MGT600_Assessment 2_Case Study.docx Page 1 of 8
ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT600 Management, People and Teams
Assessment Case Study
Length Up to 3000 words
Learning Outcomes a) Critically assess the key principles and theories underlying strategic people management and explain how their application enhances organisational and individual performance.
b) Critically evaluate the effectiveness of different approaches and the relationships between effective people management and organisational performance.
c) Demonstrate effective communication and practical problem-solving skills to effectively manage people in a range of organisational contexts
d) Critically reflect on the roles and functions that managers perform in the context of the challenges and risks they have to address in the changing environment.
Module 4.2 (week 8)
Total Marks 40 marks
Though challenging, group assignments are designed to reflect the reality of the workplace.
In this instance, people coming together to contribute knowledge, experience and skills to
produce a desired outcome.
This assessment encourages students to develop their knowledge in relation to the key topics
of attracting, developing and retaining employees, teamwork, performance management,
team development and change management.
Students will be allocated into groups by the learning facilitator. The group will work
together to analyse the given company and provide recommendations to improve on
attracting, developing and retaining employees, teamwork, performance management and
MGT600_Assessment 2_Case Study.docx Page 2 of 8
Your group is from a well-regarded consultancy firm and has been engaged by your client,
ComSyst Technologies (CST) to provide advice on addressing a variety of challenges.
CST is a multi-national communications software and systems developer serving the defence
and emergency services industries. CST has offices in Australia, New Zealand, the United
States, Philippines, India and South Korea.
CST has recently lost three major tenders to competitors and their market share has
declined substantially in the last two years. This has been attributed to some significant
people related issues including poor employee performance, low employee engagement, a
decline in staff retention and resignations of some key specialists. Technological
advancements elsewhere have highlighted a gap in CST’s technical skills and capabilities.
Your brief from the client is to prepare a report with recommendations to achieve the
following objectives over the next two years:
1. Ensure CST is well positioned for the future by attracting and retaining the best
2. Create a team based high performance culture
3. Build employee capability and performance
To address these objectives your consulting team will need to draw on content from
modules two, three and four. Some consideration may need to be given to other module
content if deemed relevant. It is also expected that groups conduct research beyond the
resources provided on the subject site
For each of the objectives mentioned above, you must include at least one real world
example / case study from the literature of how other organisations have successfully
achieved the same or similar.
Your group must prepare a business style report for the Chief Executive and Board of
ComSyst Technologies. Whilst the format may vary, it must include the following:
? Cover page
? Executive Summary
? Table of Contents
? Main Discussion
MGT600_Assessment 2_Case Study.docx Page 3 of 8
You may make any necessary assumptions; however, any significant assumptions should be
detailed in your report.
Groups will be assessed against the learning rubric below.
Teamwork and group participation will constitute 20% of the mark for the assignment for
each member of the group.
Group participation will be determined as follows:
? Each participant in the team will evaluate the other member’s contribution using a
participation score matrix (see Appendix 1 Team Participation Score Matrix)
? Each participant is to assess their peers according to the Peer Evaluation Grading
Scheme (see Appendix 2)
? Each participant is also required to complete a self-review using the score/rate found
in the Team Participation Score matrix.
? The score matrix will be individually submitted to the Facilitator at the same time as
the group (collective) report submission.
? The Facilitator will take into consideration the average “team participation score” for
each member to determine the weighted ‘Teamwork’ criterion rows in the final
marking rubric for this assessment (see below).
? All peer evaluations are confidential and individual rankings will not be released to
other members of the group.
? Failure to submit a self-review and peer review correctly, or at all, will result is zero
grading for this assessment criteria.
? Groups should refer to the marking rubric to ensure all the assessment criteria are
You must recognise all sources of information; including images that you can include in your
work. Reference your work according to the APA 6th edition guidelines. Please see more
information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
o Each group is to submit one final Case Study submission into Assessment 2
submission link in the Assessment section found in the main navigation menu of the
subject Blackboard site. A rubric will be attached to the assessment.
o Each student is to submit a completed team participation score matrix document in
Assessment 2 review submission link.
