Individual Assignment #1 and #2 (30%)

Please read the guidelines thoroughly else it will cost you grades.

Case-Review Presentation (15%)

Due: Weeks 1 – 8 before start of the class (on your assigned date, see appendix b)

Students will be assigned a case as per instructions below* and they will be prepared to play the
role of consultants to a corporate executive in the case and present in front of the class (10-12
minutes of presentation). Issues will relate to the topics and readings of the syllabus posted. You
are required to:
- summarize the key OB issues highlighted in the case-study,
- undertake some research (minimum 3 sources) in regards to the problem presented and provide
your critical analysis on those issues/ problems as per your understanding of the course material
by applying the principles/ concepts learned in the class, (for example, Amazon as a company is
making remarkable financial success but as per the research it has been portrayed as a soul
crushing employer. So how far the people management practices at Amazon are sustainable for
its employer brand?)
- provide some industry comparisons (compare the issues highlighted with the best practices of
another company in the similar industry with comparable business strategy, size and operations)
and
- suggest suitable recommendations (4-5) with examples and illustrations from your
understanding of the course acting as an organisational behaviour consultant. (for example, in
continuation of the example provided above, provide recommendations on how Amazon can
continue to sustain its employer brand by introducing some robust employee friendly policies and
practices?)
The presentations will be uploaded on the following:
1. Moddle Turnitin – Assignment 1 submission box (PPT format)
2. Discussion forum- Peer Learning Discussion (as a link in a video-recorded format) on the
assigned dates (see appendix – b) before the start of the class.

Case-Review Reflection Paper (15%)

Due: Before Sunday mid-night (on your respective presentation week)

After the presentation, the students will submit a reflection paper (2-3-page outline) of
- their preparation and plan for the consulting exercise (brief steps undertaken to prepare the
presentation, timeline, research undertaken), and
- a few sentences about how you believe the presentation was (self-reflection) and what could
be improved (content-based improvements) based on your self-reflection, learnings from your
post-research and ideas generated in the discussion forum on moodle after posting the
presentation. You might have to research more about the subject of your case study and present
ideas about how you would like to improve the content presented (e.g., any point(s) you missed,
any additions you want to make, OB strategies in recommendations based on your self-reflection,
research and ideas generated in the online forum).
The reflection paper will be uploaded on the following:
1. Moddle Turnitin – Assignment 2 submission box

APA writing conventions should be followed in both the assignments with a minimum of three
(3) sources referenced and cited including abstract (reflection paper only) and in-text citations
(both), references in APA (both). The written submission must demonstrate objective academic
analysis of the material and its application to the workplace. Title of the case cannot be your
presentation title due to copyright reasons.

*Purchase the assigned case by simply google the title of the case or from Harvard Business
Publishing Education (https://hbsp.harvard.edu/home/)/ Ivey Publishing
(https://www.iveycases.com/) website (cost of each case is approx. USD$5-$8).
The submission date for case-review presentation will be before the start of the class on your
assigned date and case reflection paper will be the respective week’s Sunday mid-night. 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”.
In case you miss your presentation on your assigned date, your presentation will be in the waiting
list which means there is no re-assigning of a new date and your presentation will be taken if
there is time available in remainder of the classes (which also implies that you will have to be
ready with your presentation in every class thereafter). Subsequent late submission deduction of
grades will also apply.
The case-review presentation and reflection paper will be graded from 30 % (15% each) as per
rubric attached at Appendix- A. The case-presentation schedule is enclosed in Appendix-B.
Appendix – A
Assessment Rubric for Case-review Presentation and Reflection Paper
Does Not Meet Expectations
25%
Clarity (10%)
Writing is not clear. It is difficult
to understand points being
made. The writing lacks
transitions, and few examples
and/or illustrations are provided
to support explanation or
recommendations.
Depth of Discussion (20%)
Ignores bias; Omits arguments
Misrepresents issues; Excludes
data; Includes but does not
detect inconsistencies of
information; Ideas contain
unnecessary gaps, repetition or
extraneous details; Overlooks
arguments and ignores
differences
Critical Thinking and Self-Reflection (30%)
Evaluation of OB issues is
superficial (for example, contains
cursory, surface level
explanation), and incomplete,
lacking many of the following:
Consider history of the problems,
reviews logic/ reasoning,
examines feasibility of the
solutions, reflects on ethical
implications, and weighs impact
of solutions.
Integration of Analysis of Ideas and Concepts (20%)
Levels: Criteria
Meets Expectations
65%
Writing is generally well-organized
and understood. Transitions are
used to facilitate clarity. Some
examples and/illustrations are
used to support explanation or
recommendations.
Detects bias; Recognizes
arguments; Categorizes content;
Paraphrases data; Sufficient detail
to support conclusions and/or
recommendations
Evaluation of OB issues is brief (for
example, explanation lacks depth),
perhaps noticeably lacking one or
more of the following: Consider
history of the problems, reviews
logic/ reasoning, examines
feasibility of the solutions, reflects
on ethical implications, and
weighs impact of solutions.
Exceeds Expectations
100%
Writing is succinct, precise, effectively
organized and without ambiguity.
Transitions, explanation and elaboration
are extensive to elucidate points.
Detailed illustrations and/or examples
are used to support explanation or
recommendations.
Analysis includes insightful questions;
Refutes bias; Discusses issues
thoroughly Critiques content; Values
information Examines inconsistances;
Offers extensive detail to support
conclusions and recommendations;
Suggests solutions or implementation.
Evaluation of OB issues is deep and
elegant (for example contains thorough
and insightful explanation), includes,
deeply and thoroughly, all of the
following: Consider history of the
problems, reviews logic/ reasoning,
examines feasibility of the solutions,
reflects on ethical implications, and
weighs impact of solutions.
Student demonstrates minimal
or no ability to propose a
potential solution related to the
problem. Fails to draw
conclusions or conclusions rely
on author’s authority rather than
strength of presentation; draws
faulty conclusions or faulty logic
of the conclusion.
Recommendations are unclear,
inconsistent, lacks feasibility and
has no correlation with the
analysis.
Student fails to incorporate
relevant lecture materials to
support recommendations.
APA (20%)
Student fails to cite and
reference resources to support
ideas.
Total
Comments:
Student proposes at least two
recommendations that are “off
the shelf” rather than individually
designed/ customized to address
the specific contextual factors of
the problem.
The recommendations are fairly
transparent in terms of its
description; however, it is weakly
correlated with the analysis and
its feasibility is questionable.
Student attempts to cite and
reference credible and/relevant
resources, appropriate to the
discipline, to support ideas in APA
format. The required minimum
number of citations/references is
not met.
Student proposes at least three
recommendations that indicate a deep
comprehension of problem.
Recommendations are sensitive to
contextual factors as well as all of the
following are relevant: ethical, logical,
and cultural dimensions of the problem.
Recommendations are stated clearly
and clearly flows from the analysis.
Student properly justifies the
recommendations by integrating
relevant concepts from the course.
Student skillfully cites and references
credible and/ or relevant sources,
appropriate to the discipline, to support
ideas in APA format. Student exceeds
the required minimum number of
citations/ references.
Appendix – B
Case-Presentation Schedule

