GUIDELINES & MARKING CRITERIA

Use the following FIVE headings in your proposal. These five headings must be presented as
Level 1 headings with any additional headers at Levels 2 or more (see APA manual for
heading levels). A Level 1 header is presented in the middle of the page in bold on a separate
line from the rest of the text, whereas Level 2 headers are presented left-justified in bold.
Note that the suggested word limits for each section ARE A GUIDE ONLY – that is, each
problem will be different and as such likely have a different spread of the 1500 words across
these sub-sections.
Organisational Details (approx. 150 words)
 Identify the organisation that is experiencing the problem you have chosen.
 Provide details of the organisation that will be relevant for devising a strategic
HRM plan for solving the problem. For example, answer questions such as:
o What type of organisation is it (e.g., what is its core business)?
o What is the organisation’s mission statement?
o What are the organisation’s key objectives (e.g., excellent customer
service, cost containment)?
o What are the organisation’s strategies (e.g., growth, retrenchment)?
Problem Description (approx. 150 words)
 Describe the problem, that is, answer the question of “what is the problem you have
identified?” Describe the key issue(s) that you will be dealing with (e.g., high
absenteeism / turnover rates, disengaged workforce, unwilling to exceed expectations
or role requirements, burnout) and discuss any situational features (e.g., highly skilled
workforce, a repetitious job with little skill variety) that are likely to be important
factors in the emergence of the problem. Ensure there is a clear link between the
content of your interview and the problem you describe.
 Discuss the significance of the problem, that is, answer the question of “why is this
issue a problem?” For example, how and why might it detract from the organisation’s
key objectives and how is it at odds with the organisation’s strategy?
 Draw on theory and empirical evidence (at least three citations) relating to this type of
problem and its impact on individual, team and/or organisational effectiveness when
arguing for its significance.
 You will be asked to upload a copy of your for random verification. Instructions
will be provided in the lecture and tutorial.
 Ensure you clearly cite where the additional information about the organisation came
from and how it can be retrieved. For example, if you use an organisation’s website,
then follow the citation norms for citing a website.
Focus and Construct Definition (approx. 200 words)
 Begin this section with 1 – 2 sentences describing the focus of your assignment. This
is essentially your understanding of the problem the organisation is facing. Imagine
you are writing it to the manager/supervisor you interviewed.
 Now that you have defined the focus, clearly define the relevant constructs (e.g.,
burnout, disengagement).
  Ensure you cite relevant literature in defining your constructs and any direct quotes
are accompanied by page numbers.
 You should lend on at least two high-quality peer-review sources in this section.
Literature Review (approx. 900 words)
 Identify at least 10 high-quality peer review articles
 You need to find research that has considered your topic (i.e., the relationship you are
interested in) and summarise what previous researchers have hypothesised with
regard to this topic.
 Ensure that your review is comprehensive (e.g., ensure it covers seminal
articles/reviews in the area, and ensure that it covers critical classic research
in addition to current literature).
 Ensure that your review is structured effectively (e.g., tell the readers a story about
researchers’ arguments regarding this topic by integrating the arguments from the
different papers you have read, and using a logical structure to organise the
information according to similarities/dissimilarities rather than listing one
argument after another).
 You need to find empirical studies that have tested relationships tested the impact of
your constructs (e.g., findings consistently show a positive relationship between
innovation and teamwork; or findings are mixed such that….).
Conclusion (approx. 100 words)
 Summarise the issue described in the article
 Summarise the state of knowledge in relation to your topic

Please review the rubric provided below as it will be used to grade your submission.
