浏览： 日期：2020-01-13
本文为代写assignment案例的代写要求，学科Strategic Leadership and Management，代写时应注意格式为report，最下面是打分标准，代写时应严格按照最高标准写作。
Moodle submission
Using appropriate examples from the business environment, critically evaluate the relationship between Strategic Leadership and Human Resource Management covering learning outcomes 1-4
Learning Outcomes:
1. Establish a critical knowledge and understanding of theories, concepts and models relating to leadership and management, strategic thinking and strategic leadership.
2. Critically evaluate examples of effective and ineffective leadership.
3. Define and critically consider the relationship between Human Resource Management and the development of strategic leadership, within organisations.
4. To critically evaluate and discuss the role of human resources in the development of organisational strategy
In this report you must demonstrate:
Ø Critical knowledge and understanding of theories, concepts and models relating to strategy and leadership
Ø The ability to relate and define relationships between strategy and leadership
Ø The use of appropriate organisational examples to evidence your discussion
Marking Grid
Students Number
|
|
A+ 80-90
Excellent |
A 70-79
Very good |
B 60-69
Good |
C 50-59
Satisfactory |
F-Narrow Fail 40-49
|
F (20-39) |
|
Knowledge and understanding
|
Command of the topic, creativity, perception and insight, all suggesting that work should be published in an academic forum |
Demonstrates command of the topic by showing unusual creativity, perception and insight – a serious contribution to the academic debate |
Outstanding selection that makes a substantial contribution to the academic debate |
Understanding of contemporary academic debate, with some creative input |
Descriptive while demonstrating reasonable understanding |
Limited/poor understanding demonstrated
Any creative input is somewhat off the point |
|
Content/ Exploration of theories/ideas |
Outstanding selection that makes a substantial contribution to academic debate
|
Outstanding selection from a wide relevant and innovative range of perspectives and sources |
Selection from a wide and relevant range of perspectives and sources that draws upon contemporary academic debate |
Relevant selection from a good and relevant range of perspectives and sources
Sources mostly well-integrated into the overall argument |
Relevant but not wide selection from a reasonable range of sources |
Some/minimal relevant sources and limited topic coverage |
|
Analysis/
Synthesis
|
Outstanding use of source material
Excellent argument that is of the highest academic quality |
Sources very well integrated into the overall argument
Clear , well structured argument that is well crafted and cogent |
Sources well-integrated into the overall argument
Clear, cogent and well-structured argument |
Mostly clear, cogent and well-structured argument |
Sources sometimes properly integrated into the argument
Some tendencies towards a clear and cogent argument |
Sources only occasionally/not at all integrated into the argument
Some/minimal structure and agrument present |
|
Critical engagement and analysis
|
Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question, to a high degree of excellence |
Critical distance and outstanding analysis of the question |
Critical distance and sound analysis of the question |
Demonstrates criticality and generally good analysis |
Some successful analysis with a tendency to accept the source material at face value |
Limited/poor analysis and criticality with reliance on limited sources |
|
Technical skills /referencing |
Referencing impeccable using appropriate conventions
Virtually no errors in grammar/spelling/syntax |
Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions
Virtually no errors in grammar/spelling/syntax |
Referencing clear and accurate using appropriate conventions
Near perfect
grammar/spelling/syntax, with only a few errors |
Referencing clear and mostly accurate using appropriate conventions
Good grammar/spelling/syntax with some errors |
References adequate but clearer and/or more references needed.
Reasonable grammar/spelling/syntax but with several errors |
References limited/inappropriate
Many errors in grammar/spelling/syntax making it difficult or impossible to read |
