Correlation Between Motivation

and Job Satisfaction - A Case

Study of The Anti-Corruption
Commission of Zambia
by Musiwa Saasa

Submission date: 13-Apr-2018 05:59PM (UT C+1000)

Submission ID: 946109343
File name: 254090_Musiwa_Saasa_Correlation_Between_Motivation_and_Job_Satisf action_-
_A_Case_Study_of _T he_Anti-Corruption_8610623.pdf
Word count: 2232
Character count: 12596
Correlation Between Motivation and Job Satisfaction - A Case
Study of The Anti-Corruption Commission of Zambia
ORIGINALITY REPORT

32 %
SIMILARIT Y INDEX
27%
INT ERNET SOURCES
9%
PUBLICAT IONS
28%
ST UDENT PAPERS

PRIMARY SOURCES

1
Submitted to Macquarie University
St udent Paper 14%
2
Submitted to University of Huddersfield
St udent Paper 2%
3
www.benfruytier.nl
Int ernet Source 1%
4
etds.nkuht.edu.tw
Int ernet Source 1%
5
Submitted to De Montfort University
St udent Paper 1%
6
Submitted to Australian National University
St udent Paper 1%
7
www.acel.org.au
Int ernet Source 1%
8
Submitted to Husson University
St udent Paper 1%
9
www.dol.gov
 Int ernet Source

1%
10
Submitted to Loughborough University
St udent Paper 1%
11
Submitted to Hofstra University
St udent Paper 1%
12
seriouslyvc.com
Int ernet Source 1%
13
Submitted to University of Newcastle
St udent Paper 1%
14
dspace.unza.zm:8080
Int ernet Source 1%
15
Submitted to Flinders University
St udent Paper 1%
16
Submitted to Birla Institute of Technology and
Science Pilani
1%
St udent Paper

17
media.proquest.com
Int ernet Source 1%
18
www.medicalnewstoday.com
Int ernet Source <1%
19
documents.worldbank.org
Int ernet Source <1%
www.kmice.cms.net.my
 Int ernet Source

<1%
20

21
"ACC Arrests Customs Agents On Corruption
Charges.", Africa News Service, June 2 2015
<1%
Issue
Publicat ion

22
www.coursehero.com
Int ernet Source <1%
23
pssou.ac.in
Int ernet Source <1%

Exclude quotes Of f Exclude matches Of f

Exclude bibliography Of f
Correlation Between Motivation and Job Satisfaction - A Case
Study of The Anti-Corruption Commission of Zambia
GRADEMARK REPORT

FINAL GRADE GENERAL COMMENTS

Instructor

23
Musiwa

T his is a good attempt.

/30 You are providing inf ormation that are helpf ul to

explain this case. You also have identif ied
interesting theories to ref lect on the problem.

However, you could have strenghtened the analysis

by linking more the theory to the case.

In the recommendations, can you support your

suggestions with evidence f rom research that
shows what you are suggesting is ef f ective?

Make sure to f ollow the APA ref erencing style.

PAGE 1

PAGE 2

PAGE 3

PAGE 4

PAGE 5

PAGE 6

PAGE 7
RUBRIC: 1: CASE STUDY REPORT RUBRIC

RESEARCH Distinction
(75-84%)
- Evidence of relevant and wide reading. - Demonstrated understanding of the issues within the case. -
Breadth and depth of the review of the literature and integration of relevant literature into the written piece.

FAIL (<50%) - Unsatisf actory use of academic and non-academic sources. - Limited understanding
of the issues. - Unsatisf actory literature review, no/little integration.

PASS (50- 64%) - Demonstrates some use of academic and non-academic sources. - Satisf actory
understanding of the issues. - Satisf actory review of the literature and some
integration.

CREDIT (65- 74%) - Demonstrates sound use of a number of academic and non-academic sources. -
Demonstrates a sound understanding of the issues. - Sound evidence of f urther
research and integration.

DISTINCTION (75- - Demonstrates a very competent use of a wide range of academic and non-academic
84%) sources. - Demonstrates a very competent understanding of the issues. - Highly
competent demonstration of f urther research and integration.

