Get help from the best in academic writing.

Choose 1 applied (program evaluation or action research) article and compose a 3-page review (not including the reference page

Choose 1 applied (program evaluation or action research) article and compose a 3-page review (not including the reference page in the count). Your review must include 2 sections: (1) a
summary of the article, and (2) a critical analysis of the article. Because applied research could be either quantitative or qualitative in nature, you must be able to distinguish the correct
characteristics in order to include the correct components. All articles must be of studies conducted and published in the United States or Canada within the past 5 years.
Your summary must include:
 Identify whether article is more quantitative or qualitative in nature and/or if
program evaluation or action research, if applicable.
 The purpose of the study;
 A descriiption of participants/sample/setting;
 The research design
o Quantitative analysis (experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational, regression,
etc.) AND/OR
o Qualitative analysis (narrative, grounded theory, case study, phenomenology,
ethnography, etc.)
 The method of data collection
o Quantitative (survey, test, questionnaire, etc.) AND/OR
o Qualitative (questionnaire, document analysis, observation, open-ended or
structured interview, etc.)
 Analysis
o Quantitative: A statistical analysis (t-test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) analysis
of covariance (ANCOVA), chi square, Pearson product moment correlation,
Spearman rho, etc.); AND/OR
o Qualitative: Inductive/deductive approach, point of focus, summaries, memoing,
indexing, coding, grouping, themes, order of analysis, type of analysis (content,
narrative, discourse, framework, grounded theory)
 The results.
Your analysis must include:
 Opportunities for further research not already stated in the article,
 Threats
o Quantitative: to validity or rival hypotheses not already discussed AND/OR
o Qualitative: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability
 Other original insight or criticism, and
 Implications of the findings.
See your textbook if you need more help evaluating your article. Please remember to include a
reference page. ***All citations and references must be in current APA.
Note: Applied research can have quantitative or qualitative components; however, it must be
true applied research.

Critical Analysis of the Business Drivers of Risk Management Introduction In 1958;

Critical Analysis of the Business Drivers of Risk Management


In 1958; Modigliani and Miller suggested that, under perfect market condition, stockholders could diversify their portfolio as a risk management strategy for the firm. The implications were that firm’s risk management strategies did not add any value to the firm (Takatoshi, et al., 2013). However, modern literature has established that perfect market conditions are impossible to replicate. In reality; markets are full of imperfections ranging from corporate taxes, financial distress costs to asymmetric information. Most empirical studies have concluded that effective RM strategies can increase the value to the firm (Aretz & Bartram, 2009) (Takatoshi, et al., 2013). Opponents of this doctrine tend to isolate a particular risk management strategy that they are not comfortable with. For instance; Warren buffet opposes the use of financial derivative on account of their complexity and ‘potential of problem multiplication’ (Chew, 2008).

Concept of Risk Management

Risk management can be defined as the identification of areas of exposure to some type of risk, and the subsequent strategic responses to avoid or mitigate the impact (loss) upon occurrence of such events (Brigham & Daves, 2016). In evaluating risks; three elements are important – probability of occurrence, impact on occurrence and the exposure. Probability is the likelihood of occurrence of an event with adverse effects to the organization. The impact of risk refers to a quantified value of loss that may arise upon occurrence of an adverse event. Exposure refers to the magnitude of risk that an organization is exposed to dependent on the probability and impact of an adverse event (Alberts & Dorofee, 2009).

The failure of some major financial institutions across the US and UK during the 2007/08 has been partly attributed to inefficiencies in their RM systems (Woods, 2011) including the Royal Bank of Scotland and AIG. It is therefore imperative that the organization establishing the actual business drivers for its risk management. Business drivers of risk are the internal or external factors that influence the risk concerns of an organization, and prompt certain risk management strategies. Møller (2011) observed that these business drivers can be progessive or defensive. Progressive business drivers assume a proactive approach to risk and its management, whereas defensive drivers are reactive to risk management strategies.

Evaluation of Key Drivers of Risk Management

Progressive drivers

Value creating

Some of the immediate benefits that would drive the implementation of a robust RM framework include the reduction of risk-associated losses and remedial costs, increased profitability from reduced volatility of cash flows (Chew, 2008) and earnings that are eventually delivered to shareholders as dividends (Fite & Pfleiderer, 1995). There are organizations, particularly in Tech, Pharmaceuticals, Emergent innovations and other high growth industries, that actively sought out risk as a potential source for creation of value to the firm (Bromiley, et al., 2015). In a working paper, presented in the 5th International Risk Management Conference in Rome, Andersen & Roggi (2012) observed that there was consistency in the valuation of the firm based on its PV of future cash inflows less financial distress costs like bankruptcy. Møller (2011) observed that for RM to create value to the firm, it must undertaken progressively and in a knowledge searching manner for it capitalize on existent opportunities.

Goal seeking

This approach is characterized by the establishment of core objectives of the firm, or desired outcomes, which then informs the degree of input and risk tolerance that the enterprise can adopt towards their realization. The common desired outcomes in goal seeking include an increase in revenues or operating profits, improved cash flow generated from operating activities, expansion into new markets as well as M&As.

