Faculty of Social Sciences – Assessment Brief for Students – 2018/19
Module code and title
4HR018 Organisational Structures for Effective Management
Module leader
Kevin Willmore
Diet First Attempt
Assessment type
PowerPoint Presentation – Small Groups comprising 3 students
Submission date
PowerPoint Presentations to be uploaded by 23.59 on 8th November 2018.
Submission method
Copy of PowerPoint slides with notes to be submitted via Canvas.
Assessment limits
8 to 10 slides, with 1000 word =/- 10% accompanying notes
Assessment weighting
50% - This assignment focusses on Learning outcomes 1 & 2.
Assessment brief (if appropriate, please refer to module assessment briefing document)
Assessment 1:
For this assignment you are required to work in groups of 3.
You have recently started a new job in an organisation which is currently considering the possibility of restructuring in the near future. Your manager is aware that you are studying for your degree in Business and Management and feels that you have the knowledge to develop a presentation suitable for delivery to groups of managers across the organisation.
You have been tasked by your manager to produce a PowerPoint Presentation suitable for delivery to a panel of middle managers. You will not be required to verbally present your PowerPoint, but you should ensure that it is suitable for your manager to use to present to their team, when required. Your PowerPoint must therefore include notes using the facility within PowerPoint to follow up on the detail in your slides.
Your PowerPoint should focus on two themes:
• Discusses the historical and theoretical basis of organisational structure
• Analyses the relationship between organisational structure and business strategy
Your Presentation should be designed to last for 15 minutes, and consist of a minimum of 8 slides, and a maximum of 10 (including a reference list). Each of the slides should have accompanying notes, a maximum of 100 words for each slide. Your final slide, should provide a reference list, identifying the sources of information used in your PowerPoint Slides, you must use academic sources and not general websites. Your reference list should use the Harvard Referencing System.
The Presentation should have two main sections addressing the two key areas identified above and should reflect on theory and with clear links being made to literature to support your response.
You should ensure that you:
• Present your answer to the assignment in the form of a PowerPoint presentation
• Your Presentation should answer the two themes using the main relevant theories
• You are required to use ‘notes’ facility on PowerPoint to support the delivery of the presentation, a maximum of 100 words per slide +/- 10%
• Read around the topic and include a range of academic sources
• The PowerPoint must be fully referenced using the Harvard Referencing System and a Reference List provided as the final slide of your presentation
• Ensure that your presentation is designed to include a minimum of 8 slides and a maximum of 10.
• Refer to the attached assessment criteria and performance descriptors so that you are clear about what is assessed in relation to this assignment

In your PowerPoint you should focus on:
• The importance of organisational structure: links to organisational theory; Henri Fayol, Synergy, specialisation; links made to American and European approaches
• Formal organisational structures: line, line and staff, matrix, team; mechanistic versus organic; centralised versus decentralised; flat versus tall
• Informal organisational structures: difference between formal and informal structure; benefits, e.g. promote communication, provide satisfaction, provide social control; potential drawbacks, e.g. resistance to change, role conflict, lack of control over information of informal structure
• Organisational effectiveness: achievement of objectives, efficiency, sustainability, growth, competitive advantage, reputation, influence, external benchmarking
.
Assessment Criteria (The actual assessment components for this assignment)
Criteria Weighting (If applicable)
Discuss the historical and theoretical basis of organisational structure
40%
Analyse the relationship between organisational structure and business strategy
40%
Demonstrate wider reading evidenced by references from a range of relevant sources.
The presentation should be conducted in a professional business style and the
PowerPoint should be free from errors in relation to grammar and spelling.
20%
Pass mark
Undergraduate 40%

Performance descriptors in use;
• University of Wolverhampton Yes
• Professional or Statutory Body No
• Module specific Yes
• Other (specify below) No
Return of assessments
(Instructions for return / collection of assessments)
Feedback will be provided electronically via CANVAS.
This assessment is testing Module Learning outcomes Tick if tested here
LO1 Demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the historical development
and theoretical basis relating to organisational structure

v
LO2 Develop a sound analysis and evaluation of the relationship between the
structure of organisations and the business strategy

v
Additional information for students
The University’s Learning Information Services have produced a series of guides covering a range of topics to support your studies, and develop your academic skills including a guide to academic referencing http://www.wlv.ac.uk/lib/skills_for_learning/study_guides.aspx
Your module guide and course handbook contain additional and important information regarding;
• The required referencing style for your assignment.*
Whilst many modules require referencing in accordance with the Harvard Referencing convention, some modules – for example those within the School of Law – require Oxford Referencing. Please familiarise yourself with the requirements of your module.
• Submission of your work
• Marking, feedback and moderation in accordance with the University of Wolverhampton Assessment Handbook
• Extensions on submission dates *
• Additional support *
• Academic conduct with regards to cheating, collusion or plagiarism *
• Links to appropriate sources of relevant information *
* Further information regarding these and other policies can be accessed through your student portal on wlv.ac.uk.
Always keep a copy of your work and a file of working papers
The requirement to keep a file of working papers is important. There may be circumstances where it is difficult to arrive at a mark for your work. If this is the case, you may be asked to submit your file and possibly meet with your tutor to answer questions on your submission.
When you submit your work you will be required to sign an important declaration confirming that:
• The submission is your own work
• Any material you have used has been acknowledged and appropriately referenced
• You have not allowed another student to have access to your work
• The work has not been submitted previously.
The following information is important when:
• Preparing for your assignment
• Checking your work before you submit it
• Interpreting feedback on your work after marking.
Module Learning Outcomes
Module Learning Outcomes are specific to this module, and are set when the module was validated.
Assessment Criteria
The module Learning Outcomes tested by this assignment, and precise criteria against which your work will be marked are outlined in your assessment brief.
Performance Descriptors
Performance descriptors indicate how marks will be arrived at against each of the assessment criteria. The descriptors indicate the likely characteristics of work that is marked within the percentage bands indicated.
To help you further:
• Re-sit opportunities are available for students who are unable to take the first sit opportunity, or who need to re take any component.
• Refer to the VLE topic for contact details of your module leader / tutor, tutorial inputs, recommended reading and other sources, etc. Resit details will also appear on the VLE module topic.
• The University’s Learning Information Services offer support and guidance to help you with your studies and develop your academic skills http://www.wlv.ac.uk/lib/skills_for_learning/study_guides.aspx