MGT600_Assessment 2_Case Study.docx Page 4 of 8
The Assessment 2 Case Study assignment and individual Team Participation Score
documents are to be submitted at the same time for the facilitator to finalise grading for
this assessment. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the
LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Team Participation Score Matrix
a) Individually, each team member will assign a “teamwork” score (from 1-5) for other
members of the team/group using a participation score matrix attached to the
b) You will need to assign yourself a participation score.
c) The score matrix will be individually submitted to the Facilitator at the same time as
the group (collective) report submission.
d) The Facilitator will use the average “teamwork” score for each member in
considering the weighted teamwork or group participation contribution to their final
Member Name/ID Maximum Teamwork Mark (%)
Average Participation Score (1-5)2 10
MGT600_Assessment 2_Case Study.docx Page 5 of 8
Peer Evaluation Grading Scheme
5 Builds team’s identity and commitment Leads team Evaluates teams’ outcomes Implements strategies for enhancing team effectiveness
4 Understands group dynamics and team roles Facilitates team development Renegotiates responsibilities, tasks and schedules to meet needed change
3 Contributes to small group discussions to reach agreement on issues Works together with others towards shared goals Renegotiates responsibilities to meet needed change
2 Participates effectively in teams Identifies team and individual goals, tasks, responsibilities and schedules Contributes to group processes Supports the team
1 Does not participate effectively in a team environment Places individual goals ahead of the group responsibility Hinders the group process and upsets the schedule
MGT600_Assessment 2_ Case Study Page 6 of 8
Learning Rubric: Assessment 2 Case Study
Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable)
High Distinction (Exceptional)
Knowledge and understanding (technical and theoretical knowledge) Understands theoretical models and concepts Percentage for this criterion 25%
Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Application of knowledge to practise Shows a clear understanding of the practical application and
Limited understanding of the internal and external business environment. Uses a limited range of information as the basis
Understands the internal and external business environment including commercial context and market forces. Accesses relevant information.
Understands the impact of financial, social, political, environmental issues on the business. Understands the business.
Evaluates the impact of financial, social, political, environmental issues on the business; and where relevant, as they relate to different countries where the business may operate.
Demonstrates cultural sensitivity. Analyses the impact of financial, social, political, environmental issues on the business; and where relevant, as they relate to
MGT600_Assessment 2_ Case Study Page 7 of 8
implications of key concepts and principles Percentage for this criterion 25%
of recommended practice.
Adequately utilises information from a variety of sources.
Can prepare and presents business cases/proposals.
Understands the business and its risks. Can prepare and presents business cases/proposals.
different countries where the business may operate.
Holistic understanding of business and its risks. Assesses the impact of information and communication systems on the operations of the business.
Effective Communication Well-structured report with clear flow of ideas Percentage for this criterion 20%
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence. Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence. Demonstrates cultural sensitivity.
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic, demonstrates high levels of cultural sensitivity Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi-media.
MGT600_Assessment 2_ Case Study Page 8 of 8
Team Work Contributes effectively to the team by meeting responsibilities, encouraging and supporting others Percentage for this criterion 20%
Does not participate effectively in a team environment. Places individual goals ahead of the group responsibility. Hinders the group process and upsets the schedule.
Participates effectively in teams. Identifies team and individual goals, tasks, responsibilities and schedules. Contributes to group processes. Supports the team.
Contributes to small group discussions to reach agreement on issues. Works together with others towards shared goals. Renegotiates responsibilities to meet needed change.
Understands group dynamics and team roles. Facilitates team development.
Renegotiates responsibilities, tasks and schedules to meet needed change.
Builds team’s identity and commitment. Leads teams. Evaluates teams’ outcomes. Implements strategies for enhancing team effectiveness.
Correct citation of key resources and evidence
Professional presentation, well written and meeting APA guidelines for referencing Percentage for this criterion
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence
Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence