1  

MGT1FOM  S2  2013    Review  of  the  Management  Literature  Assessment  Rubric      

All  Subject  Instances  

Section  1  -­‐  Detailed  Explanation  

Pre-­‐conditions  for  submitting  the  Management  Literature  Review  item  in  MGT1FOM:  

1) The  item  must  be  structured  in  essay  format  and  comprise  an  Introduction,  Main  Body  and  Conclusion.  

2) The   item   must   have   clearly   identifiable   paragraphs   that   respond   to   the   review   question  chosen  by  the  candidate.  

3) The  item  must  be  correctly  referenced,  punctuated,  expressed,  and  written   in  the  medium  of  English.  

4) The   item   must   reference   at   least   ten   scholarly   works   from   peer   reviewed   journals.   It   is  strongly  recommended  the  paper  demonstrates  a  reading  of  Wren,  D.  (any  edition).  There  is  no   maximum   limit   on   references   to   be   included   in   the   paper.   In   this   exercise,   a  demonstration   of   competence   may   include   three   (as   a   general   rule)   references   per  paragraph,   and  would   typically   have   between   five   and   seven  main   body   paragraphs.   The  word  limit  is  1500  words  (excluding  bibliography  and  quotations).  Whilst  examiners  will  be  provided  with  a  word  count  via  Turn-­‐it-­‐In,  no  penalty  will  be  offered  for  overweight  papers;  those  exceeding  1500  words  WILL  NOT  ENCOURAGE  a  higher  assessment.  

This   item  of  assessment   is  designed  to  have  the  candidate  demonstrate  an  understanding  of  their  chosen  topic   in  some  depth,   in   addition   to   developing   and   demonstrating   skills   in   information   literacy,   research   ability,   focused   inquiry   and  critical   thinking.     The   literature   review,   this   semester,  offers  alternative  questions   to  provide  candidates  with  a  point  of  focus.  Candidates  must  choose  ONE  QUESTION  ONLY.  These  are:    

Provide  a  detailed  literature  review  and  discuss  with  reference  to  the  theorists  you  have  considered  in  your  tutorials  and  key  academic  studies  in  this  area.  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   OR  

Define   trust   and   the   psychological   contract.   Explain   the   critical   nature   of   the   psychological   contract   between   the  organisation   and   its   employees.   Identify   how   managers   may   reinforce   or   break   the   psychological   contract   in   their  interactions  with  their  subordinates.  Does  a  clearly  understood  psychological  contract   result   in  higher  team  performance  levels?  Provide  a  detailed  literature  review  and  discuss  with  reference  to  the  theorists  you  have  considered  in  your  tutorials  and  key  academic  studies  in  this  area.  

 

The   literature   review   involves   choosing   one   of   the   topics   from   the   above   and   then   selecting,   at   least   ten   refereed  academic   journal   articles   relevant   to   the   topic.   As   a   starting   point,   students   may   use   choose   to   use   (but   not   limit  themselves  to):  

Academy of Management Journal Harvard Business Review Academy of Management Review Journal of Management Administrative Science Quarterly Journal of Management Studies Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources Management Science British Journal of Industrial Relations Organization Science British Journal of Management Organization Studies California Management Review Strategic Management Journal  

-­‐ Students  must  draw  only  on  academic  sources  (Wren  D.  A.  The  Evolution  of  Management  Thought  (any  edition)  and  scholarly  journal  articles)  to  inform  their  review.    

-­‐ Students  must  identify  key  academic  studies  relevant  to  the  chosen  topic  and  summarise  the  key  findings  in  the  literature  to  illuminate  a  response  to  the  question.    

2  

-­‐ Note:  not  all  studies  will  produce  similar  findings.  So,  students  must  identify  and  summarise  the  main  threads  in  the   literature   by   grouping   studies   together   that   have   similar   findings.   This   will   demonstrate   your   ability   to  analyse  and  synthesise  large  amounts  of  complex  information.  Students  must  explain  their  research  findings  and  establish   consistent   definitions   for   key   variables,   as   different   researchers  may   use   different   terminology.   For  

 define  these  terms.  Further  terminology  will  be  become  apparent  as  you  conduct  your  search.  You  should  clearly  outline  the  reasons  for  your  definitions  in  your  literature  review.    

How  the  rubric  works:  

Your  examiner  will  assess  your  paper  against  the  specific  criteria  shown  in  the  tables  below.  Papers  will   typically   fall   within   the   categories   below.   The  more   comprehensive   a   paper,  when  measured  against  the  criteria,  the  higher  the  mark  likely  to  be  awarded.  You  will  note  that  we  have  provided  an  indicative  maximum  mark  in  the  far  right-­‐hand  column  of  the  rubric.  Your  examiner  is  not  bound  to  these  (or  any)  marks,  but  may  award  above  or  below  the  range  against  the  criterion.  When  this  takes  place,   the  examiner  will   provide  appropriate   commentary  on   the  assessment   sheet  as   to  why   the  mark  has  moved  beyond  the  typical  range.  