Assessment Guide: Managing Jobs, Performance, and Wellbeing
HRMT3345 – MANAGING JOBS, PERFORMANCE, AND WELLBEING
ASSIGNMENT 1 RUBRIC – STRATEGIC HRM CASE ANALYSIS (PART 1)

CRITERIA % POOR FAIR SATISFACTOR ABOVE- GOOD VERY GOOD EXCELLENT

Y SATISFACTOR
Y
ORGANISATIONAL 1 .50 1.00 1.50 .75 2.00 2.25 2.50
DETAILS 0 Provides Provides vague and Provides basic Provides good Provides clear Provides clear Provides
Provides details of insufficient detail unclear detail about an detail about the detail about the and succinct and succinct comprehensive
the focal to identify the organisation that is organisation that organisation that details about details about , clear and
organisation that organisation that experiencing a problem. is experiencing a is experiencing a the the succinct details
are relevant and is experiencing It is unclear what type of problem. It is problem. It is organisation organisation about the
the problem. It is organisation was somewhat clear generally clear that are that are organisation
clear for
unclear what selected, the mission what type of what type of relevant for relevant for that are very
diagnosing the
type of statement, the key organisation was organisation was the diagnosis the diagnosis relevant for
problem, focusing organisation was objectives, and the selected, the selected, the of the of the problem the diagnosis
the literature selected, the overarching strategy (at mission mission problem and and future of the problem
review, and mission least two elements statement, the statement, the future intervention. and future
preparing for the statement, the missing). Limited key objectives, key objectives, intervention. Includes intervention.
intervention key objectives, external or internal and the and the Includes essential Includes
recommendations. and the additional sources are overarching overarching essential information essential
overarching used to describe the strategy (at least strategy (at least information such as the information
strategy. No organisation and collect 1 elements 1 elements such as the type of such as the
external or relevant information. missing). Limited under- type of organisation, a type of
internal external or developed). organisation, summary of organisation, a
additional internal Limited external a summary of the mission summary of
sources are used additional or internal the mission statement and the mission
to describe the sources are used additional statement and key objectives, statement and
organisation and to describe the sources are used key and the key objectives,
collect relevant organisation and to describe the objectives, organisation’s and the
information. collect relevant organisation and and the strategy (may organisation’s
information. collect relevant organisation’s exclude 1). strategy.
information. strategy. Includes Includes
Includes appropriate appropriate

11
 appropriate sources (at sources (at
sources (at least 1 least 1 external
least 1 external, most to the
external to internal). organisation).
the
organisation).
PROBLEM 1 .50 1.00 1.50 .75 2.00 2.25 2.50
DESCRIPTION 0 Provides vague Provides some detail Provides some Provides detail Provides good Provides Provides
Provides and very and relevant detail and and relevant detail and detailed and comprehensive
comprehensive superficial information about the relevant information relevant relevant and relevant
and relevant information problem but is very information about the information information information
information about about the superficial / unclear. about the problem that is about the about the about the
the problem. problem. Fails to Attempts to problem but is sufficient. problem. problem. problem.
Communicates the communicate the communicate the superficial. Communicates Communicate Communicates Communicates
significance of significance of the Attempts to the significance s the the the
significance of the
the problem for problem for the communicate the of the problem significance of significance of significance of
problem for the
the organisation organisation but does significance of for the the problem the problem the problem
organisation with no reference not make clear the problem for organisation and for the for the for the
(including to the reference to the the organisation makes loose organisation organisation organisation
reference to the organisation’s organisation’s strategy / and makes some reference to the (including (including (including
organisation’s key strategy / key key objectives and/or is reference to the organisation’s reference to reference to reference to
objectives and at objectives, peer- colloquial in nature. Fails organisation’s strategy / key the the the
least three peer- review articles, or to include least one strategy / key objectives and at organisation’s organisation’s organisation’s
review citations. external sources. peer-review citations objectives and at least one peer- key key objectives) key objectives)
This also includes Situational and at least one other least one peer- review citations objectives) and at least and at least
factors are sources of information. review citations and at least 2 and at least three peer- three peer-
at least 3
ignored. Link Situational factors are and at least one other sources of two peer- review review
additional sources
between the unclear with evidence other sources of information. review citations and citations and at
of information problem and the several missing element information. Includes several citations and at least 3 other least 3 other
about the article is unclear may be evident. Link Includes some important at least 2 sources of sources of
organisation. and between the problem important situational other sources information. information.
