ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT600 Management, People and Teams / MGMT6009 Managing People and Teams
Assessment Case Study Presentation and Summary Report
Length 5 minutes per person and 750-words report
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
a) Critically assess the key principles and theories underlying management to achieve high-performing organisations at projects, teams, and individual levels.
b) Critically evaluate and reflect on effective relationships between people and teams in organisations and projects.
c) Demonstrate effective communication and practical problemsolving skills to manage people in a range of complex contexts.
d) Critically reflect on the roles and functions that managers perform in the context of the challenges and risks in the changing global environment.
e) Develop and justify contemporary management strategies to address a variety of people management issues to ensure best practice and quality outcomes.
Submission 12-Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 5.1 (Week 9)
6-Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 5.1 (Week 5)
Total Marks 100 marks
Based on the case scenario provided, each group is required to submit a case study presentation and a summary report. In doing so, you need to utilise suitable models and frameworks to provide recommendations to achieve the case objectives. This will require the identification, evaluation, and justification of pragmatic approaches to management.
Please refer to the Instructions for details on how to complete this task.
Though challenging, group assignments are designed to reflect the reality of the workplace. In this instance, it is about people coming together to contribute knowledge, experience, and skills to produce a desired outcome. Such an activity hones your skills in teamwork, communication, project management and personal organisation. This assessment encourages you to develop and apply your knowledge in relation to the key topics of Recruitment and Selection, Managing Talent, Developing People and Teams, and Managing Change.
You will continue to work in the same group that you were in for Assessment 1. The group will work together to analyse the given case study and provide recommendations to address the stated objectives.
1. Case Scenario
• Your group is from a well-regarded consultancy firm and has been engaged by your client to provide advice on addressing a variety of challenges.
• Please read the attached MGT600-MGMT6009_Assessment 2_Case Scenario. This includes the details of your client and their challenges and objectives. Your brief from the client is to present your findings and recommendations to achieve key strategic objectives over the next two years.
2. Assessment Preparation
• To address the case objectives, your consulting team will need to draw upon content from Modules 2, 3, and 4.
• Please note that some consideration may need to be given to other module content if deemed relevant. It is also expected that groups conduct research using the module resources and beyond.
• For each of the objectives mentioned in the case scenario, you are required to include at least one real-world example from the literature of how other organisations have successfully achieved the same or similar. For each example, you should specify the organisation, the situation it faced, action taken, and outcomes achieved.
• Your assessment submission will be in two parts: an oral presentation and a summary report.
3. Oral Presentation
• The group presentation can be considered a pitch for your recommendations.
• This oral presentation should provide a short introduction, setting of the context and research. The major part of your presentation should focus on the findings, recommendations, and justification.
3. Summary Report
• As a group, you are also required to submit a 750-word summary report along with the presentation.
• Please structure the summary report as follows:
o Cover sheet: Student name, ID number, subject code and name, assessment number and title o Introduction: Outline the purpose and structure of your report.
o Approach (methodology): Briefly describe how you conducted your research.
o Main discussion: Key issues for consideration, findings, and supporting real-life examples o Recommendations: Provide a summary of your recommendations.
o Conclusion o Reference list o Appendices
• Please note that this is a short report with a word limit of 750. Therefore, it is important that you make use of tables, figures, and diagrams as these are not part of your word count.
• You may make any necessary assumptions but ensure that you explain the assumptions in your report.
4. Peer Evaluation
Group participation constitutes 20% of the final mark for Assessment 3.
Participation will be determined as follows:
• Each student in the team will evaluate the other members’ contributions using a participation score matrix (see Group Participation Score Matrix attached).
• Individually, each team member will assign a “Group participation score” (from 1–5) for each member of the group using the score matrix.
• Each student is to assess peers’ contributions according to the Peer Evaluation Grading Scheme.
• The participation score matrix submitted by each individual student via the Assessment 2 link at the same time as the final group digital presentation submission.
• The Facilitator will use the average “group participation score” for each member to determine the weighted ‘Teamwork’ criterion row in the final marking rubric for this assessment.
• All peer evaluation submissions are confidential and not viewed by the other team members.
5. You are strongly advised to read the rubric, which is an evaluation guide with criteria for grading your assignment–this will give you a clear picture of what a successful oral presentation and summary report looks like.
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. You are required to reference the graphics, diagrams, and models used in the presentation with the appropriate page numbers and text details. Please see more information on referencing here: Academic Skills webpage.
Graded submission – Group submission
Submit your group oral presentation and the summary report for Assessment 2 via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu in MGT600 Management, People, and Teams. Only one student needs to submit these on behalf of the group. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Peer Evaluation – Individual Submission
Each individual student is to submit a completed team participation score matrix document in the Assessment 2 – Peer Evaluation submission link.
