Career Development Plan (15%) UCW Individual assignment
OBHR Comparative Case Study (20%)
Individual assignment
Due: Week 11
Prepare a 1500-word comparative case study. Adhere to the following format while preparing the case study.
Choose two well documented case studies of different organizations.
One case study should be based on success story like Apple, Google, Microsoft.
Other case study should focus on organizational failure/project failure etc. like Blueberry, Nokia, Yahoo.
Analyze the organizational structure and culture for both organizations.
What is the mode of communication adopted by both organizations? How do employees interact with each other?
What kind of leadership style these organizations prefer/follow? What is the management style of both organizations?
Explain how the organizational culture, structure and management style effects/relates to the success and failure of the organization?
What is the HR Strategic planning, recruitment and selection strategy, performance/ talent management strategy of both the organizations?
Based on the analysis performed propose suggestions and recommendations (5-6) based on the OBHR concepts learned in the course for both organizations.
Report Requirements
The report must include a title page, table of contents, introduction, multiple supporting body paragraphs, conclusion and list of references.
Students must use a minimum of 10 references. All references must come from peer-reviewed academic journals (UCW University Library); additional references may be from trade and practitioner publications or online search engines.
Students must use APA format when citing literature.
Students are encouraged to use Grammarly to avoid plagiarism. If plagiarism is identified in the paper, the student will receive a zero for the assignment.
Do not exceed the word-limit. Marks will be deducted for excessive length.
APA writing conventions should be followed in the report with a minimum of ten (10) sources referenced and cited including in-text citations (if you are presenting another author’s ideas in your own language you still have to provide the in-text citation of that author), references in APA format, the report must demonstrate analysis of the material and its application to the workplace. Title of the company cannot be your report title due to copyright reasons.
The submission date is mentioned in the course schedule (i.e., week 11) in course syllabus. All submissions will be made on Moodle. Please note that assignment submissions are ONLY accepted on Moodle and NOT on email. Kindly rename your assignment file by your respective name before you upload. For example, if John Smith is submitting his assignment his assignment file name should be “Johnsmith”.
The report will be graded from 20% as per the rubric mentioned below.
Appendix – A
Assessment Rubric for OBHR Comparative Case Study
1-4 Scale |
| |||||||||||
Percentage Score | Weight | 0-59 | 60-67 | 68-71 | 72-75 | 76-79 | 80-84 | 85-89 | 90-100 | |||
Grades | F | C | B- | B | B+ | A- | A | A+ | ||||
Mastery Level | Beginning | Developing | Competent | Mastery | ||||||||
Standard Level | Below Standard | Approaching Standard | At Standard | Exceeds Standard | ||||||||
Executive Summary/ | 5 | Executive summary or Abstract missing or poorly constructed | Executive summary or Abstract inadequate | Executive Summary or Abstract Executed Adequately | Executive Summary or Abstract Executed in Superior Fashion | |||||||
Problem Identification & Scope | 10 | Shows little understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. | Shows some understanding of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. | Shows adequate knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. | Shows superior knowledge of the issues, key problems, and the company’s present situation and strategic issues. | |||||||
Content | 10 | Does not address the case question with little relevant evidence (e.g., details, examples, facts, and expert opinions) Central idea and clarity of purpose are absent or incompletely expressed and maintained Lacks most of the necessary case parts Does not comments on (/evaluates) the differences | Not all the major similarities and / or differences have been a (e.g., details, examples, facts, and expert opinions) Includes only a few of the necessary case parts Central idea and clarity of purpose are expressed though perhaps too vaguely or broadly Only minimally comments on (/evaluates) the differences | Generally, addresses the case question by providing most major similarities and / or differences but loses focus at times by focusing on minor details Uses a few details, examples, facts, and expert opinions to elaborate on similarities and / or differences Includes most of the necessary case parts Comments on (/evaluates) some of the differences | Addresses the case question by providing all major similarities and / or differences Uses some details, examples, facts, and expert opinions) to elaborate on the similarities and / or differences Includes all the case parts Comments on (/evaluates) the differences | |||||||
Case Analysis | 15 | Analysis of case poor analysis of issues of the case, supporting detail is incorrect or missing. No use of material from the textbook and course. | Analysis of case shows inadequate levels of analysis of issues of the case, provides little supporting detail. Some material from the textbook and course was used. | Analysis of case shows adequate levels of analysis of issues of the case, provides supporting details. Good use of material from the textbook and course. | Analysis of case shows superior levels of analysis of underlying issues that are not necessarily readily apparent, uses appropriate levels of supporting detail. Substantial use of material from the textbook, library, and course. | |||||||
Recommendation and Conclusions | 10 | Recommendations and/or plans of action provided that are mostly incorrect or absent. No use of material from the textbook and course. | Recommendations and/or plans of action provided that are partially correct, alternate viewpoints not considered. Some material from the textbook and course was used. | Specific recommendations and/or plans of action provided that are substantially correct, alternate viewpoints may be considered. Good use of material from the textbook and course. | Specific recommendations and/or plans of action provided that go beyond the expected scope of the case fully supported by data, alternate viewpoints fully considered. Substantial use of material from the textbook, library, and course. | |||||||
Organization & Critical Thinking |
|
| ||||||||||
Coherence, Cohesion, organization, demonstration of thought process, analysis of problem using own thoughts and ideas | 20 | Similarities and differences have been clearly organized using either the block or thematic method. Very clear relationship between ideas Accurate use of connectors Accurate use of pronouns Clear match between the topic sentence, supporting sentences and concluding sentence in each body paragraph | Similarities and differences are organized generally clearly using the block or thematic method but one of the paragraphs may cover more than one main idea Generally clear relationship between ideas Mostly correct use of connectors. Mostly correct use of pronouns The topic sentence, supporting sentences and concluding sentence (if any) support one main idea. | Similarities and differences are organized generally clearly using the block or thematic method but one of the paragraphs may cover more than one main idea Generally clear relationship between ideas Mostly correct use of connectors. Mostly correct use of pronouns The topic sentence, supporting sentences and concluding sentence (if any) support one main idea. | Similarities and differences have been clearly organized using either the block or thematic method. Very clear relationship between ideas Accurate use of connectors Accurate use of pronouns Clear match between the topic sentence, supporting sentences and concluding sentence in each body paragraph | |||||||
Style & Mechanics |
|
| ||||||||||
APA | 10 | 7th Ed. APA Manual is not followed or there are significant errors in: | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with significant errors in: | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with minor errors in: | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with no errors including: | |||||||
Grammar/Punctuation/Spelling | 10 | Grammar and sentence structure has major problems following standard English rules and reads with difficulty with major errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure has problems following standard English rules and reads with some difficulty with errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure mostly follows standard English rules and reads reasonably well with few errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure follows standard English rules and reads well with excellent punctuation and spelling | |||||||
Readability & Style | 10 | Sentences are lacking in completeness, clearness, conciseness and are not well-structured. | Sentences need to be more complete, clear, concise and well-constructed. | Sentences are mostly complete, clear, concise and well-constructed. | Sentences are consistently complete, clear, concise and well-constructed with strong, varied structure. | |||||||
Marks | 100 | Additional Comments |