unsubstantiated. and the article is a situational features but of Includes Includes
stretch and not always features but evidence of at information. several several
easy to follow or has evidence several least 2 missing Includes important important
many holes. missing element element may be several situational situational
may be evident. evident. Link important features but features. Link
 Link between the between the situational evidence of between the
problem and the problem and the features but missing problem and
article is vague article is evidence of at element (1) the article is
and not always somewhat clear least 2 missing may be clear and easy
easy to follow or but not always element may evident. Link to follow.
has holes. easy to follow or be evident. between the
has holes. Link between problem and
the problem the article is
and the article generally clear
is generally and easy to
clear but not follow.
always easy to
follow.
TOPIC AND 1 .50 1.00 1.50 .75 2.00 2.25 2.50
CONSTRUCT 0
Fails to define Focus of the case Focus of the case The focus is The focus of The focus of The focus of
DEFINITION
focus of the case analysis is somewhat analysis is generally clear. the case the case the case
Clearly define the analysis or the defined but still lacks generally well The majority of analysis is analysis is analysis is
focus of the case focus appears to clarity. Focus may be define but would constructs are clear. Almost clear. The unequivocal.
analysis including be disconnected loosely associated with benefit from clearly defined all constructs section The section
key operational from the focal the focal article. greater detail / using peer are clearly commences commences
definitions and article. Failure to Provides clarity. Some review sources defined using with a well with a succinct
relevant peer- provide incomplete/inaccurate/o constructs are (potentially low high-quality defined and eloquent
review literature. operational r flawed operational defined using quality sources). peer-review explanation of explanation of
definitions and definitions of some colloquial Over-reliance on sources. the problem. the problem.
does not lend on constructs. Lacks sources or are quotations and Would benefit All constructs All constructs
appropriate appropriate sources. not sourced at all lack of from greater are clearly and are clearly and
literature. (may also include paraphrasing. use of accurately accurately
Colloquial poor quality Some elements paraphrasing defined, defined
definitions used sources). are disconnected or more up to lending on lending on
(e.g., dictionary). Potentially from focal- date high-quality high-quality
presented as a statement. operational peer-review peer-review
series of definitions. sources. sources that
disconnected Core elements Potential over- are up-to-date.
quotations or are clearly reliance on Definitions are
ideas. linked to the direct quotes largely
 focus of the as opposed to paraphrased
assignment. constructive and an
paraphrasing. appropriate
At least two mix of direct
peer-reviewed quotes are
sources used. used as
necessary. At
least two
sources, if not
more, are
used.
LITERATURE 5 3.00 6.00 7.00 8.75 10.00 11.25 12.50
REVIEW 0
Theoretical and Theoretical and Theoretical and Theoretical and Theoretical Theoretical Theoretical
Provides a
empirical review empirical review was empirical review empirical review and empirical and empirical and empirical
comprehensive, was inadequate fundamentally flawed was flawed and is somewhat review is clear review is clear review is clear
up-to-date, and and and lacked coverage, somewhat lacked flawed and may and free of and free of and free of
focused overview fundamentally coherence, and/or coverage, lacked coverage, coverage, coverage, coverage,
of the topic. flawed including logical inconsistencies coherence, coherence, coherence, coherence, coherence,
Comprehensivenes a lack of (at least 2). Includes and/or logical and/or logical and/or logical and/or logical and/or logical
s includes both coverage, some classic and/or inconsistencies inconsistencies inconsistencie inconsistencies inconsistencies
relevant classic disjointed recent theoretical (at least 2). (at most 1). s (minor (minor . Includes key
and current arguments, and and/or empirical work Includes some Includes some permitted, permitted, not classic and/or
logical but multiple key articles classic and/or classic and/or not in excess in excess of 1). recent
theoretical and
inconsistencies. missing. Literature may recent recent of 1). Includes Includes key theoretical
empirical Classic and/or include poor quality theoretical theoretical most classic classic and/or and/or
literature. There is recent theoretical sources. Failure to and/or empirical and/or empirical and/or recent recent empirical work
clear integration of and/or empirical operationally define work but key work but are theoretical theoretical that is timely
ideas (theoretically work was some constructs. Limited articles missing. somewhat out- and/or and/or and from high-
and empirically) as missing. Failure evidence of integration Literature may of-date and/or empirical empirical work quality
to provide a to operationally of key concepts, models, include poor loosely relevant. work that is that is timely sources. All
coherent and clear define constructs. and/or theories. quality sources. Literature may timely and and from high- literature is
summary of the No or limited Demonstrated Failure to include some from high- quality from high-
state of evidence of superficial knowledge of operationally poor quality quality sources. All quality peer-
integration of key issues. Many arguments define some (no sources (no more sources. literature is reviewed
knowledge. The
concepts, lack coherence and more than 2) than 4). Failure Literature from high- sources.