Performance Descriptors – Level 4
Assessment criteria A (70-100%)
Work of an outstanding, excellent and very good standard.
B (60-69%)
Work of a good standard. C (50-59%)
Work of a competent standard. D (40-49%)
Work of a satisfactory standard to pass. E (30-39%)
Work of an unsatisfactory standard * F (0-29%)
No learning outcomes fully met.
Level of research and range of additional material used.
Evidence of use of independent reading with the use of a variety of relevant and up to date source materials. Excellent understanding of relevant organisational theory which is effectively linked to the topic. Some evidence of reading outside the recommended reading list and is beyond classroom notes. All significant content accurate. A good understanding is demonstrated of the background reading and links are made to the topic. Content relevant to the question/task. Reading based on main texts or materials, but not always utilized in supporting argument. A limited range of sources of wider reading is used, with some links made between reading and the topic. Limited reading only; mostly just class notes. Only a few sources used and those taken from materials provided in class. Material merely repeats taught input. Too little evidence of reading, from class notes or outside. Limited analysis of sources. Failure to answer the question as set. Little/no attempt to address the assignment brief or learning outcomes or to engage with module materials. No evidence of reading or analysis of sources. Failure to answer the question as set.
Identification and analysis of key issues A clear understanding of organisational theory. An effective identification of the key issues, which are then related effectively to the question and used to provide full answers to all parts of the assignment. supported throughout by theory. Good understanding of a range of organisational theory and issues are demonstrated.
Full identification of key issues, which are analysed in a thorough way.
A good level of application of theory to support answers which are of a good overall standard. Competent understanding of organisational theory and their application to the assignment questions. Competent identification of most key issues which are discussed. A range of relevant theory competently applied to support answers in most places Basic understanding of organisational theory . Some key issues identified but discussed in a predominantly descriptive rather than analytical way. Limited relevant theory applied to support the answers.
Lacks understanding of basic organisational theory and concepts. Few key issues identified. Wholly descriptive.
No evidence of examination or application of theory. Failure to answer the question as set. Inadequate/no demonstration of knowledge or understanding of key organisational theories. Wholly descriptive and lacking in theory. Failure to answer the question as set.
Application of theory to the case study materials Focused and detailed links are made between the case study information and relevant theory. Good levels of analysis relating the connection between theory and case study examples in all areas. Draws effective conclusions from wider reading and the information provided. Clear links made between the case study information and relevant theory. Good level of analysis between organisational theory and case study examples in most areas. Draws good and clear conclusions from wider reading and information provided. Sound links made between the case study information and relevant theory. Competent level of analysis between theory and case study examples in key areas. Draws sound conclusions from reading key sources and information provided. Some links made between the case study information and limited relevant theory. Very little analysis of theory and case study examples, the writing is mostly descriptive and repeats the case study details. Draws limited and obvious conclusions from reading of narrow range of sources. One or two links made between the case study information and theory. No critical evaluation, wholly descriptive and assertions made without substantiation. No meaningful conclusions drawn. Failure to answer the question as set. No evidence of theory to link to the case study. Wholly descriptive and no attempt made to engage with the topic. Failure to answer the question as set.
Structure of argument, clarity of writing and Harvard referencing All arguments are analysed with effective conclusions provided and overall the structure is clear and well laid out. A clear and accurate writing style. Very few errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax evident. Harvard referencing all present and correct both within the assignment and in the reference list Most arguments are analysed, a range of appropriate idea and conclusions offered and a clear structure and writing style. Minor repeated errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax evident. Minor errors in Harvard referencing, or some omissions both within the assignment and in the reference list Key arguments are analysed, and conclusions drawn and presented. Structure and writing style clear. Repeated errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax evident. Repeated errors and/or omissions in Harvard referencing both within the assignment and in the reference list Limited evidence of analysis, some obvious insights offered. Structure is muddled, or writing style lacking in coherence. Regular or frequently repeated errors in in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax evident. Significant repeated errors and/or omissions in Harvard referencing both within the assignment and in the reference list Little or no evidence of analysis and limited insights or conclusions drawn. Lack of structure, poor writing style with extensive errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Harvard references negligible or missing in either the assignment and/or in the reference list No evidence of engaging with the assignment materials, content unclear due to poor structure and writing style with extensive errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation and syntax. Harvard references missing in either the assignment and/or in the reference list