Please submit a peer review correctly, as no submission may result is zero grading for this assessment criteria.
Note: All submissions (the group Summary Report and Peer Evaluation) must be in MS Word (.doc or .docx) format. and contain a signed cover sheet.
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard)
50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
75-84% High Distinction
Professional display of
Ease of delivery
Use of supportive tools and techniques
Percentage for this
criterion = 50%
Difficult for the audience to understand. No logical/clear structure; poor flow of ideas; argument lacks supporting evidence.
Specialised language and terminology is rarely or inaccurately employed.
Stilted, awkward, and/or oversimplified delivery. Limited use of engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture, eye contact, gestures, volume, pitch, and pace of voice).
Presentation aids are not employed or developed as directed.
Presentation is sometimes difficult to follow.
Information, arguments, and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Employs some specialised language and terminology with accuracy.
Correct, but often stilted or awkward delivery. Sometimes uses engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture, eye contact, gestures, volume, pitch, and pace of voice).
Employs basic but generally accurate presentation aids as directed. Several aspects require further refinement (e.g. amount of information, styling, editing).
Presentation is easy to follow. Information, arguments, and evidence are well presented; mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Accurately employs specialised language and terminology. Correct but occasionally stilted or awkward delivery.
Uses engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture, eye contact, gestures, volume, pitch, and pace of voice).
Employs clear and somewhat engaging presentation aids as directed. A few aspects require further refinement (e.g. amount of information, styling, editing). Engages audience interest. Information, arguments, and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear, and well supported by evidence.
Accurately employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. Clear and confident delivery.
Confidently and consistently uses a range of engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture, eye contact, expression, gestures, volume, pitch, pace of voice, stance, and movement).
Employs succinct, styled, and engaging presentation aids that incorporate a range of elements (graphics, multimedia, text, charts, etc.).
Engages and sustains audience interest. Expertly presented; presentation is logical, persuasive, well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Discerningly selects and precisely employs a wide
range of specialised language
and terminology. Clear, confident, and persuasive delivery.
Dynamic, integrated, and professional use of a wide range of engaging presentation techniques (e.g. posture, eye contact, expression, gestures, volume, pitch, pace of voice, stance, and movement).
Employs succinct, creative, and engaging presentation aids that effectively
integrate a wide range of elements (graphics, multimedia, text, charts, etc.).
Ability to synthesise and present information on the approach, key issues for considerations,
findings, and recommendations
Apply existing theoretical knowledge
to the case
Percentage for this criterion = 20%
Limited synthesis and
analysis. Limited application/recommendations based upon analysis.
Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge
with application. Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature.
Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and/or independently developed models.
Justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Highly sophisticated and creative analysis; synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and/or independently developed models.
Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applies knowledge to new situations / other cases.
Participation in team
Sense of connectedness and cohesion
Use of effective strategies to enhance togetherness, team
performance, and goals
Does not participate effectively in a team environment.
Team delivery is hampered by lack of cohesion with little or no evidence of handover or continuity.
Places individual goals ahead of the group responsibility. Hinders the group progress.
Participates effectively in teams.
Team delivery is stilted and disjointed with poor evidence of handover and lack of continuity.
Adequate contribution to group processes is evident within team delivery.
Supports the team.
Understands group dynamics and team roles and contributes as per requirement.
Team delivery largely flows, but there is evidence of some confusion or lack of preparedness.
Contribution to group processes are soundly Good team cohesion with clear understanding of handoffs and connections between areas of delivery.
Team delivery shows evidence of planning, clear roles, and areas of responsibility. Group contributions are well delivered with some evidence of overlap in Team has a strong sense of bonhomie, connectedness, and mutual engagement.
Team delivery reflects a high degree of mutual engagement.
Team members are able to respond and navigate across the information being delivered and
Percentage for this
criterion = 20%
evidenced with small glitches in delivery.
Renegotiates responsibilities to meet needed change. understanding into adjacent areas of knowledge.
responsibilities, tasks, and schedules to meet needed change. demonstrate synergy of delivery.
Implements strategies for
enhancing team togetherness and effectiveness.
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
Use of credible and
Percentage for this
criterion = 10%
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible, and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Referencing is omitted or does not resemble APA.
Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Referencing resembles APA, with frequent or repeated errors. Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas.
Referencing resembles APA, with occasional errors. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible, and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements.
APA referencing is free from errors.
Demonstrates use of high quality, credible, and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements.
APA referencing is free from errors.