review is models, and/or detailed in-depth constructs. Some to operationally may include quality peer- Includes more
structured theories. Failed discussion including evidence of define limited limited poor reviewed than 10 peer-
effectively and to demonstrate relevant research integration of peripheral quality sources. review articles.
presents adequate findings. Issues are key concepts, constructs. Some sources (no Operationally Operationally
arguments and key knowledge of generally not explained models, and/or evidence of more than 2). defines all core defines all
issues. or described properly. theories. integration of Operationally constructs and constructs and
ideas logically.
Nearly all Demonstrated key concepts, defines all most provides
Provides arguments lack basic knowledge models, and/or core peripheral citations.
summaries of coherence and of issues. Several theories. constructs. constructs. Excellent
findings. detailed in-depth arguments lack Demonstrated Advanced Advanced evidence of
Communicates discussion with coherence and acceptable evidence of evidence of integration of
ideas clearly relevant detailed in-depth knowledge of integration of integration of key concepts,
including research. Issues discussion issues. Most key concepts, key concepts, models, and/or
appropriate are not explained including arguments are models, models, theories.
concepts (and or described relevant research presented and/or and/or Demonstrated
properly. findings. Issues coherently and theories. theories. exceptional
operational
are generally include an in- Demonstrated Demonstrated knowledge of
definitions),
somewhat depth discussion above- very good issues.
models, and explained or with relevant acceptable knowledge of Arguments are
theories. described research knowledge of issues. presented
Demonstrates in- properly. findings. Issues issues. Arguments are coherently and
depth knowledge are generally Majority of presented include an in-
of issues and explained or arguments are coherently and depth
capacity to described presented include an in- discussion with
synthesise ideas properly. coherently depth relevant
and draw and include an discussion with research
in-depth relevant findings. All
appropriate
discussion research issues are
conclusions.
with relevant findings. A explained or
research limited described
findings. number (no properly.
Majority of more than 2)
issues are issues are not
explained or explained or
described described
properly. properly.
CONCLUSION 5 0.00 .50 .75 .85 1.00 1.12 1.25
An effective
There is no Conclusions are only Conclusions are Many Some Conclusions Conclusions
summary of main
conclusion or the somewhat related to the either to short or conclusions are conclusions are clear and are clear,
points of the essay conclusion is not key points in the essay; too long and fail not key points in are not key summarise key succinct, and
is provided at the directly related to but they are not clear or to clearly or the essay and points but points coherent.
end of the the key points in succinct. succinctly may include new most are. discussed in Conclusions
document. The the essay. Fails to include either a summarise the elements not There may be earlier parts of reflect key
conclusion includes Fails to include a summary of issue or key issue or state previously some new the essay. No issues and
a brief overview of summary of the state of knowledge. of knowledge. discussed. The information new state of
the issue at hand issue or the state Lacks two or conclusion is too not previously information is knowledge as
and a succinct of knowledge. more: clarity, long or too short. presented or presented. The presented in
summary of the coherence, The discussion discussed. The conclusion is earlier parts of
succinctness. lacks clarity and conclusion is of appropriate the
state of knowledge
coherence but too long or length. assignment.
in relation to the include core too short. The The conclusion There is a clear
issue. elements. conclusion has may fall short flow of ideas
a general level on one (but and provides a
of clarity, not more) short yet
coherence, areas of comprehensive
and clarity, overview of
succinctness coherence, the
but may fall and assignment.
short on one succinctness.
or more of
these areas.