HIGH DISTINCTION - Demonstrates excellent initiative in locating and using relevant academic and non-
(85- 100% academic sources. - Demonstrates an exemplary and comprehensive understanding
of relevant issues. - Outstanding evidence of f urther research and integration.

ST RUCT URE Distinction

(75-84%)
- Clear structure is evident (and f ollows the appropriate f ormat) and the f low of the analysis is logical. -
Covers all case elements.

FAIL (<50%) - CSR is not logically presented. - CSR does not cover all elements.

PASS (50- 64%) - CSR is satisf actorily presented, but could be clearer. - Demonstrates adequate
attempt to cover all CSR elements.

CREDIT (65- 74%) - CSR is generally presented well and mostly logically. - Demonstrates a sound
response to all CSR elements.

DISTINCTION (75- - CSR is very well presented and logical. - Demonstrates a very competent response
84%) to all CSR elements.

HIGH DISTINCTION - CSR is excellently presented, with a very logical synthesis of elements. -
(85- 100% Demonstrates an outstanding response to all CSR elements.

ANALYSIS Distinction
(75-84%)
- T he piece is interpretive and analytical (not merely descriptive). T he level of critical analysis exhibited -
this includes the application of relevant theories to the case. - A cogent and well-structured analysis is
developed, relevant to the case and supported by research. - T he level of understanding demonstrated in
relation to the chosen case.

FAIL (<50%) - CSR is merely descriptive with little or no critical analysis. - Makes little or no use of
supporting evidence/theories. - Arguments are not logically structured and/or not
relevant to the issues. - Demonstrates inadequate knowledge of issues.

PASS (50- 64%) - Demonstrates some critical analysis, but overly descriptive. - Makes use of some,
but minimal, supporting evidence/theories. - Arguments can generally be f ollowed and
make some link to the issues. - Demonstrates satisf actory knowledge of the issues.

CREDIT (65- 74%) - Demonstrates sound critical analysis. - Makes sound use of supporting
evidence/theories. - Arguments are generally well structured, logically presented and
links to the issues are discernible. - Demonstrates a sound knowledge of the issues.

DISTINCTION (75- - Demonstrates highly competent critical analysis. - Makes very ef f ective use of a
84%) range of supporting evidence/theories. - Arguments are very well structured, logical
and clearly link to the issues. - Demonstrates very competent knowledge of the
issues.

HIGH DISTINCTION - Demonstrates excellent critical analysis. - Excellently uses a range of

(85- 100% evidence/theories (with evaluation) to support arguments. - Evidence of superior
argumentative structure - clear, logical and explicitly linked to the issues. -
Demonstrates excellent knowledge of the issues.

PRESENT AT ION Distinction

(75-84%)
- Level of written expression (including spelling, grammar, punctuation, overall prose f luency and writing
style is appropriate f or a scholarly work). - Accurate and appropriate presentation of in-text citations and
ref erence list. - Direct quotations are used economically but ef f ectively.

FAIL (<50%) - Written expression is conf used and laboured. - Extensive spelling, grammar errors. -
Writing style is inf ormal. - Excessive use of direct quotations. - Major errors in
ref erencing.

PASS (50- 64%) - Written expression is satisf actory. - Spelling and grammar are satisf actory, but with
a number of errors which detract f rom overall meaning. - Satisf actory academic
writing standard. - Satisf actory attempt at ref erencing.

CREDIT (65- 74%) - Demonstrates sound written expression. - Correct spelling and grammar, but with
some errors. - Sound academic writing standard. - Sound attempt at ref erencing.

DISTINCTION (75- - Demonstrates very competent written expression. - Correct spelling and grammar
84%) throughout, with only a f ew minor errors. - Very competent academic writing standard.
- Very competent execution of ref erencing.

HIGH DISTINCTION - Demonstrates outstanding clarity of written expression. - Correct spelling and
(85- 100% grammar throughout, virtually error-f ree. - Sophisticated scholarly writing standard. -
Excellent execution of ref erencing.