in the
team discussions and
weekly activities is
clearly evident.
Demonstrates
exceptional leadership
and commitment to
team goals. Work
shows clear evidence
of individual
contribution that is
equal to that of other
team members.
AT7052
Page 8 of 8
Peer Assessment Model
Peer Assessment Form
(filled in for each group member, and the total scores are averaged)
Your name and Northumbria University student number _________________________________________________
Name of team member being evaluated ______________________________________________________________
Criteria for evaluation
%
Grade*
Comments
Participation:
attended group and consultation meetings,
communicated properly and timely through email, promoted positive
contributions within the group
20%
Deadlines:
accomplished
20%
Motivation:
seemed to work (at least) as hard as others, helped
others, opened to feedback
20%
Actual contribution:
quality of the content delivered
40%
TOTAL grade of the peer assessment
100%
* The grade to be attributed is comprehended between 1 and 10 (1 = Poor; 10 = Great).
Peer assessment and final grade
Your final peer-review score (P) based is based on input provided by your team members. Each team member will receive a peer score (from every other team member) in
the range 1 (low) - 4 (high) on 6 criteria. Team members do not score themselves. The peer review form will be made available within the e-Learning Portal.
•
If all team members have a peer-review score of 100%, then all have contributed equally.
•
If your peers view your performance as stronger than the average, you may receive a peer score higher than 100%, say, 110%
•
If your peers view your performance as weaker than the average, you may receive a peer score lower than 100%, say, 90%
Related Documents
Recommended textbooks for you
Practical Management Science
Operations Management
ISBN:9781337406659
Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.
Publisher:Cengage,
Purchasing and Supply Chain Management
Operations Management
ISBN:9781285869681
Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Recommended textbooks for you
- Practical Management ScienceOperations ManagementISBN:9781337406659Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.Publisher:Cengage,Purchasing and Supply Chain ManagementOperations ManagementISBN:9781285869681Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. PattersonPublisher:Cengage Learning
Practical Management Science
Operations Management
ISBN:9781337406659
Author:WINSTON, Wayne L.
Publisher:Cengage,
Purchasing and Supply Chain Management
Operations Management
ISBN:9781285869681
Author:Robert M. Monczka, Robert B. Handfield, Larry C. Giunipero, James L. Patterson
Publisher:Cengage Learning