PRESENTATION & 5 0.00 .50 .75 .85 1.00 1.12 1.25
WRITING STYLE
The structure and The structure and There are major There are some The structure, There are There are no
Essay is clearly laid
formatting are formatting are inconsistencies inconsistencies in formatting, some minor inconsistencies
out using the according to the somewhat consistent and mistakes in either structure and length are inconsistencies in either
prescribed student’s own with the guidelines. May structure, or formatting. all good; in either structure or
headers. The cover style including include multiple formatting, or May include however, the structure or formatting.
page has the many grammatical, spelling, length with some several assignment formatting. There are no
required grammatical, and punctuation errors. grammatical, grammatical, does include There are very more than 3
information clearly spelling, and The length is somewhat spelling, and spelling, and some minor grammatical,
appropriate. grammatical, grammatical, spelling, or
presented punctuation Cover page is provided punctuation punctuation spelling, spelling, or punctuation
including total errors. but is missing key errors. errors. and/or punctuation errors.
word count The essay is elements. Headers are The length is The length is punctuation errors. Cover page is
(excluding either too long or somewhat formatted approximately appropriate. errors. Cover page is complete.
too short. according to APA-style correct. Cover page Cover page is complete. Headers are
reference list). The
No cover page is or are inconsistent. Cover page includes most complete and Headers are consistent with
document is provided and Includes general includes most elements contains all consistent guidelines and
double spaced headers are presentation with major elements. (missing max. of relevant with guidelines APA
with standard according to the issues. Headers are 1 element, e.g., information. and APA formatting.
margins. Page student’s own Appendix included but generally word count). Headers are formatting. There are no
numbers are clear style. fundamentally flawed formatted Headers are generally well There are no major
and formatted. The Includes general (e.g., out of date, according to generally formatted. major presentation
assignment is free presentation such excludes key info). APA-style. consistent with Includes 1 or presentation issues.
of typographical, as font size, font Includes several APA-style. less major issues. Document
type, paper size, major Includes general presentation Document appears
grammatical, and
margins, page presentation presentation issues. appears professional
spelling errors, the
numbers, and issues. with no more Appendix is professional and polished.
word limit is punctuation. A major than 2 major included but and polished. Appendix is
appropriate. The Appendix lacking presentation issues. lacking an Appendix is well presented
document is in a completely or issue includes, Appendix is element. well presented and clear.
supported file incomprehensible but is not limited included but and clear.
format. Includes . to: excessively lacking more
appropriate long paragraphs, than an element
appendix. incoherent (e.g., date, link,
sentences, full text).
failure to comply
with prescribed
formatting,
appendix issues.
REFERENCES 10 .50 1.00 1.50 .75 2.00 2.25 2.50
The reference list
Listed references Listed references are APA or Harvard APA or Harvard APA or Listed References
itself is complete
are presented in presented somewhat in style is used but style is used with Harvard style references are fully comply
and supports the student’s APA or Harvard style but there are some few errors is used almost presented in with APA or
arguments made in own style or a with numerous errors or many errors in and/or perfectly but the student’s Harvard style.
text. The reference non-prescribed some references are formatting or inconsistencies. very minor own style or a This allows for
list is appropriately format. Includes omitted. inconsistencies All references are inconsistencie non-prescribed 1
formatted many errors and across presented. s in style or format. inconsistency,
following either inconsistencies. references. One formatting. A Includes many and no major
APA or Harvard or two minor errors and inconsistencies
style. references are inconsistency inconsistencies .
omitted. would include .
This also includes
May include at failure to
in-text references least 2 major italicise or
and formatting. inconsistencies. missing
A major punctuation.
inconsistency
includes failure
to present a key
piece of
information (e.g.,
volume or issue
numbers, page
numbers, author
names, journal
title).