Assessment 3 Company Diversity Report
Get this assignment for $50 AUD
Call or what’s app: +918607726273
|Subject Code:||MBA 502|
|Subject Name:||Emotional Intelligence, Cultural Intelligence, and Diversity|
|Assessment Title:||Company Diversity Report|
|Submission:||Via LMS Turnitin|
|Due Date:||Monday 11.55 pm AEST Week 13|
Students are to choose a company from the winners from the last 3 years of the Australian HR Institute (AHRI) diversity-related awards and write a report outlining and analyzing the intercultural management models and approaches implemented by the company.
The link below is where students can find more information about the AHRI Diversity & Inclusion Awards. The specific categories of awards from which students can choose a company are also listed below. The company must have been a winner in one of these categories in the last 3 years. https://www.ahri.com.au/awards/celebrate/hall-of-fame/
- Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employment Award
- Elizabeth Broderick Gender Equality Award
- Fons Trompenaars Cross-Cultural Management Award
- Graeme Innes Disability Employment Award
- Michael Kirby LGBTIQ+ Inclusion Award
- Susan Ryan Generational Diversity Award
The following questions need to be explicitly addressed in the report:
- Company and Diversity Target – An overview of the company with information about one category of diversity targeted and why this diversity category was identified.
- Details of a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 intercultural management approaches/strategies (IMAS) that the company has implemented to address their identified diversity category.
- Analyze intercultural management approaches/strategies (IMAS) – Evaluate the success of the company in relation to addressing one or more of the following goals:
- Breaking-down barriers, and/or
- Benefitting the company’s culture, and/or
- Bringing mutually beneficial outcomes for all employees.
Academic sources, references, and supporting information needs to be included in this last section.
Students must use a report format that includes the following categories:
- Introduction (150 words)
- Overview of the company (200 words)
- Intercultural management models/approaches and strategies implemented (500 words)
- Evaluation and recommendations (500 words)
- Conclusion (150 words)
- Reference list (following Kaplan Harvard Referencing Style guidelines)
Students should refer to at least 2 intercultural management models or theories to support the statements and position they are taking. Additionally, students should include a minimum of 5 references (contemporary business articles, news items, and/or comparison websites). While many of your references will rely on the organization/company’s website, you cannot use this as your only source of information.
Please refer to the Assessment Marking Rubric to assist you in completing all the assessment criteria.
How to submit.
Reports need to be uploaded via Turnitin on the KBS Learning Management System.
Important Study Information
Academic Integrity Policy
KBS values academic integrity. All students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism, and other academic offenses under the Academic Integrity and Conduct Policy.
What are academic integrity and misconduct? What are the penalties for academic misconduct? What are the late penalties?
How can I appeal my grade?
Click here for answers to these questions: http://www.kbs.edu.au/current-students/student-policies/.
Word Limits for Written Assessments
Submissions that exceed the word limit by more than 10% will cease to be marked from the point at which that limit is exceeded.
Students may seek study assistance from their local Academic Learning Advisor or refer to the resources on the MyKBS Academic Success Centre page. Click here for this information.
Assessment Marking Guide
|Criteria||F (Fail) 0-49%||P (Pass) 50%-64%||CR (Credit) 65%-74%||D (Distinction) 75%-84%||HD (High Distinction) 85%-100%||Mark|
|Company overview and context/reason for why the category of diversity was identified||Lack of detail regarding the company context. Minimal or no discussion or justification for diversity group choice.||Company overview lengthy and not very relevant. Some effort to justify and explain the choice of diversity category – linkages weak or underdeveloped.||Overlong and detailed company overview. Justification for choice of diversity category sound and valid. Linkages between company context and diversity category credible – but could be developed further||Sensible and considered choice of relevant information re company overview – could be more succinct/precise. Detailed and considered justification for category of diversity. Persuasive and convincing linkages between company context and diversity category are chosen.||A judicious and astute choice of relevant and compelling information re the company overview. Exceptionally strong and persuasive justification for the category of diversity. Compelling and substantial linkages made between company context and category of diversity choice.||8|
|Details a minimum of 2 and a maximum of 4 Intercultural Management Approaches/Strategies||Unclear detail or explanation of IMAS chosen. Not use of models/theories.||IMAS chosen explained clearly. Some linkages explored between choice and company context. Models/ theories included – further analysis needed.||Solid overview and explanation of the IMAS implemented. Strong linkages between these and company context convincingly development. Some use models/ theories to support and augment the position taken. Could be developed more strongly||Considered, valid and detailed explanation for the choice of IMAS. Connections between IMAS and company context support validity of choices. Models and theories used effectively to justify and reinforce decisions.||Discerning and perceptive choice of IMAS approaches/strategies – succinct and concise explanation. Justification of IMAS chosen and company context outstandingly made. Discerning choice of models/theories to support and justify chosen IMAS.||12|
|Analysis of the success of the intercultural management approaches||Minimal analysis of the reasons for the success/failure. A position is either not developed, lacking in detail, or unsupported. Academic sources/references not used.||Essential points covered in analyzing the implementation and overall success/failure of the IMAS. Efforts apparent to develop a position however this could be clearer and/or more robust. Academic sources/references used but not fully.||A considered analysis of IMAS implementation and success/failure. Thoughtful position demonstrating solid analysis. Use of academic sources/references apparent – but these could have been better developed or used more effectively. Detailed analysis.||In-depth analysis of IMAS implementation and overall success/failure. A broad consideration of reasons for success/failure. Strong and compelling position – well justified – strengthened and supported by the use of academic sources/references. Insightful analysis||Outstanding analysis of IMAS implementation and overall success /failure – notable for depth and breadth. Exceptionally well developed, balanced, and considered position taken – augmented and strengthened by judicious choice and use of academic sources/references. Outstanding and insightful analysis||15|
|F (Fail) 0-49%||P (Pass) 50%-64%||CR (Credit) 65%-74%||D (Distinction) 75%-84%||HD (High Distinction) 85%-100%||Mark|
|Structure and||Paper not in the report||Report layout and||Report layout and structure||Effective report layout||Excellent report||5|
|format – Academic||format. Lack of||structure, not following||acceptable – some||and structure – follow||layout and structure|
|sources||citations and style||assessment requirements.||formatting/ style errors.||the required||– follow the required|
|poor. Little effort||Reasonable style – could||Reasonable style – clear and||style/headings, etc.||style/headings, etc.|
|displayed to||be more effectively laid||concise. Academic||Format and style||Format and style|
|support the reading||out. Academic||sources/references cited||professional and support||professional and|
|or comprehension||sources/references||using KBS guidelines –||easy reading and||support easy reading|
|of the paper.||included but KBS||occasional error.||comprehension.||and comprehension.|
|guidelines not followed||Academic||Academic|
|using KBS guidelines||use effectively and|
|cited using KBS|
Visit At :- HI6025 ACCOUNTING THEORY TUTORIAL HOLMES