From a decentralized RM approach spread across their numerous R&D and manufacturing facilities, Huntsman corporation –a global chemicals manufacturer, has in the past 5 years been implementing a more inclusive, structured and centralized framework. Regular risk assessments are undertaken periodically, and detailed discussions on specific risks undertaken every fall. The chairman, Huntsman Snr., affirmed that indeed the corporation had adopted an enterprise-wide RM structure to increase efficiency in goal seeking and capitalization of emergent opportunities (Milliman Risk Institute, 2014). Through its enterprise risk management, Huntsman is able to identify business opportunities, and weigh their expected returns against their potential risk exposures.

Assessment oriented

These drivers are most common for firms operating across different industries, or as holding companies for semi-autonomous subsidiaries. As such; these firms develop their RM frameworks to enhance risk identification, cataloguing and mitigation measures across their different operational outlets. This proactive risk assessment enables the firms to identify what risks are increasing, relatively stable or decreasing, and hence appropriate remedial action can be initiated.

TESCO plc, the largest grocery stores retailer in the UK, has operation in multiple industries including general retail, banking and real estate. To mitigate on its risks across these operational areas; TESCO operates a Group Risk Register through its RM framework. This framework outlines the Group key priorities – to regain competitiveness, to protect the balance sheet and to rebuild trust- then enumerates the principal risks that could adversely impact the realization of their primary objectives. The assessment of risk from the Group’s perspective establishes the critical areas with a high risk exposure based on their probability of occurrence and severity of impact. These areas include TESCO bank, the people, the brand, data security, liquidity and market competition (Tesco PLC, 2017). Lastly; this RM framework provides for a set of controls and key mitigation factors against the identified principal risks to the Group’s operations. The Group has a standardized oversight and governance hierarchy across all its businesses (UK and abroad) which ensures more consistency in strategic and RM processes.

Future minded

Organizations that are future-minded leverage on RM initiatives to identify potential source of risk to the future business operations, financials or reputation. In 2017; the US biotechnology giant, Biogen, adopted a proactive future-oriented RM strategy to mitigate on risks associated with the America hurricane season (Resilinc Corporation, 2017). Biogen identified supply chain disruptions, communications breakdown and crisis management activities as the primary risks that the firm would be exposed to during the hurricane season. In response; the biotech firm implemented a proactive RM strategy that incorporated intelligent tools for scenario planning and sensitivity analysis, supply chain mapping and response models. This robust value-chain RM approach enabled Biogen to sail through three Hurricanes-Harvey, Irma and Maria- as well as earthquake in New Mexico, without significant disruptions to its supply chain.

Defensive drivers

Value preserving

Traditional risk management was premised on premised on preservation of value to the firm. However; in the post-financial crisis era, more and more Governments and independent regulators have been pushing the agenda for adoption of comprehensive RM frameworks with clearly outlined mitigation strategies and oversight from the board of governance (Renault, et al., 2016). Regulatory responses to the crisis such as the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 (US) and creation of the FPC (UK) only serve as external forces driving the value-preservation approach to RM especially for the ‘Too big to fail’ entities

Loss avoidance

The avoidance of loss is a strong driver in the adoption of RM strategies. Loss aversion has been the subject of most literature in behavioural economics, having established that individuals, and now firms, give undue weight to potential losses relative to potential gains (Reeson & Dunstall, 2009). This observed phenomenon in most businesses is further exacerbated by a combination of two behavioural anomalies- endowment effect and status quo biases. Firms therefore operate in an environment where they want to avoid most risk, and maintain what they already have in terms of profitability, market share or revenues. This business driver of RM is most prevalent in matured or maturing markets.

Diageo PLC, a UK-based multinational, is the second largest distiller of alcoholic beverages, having recently been topped by Chinese Moutai. Diageo’s brands are a household name including Smirnoff Vodka, Bailey’s liquor, Guinness, Jonnie Walker and a host of other beers, spirits and wines. The multinational observes that a negative change in consumption patterns, a real or perceived decline in quality or tightening of alcohol legislations in its areas of operations could occasion profound losses to the firm. As such; the company has put in place a robust RM framework that addresses issues ranging from contamination of its products, counterfeiting of its brands, settlement of consumers’ liability claims, global expansion efforts to dilute unfavourable legislative risks in certain countries to real time assessment of changing consumer tastes, preferences and pricing. This RM approach ensures the beverage maker not only stays ahead of growing competition, but also guards its position from adverse events.


Firms employ RM processes and initiatives to contain their known knowns and known unknown risk elements. Sometimes, it is this process that gives legitimacy to the RM outcome in what was characterized as ‘process rationality’ (Møller, 2011) As such, control-oriented RM approaches make more compliance sense as they clearly outline the do’s and don’ts in their policy framework. Firms operating in a business environment where there is need to guide organizational behaviour for reputational or safety concerns tend to prefer RM initiative that emphasize on controls. This include most firms offering financial or health-related services.

Colgate, the global toothpaste manufacturer, draws in excess of 75 percent of its net revenues from investments outside the US. This exposes the multi-national to a myriad of risks ranging from exchange rate fluctuations, uncertain regulatory regimes as was the case with their subsidiaries in Brazil and Venezuela, brand damage resultant from the over 115 court cases filed in the US or its territories over the Talcum powder scandal of the 1990s, political or economic instabilities in its countries of operations to disruption sin its global supply chains (Colgate-Palmolive , 2017). In light of this; the primary business drivers of Colgate’s RM framework are control and containment of these risk factors. Its RM policy permits the application of various strategies, tools and techniques to remedy various risk factors. These interventions include a calculated working capital management to ensure generation of adequate cash flows to fund its foreign investments, and selective hedging and local currencies’ borrowings to mitigate on exchange rate fluctuations. In exercising control in its RM policy; Colgate expressly prohibits the use of complex hedging instruments either for speculative or leveraging purposes to check on their potential risk compounding effects.


Organizations may adopt, or amend, their RM framework based on past events or lesson learned from the experiences of peers. A retrospective approach evaluates the existing risk management strategies on account of what work, or what did not work, and develops an actionable plan to inculcate the positive attribute, whilst drawing lessons and reminders from the past events. A catastrophic risk management (CRM) has been proposed for adoption by firms that have an abnormal exposure to certain risk factors (Kunreuther, 2012). In the aftermath of 2007/08 global financial crisis; major financial institutions across the US and Europe were faced with an unprecedented level of systemic and financial risk exposure. Some institutions like the Washington Mutual (US) and Northern Rock (UK) went under, while other were bailed out.

The American Insurance Group was lucky to bailed out, after the collapse of Lehman Brother, but has not escaped condemnation for its role in exacerbating the financial meltdown. The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission concluded that AIG had substantially contributed to the crisis by engaging in risky behaviour via the use of collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and default credit swap schemes, failure to set-up adequate capital reserves nor upfront collateral as well as a general failure in corporate governance and RM oversight (FCIC, 2011). In light of this findings; AIG has adopted an enterprise-wide CRM to guide its management of risk exposures, and encourage sensible risk-taking guided by appropriate trade-offs. This CRM enables AIG to identify, monitor and respond to risks in real time which was one of their undoing in the pre-financial crisis era RM framework. Other progressive development on their RM framework have emphasized on development of a measured risk appetite with controls on risk concentrations, stress testing and modelling, as well as a strengthened oversight and governance structure (AIG, 2013). In essence; the near-collapse experiences at AIG, during the 2007/08 financial crisis, became its core business driver in the adoption of a more responsive and updated RM framework.

Risk Assessment Techniques

Chew characterized risk assessment as systematic approach to the identification and measurement of risks, and their exposure, to an organization (Chew, 2008), The assessment of risks also involves the establishment, or reviews, of risk appetites, mitigation or control measures as well as absorption of residual risks. (Maarten Merkelbach & Daudin, 2011). Therefore; Risk assessment techniques are the tools and methodologies applied by organizations for risk identification, analysis and evaluation (Valis & Koucky, 2009). There are different business drivers to risk management -progressive or defensive- but organizations employ a set of fairly similar qualitative and quantitative techniques in their assessment of risks. Key amongst these techniques are:

Brainstorming has emerged as one of the most obvious techniques in risk assessment. As firms shift from their siloed approach to risk to a more enterprise-wide aspect of business operations, then more stakeholders are bound to be brought into the process. More firms are scheduling formal meetings involving senior management and other cadres of employees, as well as sit-downs with stakeholders (Valis & Koucky, 2009), feedback from customers and even peer-consultations, to devise the most appropriate RM frameworks. Brainstorming is essential in the development of a risk register, as different stakeholders, may be exposed to different risk factors. Huntsman Inc. has a scheduled meeting every fall to assess and brainstorm on increasing the effecting of its RM framework towards value creation. On the other side; AIG’s CRM has expanded employee participation to allow for broader scope in assessments of their business risks

Brainstorming can be formally structured complete with the involvement of experts and transform into what is referred to as Delphi techniques (Valis & Koucky, 2009). Delphi techniques allow for a more interactive and expert-driven consensus on risk analysis particularly for multi-nationals with a cocktail of risk elements. Delphi techniques in risk assessment incorporates expert opinions from risk analysts and consultants, accounting and audit firms, legal counsel, state representatives, regulatory agencies and consumer and supply chain representatives. Colgate-Palmolive regularly consults financial experts to advise on its currency-related risk factor, and more so, on its mitigation based on a selective use on non-speculative derivatives.

Consequence/ Probability matrix; this is an essential tool in the identification and evaluation of known risks based on their probability of occurrence and severity of impact. This observed likelihood and consequence of occurrence is then plotted in a matrix form (Maarten Merkelbach & Daudin, 2011). The C-P matrix permits the firm to rank different risks based on their exposure to the firm, and relative to each other. This assessment informs the firms decision on what risks to ignore, watch, accept, avoid or insure. The C-P matrix is relatively simple to design, and its visual presentation makes risk decision more palatable at the firm level. But on the downside, the assessment of individual risks can be subjective with undue weight being placed on otherwise low impact risks while potentially adverse events are overlooked.

Diagram 1: Sample C-P matrix- each box represents a different risk element

Increasing likelihood


Increasing severity of impact (consequence)

ALARP techniques; ALARP denotes ‘As low as reasonable possible’ which refers to an assessment technique with emphasis on the residual risk. The essence of ALARP is to ensure risks are identified and addressed through appropriate remedial mechanisms such as avoidance where possible, transference though insurance contracts and mitigation where avoidance is inevitable. The minimizes the residual risk that the firm has to accept, and absorb, as an expense to its business operations. For the effective utilization of ALARP techniques; firms develop a 3-tier model of highly acceptable region of negligible risks, tolerable region based on risk-return trade-offs and highly unacceptable regions of risk (Maarten Merkelbach & Daudin, 2011)

Scenario analysis is the assessment of risk exposures on ‘best case’, ‘expected case’ worst case’ scenarios using complex risk modelling. Scenario analysis allows organizations to observe the likelihood and consequence of different adverse outcomes, and thus enabling the firms adequately plan for such eventualities (Valis & Koucky, 2009). Maarten Merkelbach & Daudin (2011) affirmed that scenario analysis involved the development of models capable of testing the future business environment based on peoples’s visions and assumptions, and as such, the RM ought to beall inclusive to provide different perspectives in the modelling. In the US; Biogen was able to leverage on its tech-advancement to develop scenario testing models in the event of natural disasters, and they were able to implement their finding into a robust RM framework.


After the 2007/08 financial meltdown; organizations have endeavoured to adopt a comprehesive enterprise-wide RM framework that would better equip them to address their exposures to systemic, business, credit, finacial or operational risks. However; different organizations have different motivations to adoption of RM dependent on their nature of business, regulatory compliance, areas of operation, products life cycle or leadership attributes. In this regard; the actual business drivers can be proactive (progressive) or reactive (defensive) to risk. However; the risk assessment techniques are relatively similar as these are scientific approaches to the identification, measurement and evaluation of risks. RM frameworks can be driven by a number of business drivers across the progressive and defensive spectrum, and utilize as much assesssment techniques as possible, if only to make them more effective and responsive in real-time. At the end of the day; it is the system’s capacity to identify, measure, control or mitigate adverse events that would count to the firm. As observed; effective RM can reduce finacial disress costs related to volatilty of cash flows or earnings, increase or preserve firm value, enahnce brand presence and customer loyalty, as well as opeational costs such as personnel or resource monitoring.


AIG, 2013. Enterprise Risk Management, London: American International Group Inc.

Alberts, C. J. & Dorofee, A. J., 2009. A Framework for Categorizing Key Drivers of Risk, Hanscom, MA: Carnegie Mellon University.

Andersen, T. J. & Roggi, O., 2012. Risk Management and Value Creation. Rome, Italy, 5th International Risk Management Conference: Global Standards for Risk Measurement, Management and Regulation.

Aretz, K. & Bartram, S. M., 2009. Corporate Hedging and Shareholder Value, Munich: Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA Paper No. 14088).

Brigham, E. F. & Daves, P. R., 2016. Intermediate Financial Management. 12th ed. Melbourne: Cengage Learning.

Bromiley, P., McShane, M., Nair, A. & Rustambekov, E., 2015. Enterprise Risk Management: Review, Critique, and Research Directions. Long Range Planning, 48(4), pp. 256-273 doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2014.07.005.

Chew, D. H., 2008. Corporate Risk Management. New York: Columbia University Press.

Colgate-Palmolive , 2017. 2016 Annual Report, New York: Colgate-Palmolive Company .

FCIC, 2011. Final Report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States, Washington DC: The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission.

Fite, D. & Pfleiderer, 1995. Should Firms Use Derivatives to Manage Risk?. In: W. Beaver & G. Parker, eds. Risk Management: Problems and Solutions . London: McGraw Hill, pp. 140-164.

Kunreuther, H., 2012. A Framework for Risk Management of Extreme Events: Evidence from Firms, Pennyslavania: Wharton University.

Maarten Merkelbach & Daudin,  ., 2011. From Security Management to Risk Management , Geneva: Security Management Initiative.

Milliman Risk Institute, 2014. Creating Value Through Enterprise Risk Mangement, London: Oxford Economics .

Møller, R. Y., 2011. Drivers of Risk Management: Adapting Risk Management to Organisational Motives, London: Chartered Institute of Management Accountants.

Reeson, A. & Dunstall, S., 2009. Behavioural Economics and Complex Decision-Making: Implications for the Australian Tax and Transfer System, South Clayton, Australia: CSIRO.

Renault, B. Y., Agumba, J. N. & Balogun, O. A., 2016. Drivers for and obstacles to enterprise risk management in construction firms: a literature review. Procedia Engineering, 164(2016), pp. 402-407.

Resilinc Corporation, 2017. [Online]
Available at:,
[Accessed 17 March 2019].

Takatoshi, I., Satoshi, K., Kiyotaka, S. & Junko, S., 2013. Exchange Rate Exposure and Exchange Rate Risk Management: The case of Japanese exporting firms, Tokyo: RIETI (Discussion Paper Series 13-E-025).

Tesco PLC, 2017. Annual Report and Financial Statements 2016 – Strategic Report, London: Tesco PLC.

Valis, D. & Koucky, M., 2009. Selected Overview of Risk Assessment Techniques. Problemy Eksploatacji, Volume 4, pp. 19-31.

Woods, M., 2011. Risk Management in Organizations: An integrated case study approach. New York: Routledge.


Name University Course Tutor Date Risk Management SARF examines how risk events

Choose 1 applied (program evaluation or action research) article and compose a 3-page review (not including the reference page Writing Assignment Help Name





Risk Management

SARF examines how risk events connect with social, psychological, cultural and institutional processes to amplify risk perceptions thereby shaping risk outcomes and behavior (Kaperson et al., 1988; Renn, 1991).

Components of SAFR

• Information Sources

The source of information can be news media, direct experience or direct brokers

• Individual or Social Amplification Stations

These are the individuals who generate and transmit (amplify) information; it may be social groups, journalists or industry spokespeople. They amplify information through communication channels like direct conversations, telephones, and letters or behavioral responses.

• Individual or Organizational behavior

This is the behavior of the individual or organization towards the risk. They may take industrial action, or avoid the risk, or stigmatize or evaluate the risk.

• Ripple Effects

This is the resultant effect of the risk event. It may result in loss of sales, regulatory interventions, or product recalls.

• Hazard Characteristics

Looks at how the hazard is was it fatal, or catastrophic or long-term.

The Process of SAFR

The process of social amplification begins by filtering incoming signals where only a section of all information is processed. The signal is then decoded and processed in relation to cognitive heuristics and attaching social values to it to know its significance on policy and management. Interaction with peer groups validates the signals which then lead to the formulation of risks which either tolerate the risk of takes actions against the risk. The group or individuals then begin to accept and tolerate the risk or ignore it or change the risk.

Risk Amplification and Ripple Effect

Risk amplification is the process of escalating or intensifying signals during conveyance of information from its source to transitional transmitters and the final receiver (Kasperson, Jhaveri & Kasperson, 2013). The information is altered by adding or deleting some of the incoming signals to the message and passing on the next transmitter. Ripple effect is the secondary economic or social consequence of the event. This extends beyond direct harm to the environment and humans. It may include indirect impacts that are so significant that may lead to loss of trust in an institution, insurance costs, liability or alienation from the community (Kasperson, Jhaveri & Kasperson, 2013).

Key Mechanisms, Processes, Effects of SAFR from Case Study Analysis

In the case study, residents from Whinney Lane were disturbed by the operator setting up a communication site in their area. The process was found to pose a great health risk to the residents after carrying out an internet search. Though the operator denied the health risk claims and gave a different health report that portrayed the process as safe, the residents chose to employ their own report. Their view was that the operator acted against their belief of accountability. The mechanisms for social amplification applied by the residents were the use of local newspaper and television media where they raised awareness of their concerns and sought for support. Social amplification of the risks arising resulted in several responses that included, protests against the development as they waved banners while singing, confrontations with the company’s security guards and lobbying the government regarding the issue.

Why They Occurred and What Risk Managers Should Have Done Differently

The reason these behavior responses occurred was that the council officials denied residents an opportunity to raise their objections and discuss issues surrounding the development even after discovering omissions in plan report. Even after residents raised health concerns, the council officials were reluctant to stop the development. In such cases, before problems get out of hand, it is essential that risk managers engage the parties that are aggrieved and listen to their points of concern. Lastly when the company seems to be in wrangles with the neighboring community a public relations department should be set up earlier to address any issues of concern.


Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O. and Slovic, P., 1988. Social amplification of risk: a conceptual framework, Risk Analysis 8, 177–187.

Kasperson, R., Jhaveri, N., & Kasperson, J. X., 2013. Stigma and the social amplification of risk: Toward a framework of analysis. In Risk, media and stigma (pp. 25-44). Routledge.

Renn, O., 1991. Risk communication and the social amplification of risk, in R. E. Kasperson and PJ. M. Stallen (eds) Communicating Risks to the Public: International Perspectives, pp. 287–324. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.


ASSESSMENT 2 (75%) Individual Essay: 21st-century leadership (2000 words) Organisations today face


Individual Essay: 21st-century leadership (2000 words)

Organisations today face significantly different challenges from those of the past.

For example; more diverse workforces, greater technological change, more mobile workforces, organisations seeking flexibility and rationalisation, more women aspiring to lead in male dominated organisations and industries.

In light of these changes it seems reasonable to assume leaders will need to consider alternative approaches to leadership, while followers may have to provide flexibility, willingness to learn and adapt, as well as the ability to accept responsibility.

Write an essay explaining ONE major challenge facing organisations in the near FUTURE, choosing from the selection below. You should identify the specific focus and the implications set in a particular organisation or industry of your choice. You should then identify and justify the kind of leadership and negotiation capabilities that are required to secure successful outcomes.

N.B. The focus of your work should be on the relationships that exist in organisations and NOT strategy, operations, or HR

1. Increasingly technological workplaces; provide clear identification of the specific challenge with evidence.

2. Organisational flexibility; incorporation of new working arrangements

3. Diversity; gender, culture, generational difference, sexual orientation – CHOOSE ONE ONLY

Confirm your choice with your seminar tutor

In each case you should CLEARLY articulate the challenge related to either an industry or an organisation and how it affects LEADERS AND FOLLOWERS which MUST be supported by research and include specific issues.

Show how theory informs practice to develop solutions (you should be sure to cover leadership in terms of the process as covered in the lecture series – including all aspects of the process; person, influence, individual/groups and goals). Your work should be in essay format 2000 Words.

Marking criteria for assessment 2

Coherent and convincing identification of a major challenge facing organisations in the contemporary world 20%

Identification of relevant leadership and negotiation concepts, and insightful application to the essay topic 25%

Evidence of reading from a range of reliable, valid and current sources; careful referencing 15%

Critical and independent thinking 15%

Good structure: an effective introduction and conclusion, logical organisation of material, effective use of paragraphs, integration of all sections into a unitary whole 15%

Clear expression of ideas, well edited, high standard of presentation and attention to details 10%

Assessments Handbook Developing Leadership N1076 2018/19 UG Year 3 Table of Contents

Assessments Handbook

Developing Leadership

N1076 2018/19

UG Year 3

Table of Contents

Module Assessments Breakdown 3

Assessments 1 – Presentation 3

Link to Module Learning Outcomes 3

Preparation 3

Marking Criteria 4

Interpreting Marks 5

Assessments 2 – Essay 6

Link to Module Learning Outcomes 6

Description 6

Preparation 6

Submission 6

Marking Criteria 7

Interpreting Marks 8

Sit / Resit 8

Writing Well and Avoiding Academic Misconduct 9

Marking Process and Ensuring Marking Fairness 9

Module Assessments Breakdown

Two modes of assessment are used in the module.


% of The Module Mark

Brief Description




Students are allocated with a topic on which they must research and deliver a presentation in a group of 5/6 students on a contemporary leadership challenge, and provide speaker notes and reflection on the process. The work is marked individually.

15 mins



Students write an essay on a challenge from a choice provided which are; diversity, new working arrangements and technological change. They then use leadership process theories to discuss and advise to what extent theory can help resolve the challenge.

2000 words including in text references but not the reference list

In the following, each of these assessments is explained in detail.

Assessments 1 – Presentation

Link to Module Learning Outcomes

The presentation covers two (identified below) of the four module learning outcomes identified below:

LO 2. Devise and sustain arguments in relation to contemporary issues in leadership and negotiation, including gender, ethics and cultural diversity.

LO 4. Describe and comment on challenges faced by leaders in contemporary business

Students must present the case for a specific challenge which encompasses issues created by new working arrangements, technology, or diversity.

They must examine the negative aspects of the challenge on the employees; resulting in e.g. change in attitude, withdrawal of effort, lack of cooperation, absence of prosocial behaviours or having intention to quit

They must do so by presenting the arguments in a coherent and informed manner based on a variety of accounts, leader, and followers perspectives.

They provide consideration of individual, team, and organisational influence on leader initiatives, linking relevant theory to practice based on research and discussion.

Students describe and comment on the challenge they have identified from the choices provided.

They then go on to present the associated issues from more than one perspective which will focus on at least two of the following; leader, follower and organisational views and impacts.


Students need to research the challenge they have chosen and find detail of the impact of that challenge on the leader, the follower and the organisation or industry.

The present a minimum of 5 slides and a maximum of 6 slides which are presented in a logical order with in text references on the slides.

They should present speaker notes of no more than 400 words and a reflection of the process they engaged in, in order to produce the presentation identifying strengths and weaknesses pointing out how this will contribute to preparation of the essay or pointing out areas which are still in need of improvement.

Students should use the Harvard style of referencing

Students should submit slides with speaker notes and reflection to seminar tutors via email by the specified deadline.

Marking Criteria

Here are the indicative marking criteria for this assessment.


Weight %

Detailed Criteria

Relevance of topic area; real world challenges relevant to leadership and followership


The challenge is clearly identified.

The challenge is current and evidenced in the business, professional bodies, academic literature.

The challenge is presented in a specific context and details will be present.

Design and content, balance, organisation, creativity and clarity, delivery, timing


The design of the presentation should be professional and eye catching

The content should be balanced, supported by research and cover both leader and follower perspectives, and will include impact on the industry or organisation

The presentation should be clear well organised, points should be clear and relevant

Delivery should be fluent, clear, not script read but may use notes, and effectively timed, with eye contact, clear voice, good pitch pace and tone

Evidence of Research, references from reliable and valid sources


In text references should be present from a range of reliable and valid sources

Full references should be provided appearing after the speaker notes they DO NOT have to appear on the slides

Demonstration of understanding to business and parties involved in the organisation/ industry; links made to examples, critical commentary not purely descriptive


There should be clear explanation of the challenge and the industry or organisation in which it is located

There should be clear articulation of the specific aspects of the challenge and how it manifests from leader and follower perspectives

There should be commentary on the impact on the business which should be critical and informed

Response to questions; informed and fluent


Students should respond to questions asked by the assessor in a clear and informed manner; questions will be based on the information and commentary presented only



Students consider how they gained and deepened knowledge relevant to the assessed work

They identify skills used, research, reading, writing, IT SKILLS, design, Analytical skills, presentations skills

They go on to say how they ensured they executed the tasks and reflect on how they could have improved given the task again.

Interpreting Marks

You can interpret your overall mark using this table.





Exceptional 1st

All aspects are researched, presented and delivered to a professional standard, responses informed, delivery clear and very well timed, with audience engagement, references of outstanding quality and currency. Reflection is insightful and clear identification of how to move forward in terms of self-development


Outstanding 1st

All aspects are researched, presented and delivered to a professional standard, responses informed, delivery clear and very well timed, with audience engagement, references of outstanding quality and currency. Reflection is insightful and clear identification of how to move forward in terms of self-development


Clear 1st

All aspects are researched, presented and delivered to a professional standard, responses informed, delivery clear and very well timed, with audience engagement, references of outstanding quality and currency. Reflection is insightful and clear identification of how to move forward in terms of self-development



All aspects are researched, presented and delivered to a very good standard, responses informed, delivery clear and well timed, with some very good audience engagement, references of good quality and currency generally good though may include some lower quality or dated materials Reflection is insightful in places and generally clear identification of how to move forward in terms of self-development



All aspects are researched, presented and delivered to an adequate standard, responses are provided but not particularly well informed, delivery is reasonably clear and very well timed but may be script read in places or with some uncertainty, insufficient or poor engagement with audience, references of adequate quality and currency but may have some which are of lower quality or missing. Reflection is present but may not be consistently reflective containing description rather than reflection. Some idea of how to move on but weaknesses in that respect or lack of clarity in self- development activities or areas in need of improvement.



Combination of some or all of the following, poor design, lack of good quality research, inconsistent or missing references, typographical errors, gaps in information, limited understanding communicated, limited explanation and or commentary.

Some descriptive content on preparation, delivery but lacking in reflection and strategies to move forward


Marginal Fail

Combination of some or all of the following; Slides are poorly prepared, lack of in text references or evidence of any real research, largely anecdotal, poorly organised, with no design aspect, script read, lack of audience engagement, under or over length.

No real thought into the processes of preparation, delivery or strategies to improve


Absolute Fail

Student did not present

Or the presentation was of very poor quality, limit recycling of materials delivered in class, poor timing, incorrect response or uninformed response or no reply to questions.

No real attempt to reflect on preparation, performance or how to move forward

Assessments 2 – Essay

Link to Module Learning Outcomes

This assessment is linked to the following module learning outcomes:

1. Demonstrate systematic understanding of leadership theory and its relevance to contemporary businesses

2. Devise and sustain arguments in relation to contemporary issues in leadership

3. Demonstrate coherent and detailed knowledge informed by current research of key leadership theories, approaches to leadership and negotiation in diverse contexts

4. Describe and comment on challenges faced by leaders in contemporary businesses


Building on the work completed in the presentation, students identify a leadership challenge which involves issues for leadership (chosen from: new working arrangements, diversity, technological change).

The research on this challenge should identify the impact for leadership and identify specific attitudes and or behaviours of followers must point out the implications for those involved.

The challenge should be present now or emerging.

The candidate then considers which leadership theories may help minimise or resolve the challenge which is informed by research.

They should present arguments for adoption of particular approaches using evidence to inform.

Further, they should generate suggestions as to how leaders and followers influence the goals of the organisation resulting in positive outcomes for all.

Limitations of approaches or difficulties that might be encountered should be articulated.


Students need to research the challenge and be very clear on where it exists and how it manifests.

They then consider the various approaches, in order to justify their choices.

There is a need to include the leadership process; leader, influence, individuals/teams and goals in order to fully address the question.

The word limit is 2000 words (+/- 10%) which includes in text references but excludes the reference list inserted at the end of the essay.

Students are free to use any recognised referencing system, but consistency is necessary. Consider using Harvard style.


Students must submit a 2000-word essay.

Marking Criteria

Here is an indicative marking criteria list for this assessment:


Weight %

Detailed Criteria

Coherent and convincing identification of a major challenge facing organisations in the contemporary world


The challenge will be well identified, clearly described with specific details and examples of the issues as experienced by leaders, followers and the impact on productivity or organisational performance

The account will be valid, current and involve leaders and follower attitudes and behaviours

The challenge will be in an organisation or industry and be well documented in the business media or research community

Identification of relevant leadership and negotiation concepts, and insightful application and discussion to the essay topic


Leadership will be considered from a process perspective; leader influence, individuals/teams and goals, all elements will be present in the work but may not be treated with equal attention.

The challenge will be current or emerging, and the perspectives should be forward looking the work should NOT ASSESS past actions of leaders nor should it name or analyse any named leader’s past actions or behaviours

Theory and practice will be linked

There will be clear and consistent links between theory and practice in order to communication

There will be incisive discussion as to the usefulness and limitations of the theory to minimise and or resolve the challenge

Evidence of reading from a range of sources; careful referencing


Research will be evident, which will be of high quality, valid, reliable and where appropriate current

References in text will be presented consistently using a recognised referencing system e.g. Harvard, APA, MLA

Critical and independent thinking


Challenge and criticality of theory and any intervening variables will be present

Good structure: an effective introduction and conclusion, logical organisation of material, effective use of paragraphs, integration of all sections into a unitary whole


The work will be logically organised, with effective and consistent use of paragraphs.

It will include identification of the challenge and the industry or organisation in which it exists

The work should progress arguments and culminate in clear conclusions which then generate feasible recommendations

Clear expression of ideas, well edited, high standard of presentation and attention to details


The work should be clearly written, points clear and the essay will be spell checked and proof read

Page numbers will be used

Paragraphs well utilised

Interpreting Marks

You can interpret your overall mark using this table.





Exceptional 1st

An exceptional essay, based on a substantial and demanding work with a very high level of originality, initiative, independence, and thoughtfulness in identifying and evaluating the usefulness of leadership theory in the business world with insightful application to a leadership challenge which is current or emerging


Outstanding 1st

An outstanding essay, displaying a high level of originality, initiative, independence and thoughtfulness in identifying and evaluating the usefulness of leadership theory in the business world with insightful application to a leadership challenge which is current or emerging requiring only very minor modifications.


Clear 1st

An excellent essay, displaying originality, initiative and independence in identifying and evaluating leadership theories relevant to challenge minimisation in a business or organisation which is present or emerging today, the work requires very minor modifications.



A well-planned essay, well-articulated, clear and convincing. Evidence of care in application of relevant concepts which lead to sound conclusions and feasible recommendations but one presented without the completeness or insight of those achieving higher grades



A reasonably well considered essay but one which indicates a lack of understanding and or completeness in terms of the leadership process



A basic descriptive essay lacking in analysis of both or either the challenge or the solutions. . Elements may be missing or the perspective is purely heroic , poor identification of challenge and minimal or no links are made, with low quality resources or very limited resources


Marginal Fail

May be a result of a) lack of clear identification of challenge, b) based on heroic leadership, c) no links made d) lacking in discussion e) little or no support – it might be a combination of these or seriously flawed in one aspect which impacts on the entire essay


Absolute Fail

Could be no submission or totally flawed in challenge and discussion of the leadership process with limited or no research

Sit / Resit

Initial attempt Mode and Weight

Resit Mode and Weight

Resit length

Resit submission



500 words




2000 words


Writing Well and Avoiding Academic Misconduct

Plagiarism, collusion, and cheating in exams are all forms of academic misconduct which the University takes very seriously.

Every year, some students commit academic misconduct unintentionally because they did not know what was expected of them. The consequences for committing academic misconduct can be severe, so it is important that you familiarise yourself with what it is and how to avoid it.

The University’s Skills Hub guide to study skills gives advice on writing well, including hints and tips on how to avoid making serious mistakes. You will also find helpful guides to referencing properly and improving your critical writing skills. Make use of the resources there.

If you are dealing with difficult circumstances, such as illness or bereavement, do not try to rush your work or hand in something which may be in breach of the rules. Instead you should seek confidential advice from the Student Life Centre. The full University rules on academic misconduct are set out in the Examination and Assessment Regulations Handbook.

If you do not think that you should be taking this assessment, or if you have any additional questions, please get in touch as soon as possible.

Marking Process and Ensuring Marking Fairness

The University takes several steps to ensure marking fairness.

Assessment Convening: The module convenor is usually the lead marker, designs the assessment, and specifies the marking criteria.

Calibration: When there are several markers:

They calibrate their marking expectations and scale, usually in a meeting before the marking begins. They usually mark a few submissions together and discuss the characteristic of poor to excellent works using the marking criteria.

The module convenor checks the marks and distributions by each marker to ensure similarity and fairness across groups. By analysing the data, any unexplained anomalies are identified and compensated.

Moderation: A sample of the marked submissions/scripts (including some from each mark classification) is then looked at by a moderator to confirm the accuracy of the marking (if they feel there is a problem they may recommend a third person to review all scripts).

External Examination: The sample is then sent to an external examiner to confirm that the marking has been appropriate and internal procedures have been followed.

Finally, a Module Assessment Board (MAB) then considers the overall distribution of marks, taking into account any complaints or problems raised concerning each module, and a Progression and Award Board (PAB) agrees awards for successful candidates and resit/sit opportunities for failed modules/assessments.



University of Sussex | Jubilee Building | Brighton BN1 9SL | United Kingdom T +44 (0)1273 872668 | [email protected]