No. Student Case-Study Presentation Date

1 McKinsey and Company: Early 10-24-19

Class Discussion
Career Choices (A)
2 Mary Griffin at Derby Foods 10-31-20
Jasmeet KAUR

3 Manjot Kaur Blake Sports Apparel and 10-31-20

Switch Activewear: Bringing the
Executive Team Together
4 Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley 10-31-20
Navjot Kaur
(A)
5 Teaming at Disney Animation 10-31-20
Radhika

6 Amazon.com,2019 11-07-20
Bharti

7 Ahmed Youssef Amazon as an Employer 11-07-20

Abdelsalam AHMED

8 Karti Kay BAKSHI Ricardo Semler: A 11-07-20

Revolutionary Model of
Leadership
9 Tony Hsieh at Zappos: 11-07-20
Malvika B.
Structure, Culture, Change
10 Growing Managers: Moving 11-07-20
Gittu B. from Team Member to Team
Leader
11 Can You Fix a Toxic Culture 11-14-20
Gurleen C. Without Firing People?

12 Megha Starbucks Coffee Company: 11-14-20

CHANDRASHEKAR Transformation and Renewal
13 Values-based Selection at 11-14-20
Muhammad Swaff H. LinkedIn: One hiring Manager’s
Approach
14 Gayani Kanishka Barbara Norris: Leading Change 11-14-20
Liyanage H. L. in the General Surgery Unit

15 WeaveTech: A High 11-14-20

Wadud I.
Performance Change
16 MOD Pizza: A Winning Recipe? 11-21-20
Melissa Maria J.

17 Ashvinkumar Should the General Manager be 11-21-20

Govindbhai J. fired?

18 GiveDirectly 11-21-20
Pawandeep K.

19 Microsoft: Competing on Talent 11-21-20

Ebrahim K.
(A)
20 Rebecca S. Halstead: Steadfast 11-21-20
Seda K.
Leadership
21 WD-40 Company: The Squeak, 11-28-20
Madhava M.
Smell and Dirt Business (A)
22 WD-40 Company: The Squeak, 11-28-20
Ritvik Rajkumar M.
Smell and Dirt Business (B)
23 The Necessary Art of 11-28-20
Hamza Ali R.
Persuasion
24 Bahareh Business Networks 11-28-20
VALADKHANI

25 Schulich School of Medicine: 11-28-20

Ngoc Anh Thu N. Enhancing and Developing a
High-Performance Culture
26 Leading Change: Why 12-05-20
Majid MAHDINIA
Transformation Efforts Fail
27 Disruption in Detroit: ford, 12-05-20
Jim Roberth Q.
Silicon Valley, Beyond (A)
28 Apple Inc. in 2015 12-05-20
Soukaina R.
29 The Wrong Ways to Strengthen 12-05-20
Minhazur R.
Culture
30 Google's Project Oxygen: Do 12-05-20
Parisa S.
Managers Matter?
31 Six Habits of Merely Effective 12-12-20
Mahdi S.
Negotiators
32 Too Hot to Handle? How to 12-12-20
Sarah S.
Manage Relationship Conflict
33 Troubled Spain: Leading 12-12-20
Vipul T. organizational changes through
network and design
34 The 12-12-20
Elmira T.
Johnsonville Sausage Co.(A)
35 The 12-12-20
Maryam Z.
Johnsonville Sausage Co.(B)