In  addition,   the  examiner  has  a  number  of  discretionary  marks,  and   these  may  be  awarded   in   the  Final  Comment  area.      The  rubric  may  be  found  in  the  next  section.  

 

-­‐-­‐  End  of  Section  -­‐-­‐  

   

3  

MGT1FOM  S2  2013    Review  of  the  Management  Literature  Assessment  Rubric  

Last  Name:   First  Name:  

Student  Number:   Email:  

  Criterion  1    The  Theorists  and  Concepts  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks   Max  Mark  

1.1   The  paper  comprehensively  refers  to  a  number  of  key  management  theorists  and  comprehensively  explains  their  theories.  

  4.5  

1.2   The  paper   effectively   references   to  a  number  of   key  management   theorists   and  effectively  explains  their  theories.  

  3.5  

1.3   The  paper  adequately  references  to  a  number  of  key  management  theorists  and  adequately  explains  their  theories.  

  2.5  

1.4   The   paper   does   not   adequately   reference   to   a   number   of   key   management  theorists,  nor  does  it  explain  their  theories.  

  1  

  Criterion  2    Reference  to  the  Academic  Literature  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks  

Max  Mark  

2.1   The   paper   comprehensively   references   the   academic   literature,   drawing   from   a  range  of  high  level  sources.  

  4.5  

2.2   The  paper  effectively  identifies  key  segments  of  the  academic  literature,  drawing  from  a  range  of  high  level  sources.  

  3.5  

2.3   The  paper  adequately  refers  to  a  number  of  sources  in  the  academic  literature.     2.5  

2.4   The  paper  does  not  adequately  refer  to  the  academic  literature.     1  

  Criterion  3    Analysis  of  the  Body  of  Knowledge  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks  

Max  Mark  

3.1   The   paper   comprehensively   gathers   and   analyses   the   body   of   knowledge   in  relation  to  the  chosen  question.  

  4.5  

3.2   The  paper  effectively  gathers  and  analyses  the  body  of  knowledge   in  relation  to  the  chosen  question.  

  3.5  

3.3   The  paper  adequately  gathers  and  analyses  the  body  of  knowledge  in  relation  to  the  chosen  question.  

  2.5  

3.4   The   paper   does   not   adequately   gather   or   analyse   the   body   of   knowledge   in  relation  to  the  chosen  question.  

  1  

        -­‐-­‐  Criterion  4  Over  Page-­‐-­‐                      

4  

  Criterion  4    Response  to  the  Question  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks   Max  Mark  

4.1   The   paper   comprehensively   responds   to   the   question   providing   a   detailed   and  supported  response  through  the  literature.  

  4.5  

4.2   The   paper   effectively   responds   to   the   question   providing   a   reasonable   and  defensible  response  through  the  literature.  

  3.5  

4.3   The  paper  adequately  responds  to  the  question  providing  a  response  through  the  literature.  

  2.5  

4.4   The   paper   does   not   respond   effectively   to   the   question   nor   does   it   provide   a  supported  response  through  the  literature.  

  1  

  Criterion  5    Functional  Referencing  Style  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks   Max  Mark  

5.1   The  paper  has  consistently  used  the  Harvard  Referencing  Style  throughout.     4.5  

5.2   The   paper   has   used   the  Harvard   Referencing   Style   throughout   though   at   times  lacks  consistency.  

  3.5  

5.3   The  paper  has  consistently  used  a  referencing  style  throughout,  but  this  style  has  not  been  Harvard.  

  2.5  

5.4   The  paper  has  not  used  a  recognised  or  pass-­‐worthy  referencing  style.     1  

  Criterion  6    Language  and  Structure  -­‐  This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks   Max  Mark  

6.1   The  paper   is   correctly   and   consistently   expressed,   it   is   consistently   punctuated,  and  it  demonstrates  a  structure  that  leads  the  examiner  to  its  conclusions.    

  4.5  

6.2   The   paper   is   generally   well   expressed,   competently   punctuated,   and   it  demonstrates  a  structure  that  leads  the  examiner  to  its  conclusions.  

  3.5  

6.3   The   paper   is   adequately   expressed,   it   demonstrates   punctuation   and   structure  the   conclusions   are   evident,   however   numerous   grammatical,   punctuation   and  structural   errors   require   considerable   effort   on   the   part   of   the   examiner   to  interpret  the  message  within.  

  2.5  

6.4   The   paper   is   expressed   in   a   way   that   renders   it   difficult   to   interpret,   it   lacks  consistency  in  punctuation  and  has  no  evident  structure.  

  1  

Section  7    Final  Comment    This  section  has  a  value  of  5  marks.  

 

 

 

 Total  Marks:                                                                                                                                                                      Date: