Assessment item 2
Diagnosis: Critical review and
application
Value:30%
Due date:10-May-2013
Return date:
31-May-2013
Length:2000-2500 words
Submission method
options
Hand delivery (option applies to
Internal only)
Alternative submission method
Task
Assessment 2 addresses the content of change: identifying what needs to be
changed and why.

In addition to the open systems model covered in the textbook, identify one
diagnosis model of change from your wider reading. Assess and evaluate each
critically. Go on to discuss which of these is the most appropriate for
diagnosing change within your chosen organization, justifying your choice. Apply
the model you have chosen as most appropriate to undertake a diagnosis of the
organisation. Draw conclusions from your assessment and summarise the course of
action you recommend.


Please write the assignment as a coherent whole, not a series of
questions with answers.

N. B. You must include a minimum of ten (10) academic
citations and references.

Rationale

The aims of the assignment are to:

• Focus on skills of critical evaluation in relation to diagnosis.
•
Demonstrate thorough comprehension of two models of diagnosis and identify when
each might be appropriate
• Develop the ability to use critical argument

• Present a balanced argument of theory and organisational practice
•
Develop and use formal academic and writing skills.

Marking criteria

MGT320 Assessment 2 Marking Schedule

Assignment Introduction	LO	Poor	Fair	Good	Very Good		Excellent
Highlight aims of the assignment		Does not identify/provides only a limited identification of the requirements for the introduction.	Attempts to identify the requirements, but does not draw out their significance in relation to the assignment.	Provides an adequate summary of the essay that identifies the significant aspects and how they interrelate.	Provides a comprehensive summary of the essay and a clear, succinct identification of the main points.		Comprehensive; purpose and significance of the main points are clearly explained and signposted through the essay structure.
Outline of essay structure
Main points previewed
Mark / 5		1	2	3	4		5
Body
In addition to the open systems model covered in the textbook, identify one diagnosis model of change from your wider reading	3	No or inadequate identification of an additional diagnosis model drawn from own wider reading. Model(s) poorly related to the organisational problem.	Appropriate alternative model is identified but inadequately explained with some aspects missed or misdescribed. Models are only adequately related to the organisational problem.	Appropriate alternative model is identified. Key aspects of both models are explained and related well to the organisational problem.	Appropriate alternative model is identified. Both models are explained clearly to demonstrate detailed knowledge of them. Clear and relevant relationships made between the models and how they may be applied to the organisational problem.		Appropriate alternative model is identified. Both models are explained comprehensively to demonstrate detailed knowledge them. Clear and relevant relationships made between the models and how they may be applied to the organisational problem.
Assess and evaluate each critically	3	Little or no assessment of each model; no or inaccurate critical evaluation of each provided. The applicability of the model to the context of change is not addressed or explained.	Limited or unbalanced assessment of each model. Cursory evaluation of the applicability of the model; limited critical evaluation.	Fair, accurate and balanced assessment of each model; evaluation is critical, identifying the benefits / disadvantages to a range of parties affected by the change.	Deep and balanced assessment of each model; evaluation is critical, the benefits / disadvantages to a range of parties affected by the change are identified and assessed critically.		Outstanding assessment of each model. Sophisticated and critical evaluation of the benefits / disadvantages of models on a range of parties affected by the change.
Discuss which of these is the most appropriate for diagnosing change within your chosen organization, justifying your choice.	3	Discussion is inaccurate and / or inadequate, with no/limited justification of appropriateness of one of the models. No/too few citations used to support discussion.	Discussion is accurate and / or adequate; fair justification provided for the choice of one of the models. Limited use of citations to support discussion.	Discussion clearly and accurately evaluates the appropriateness of the models, supporting the choice of one of the models. Some citations used to support discussion.	Discussion clearly and accurately evaluates the appropriateness of the models. Justification of choice is insightful with substantial use of citations to support discussion.		Original and sophisticated. Provides a cogent discussion that supports the choice of a change model for the organisation; extensive use of citations to support the discussion.
Apply the model you have chosen as most appropriate to undertake a diagnosis of the organisation.	4	Fails to apply the model or only provides a limited diagnosis of the organisation. No relationship of theory to practice.	Generally clear and accurate application of the model; adequate diagnosis of the organisation. Limited relationship of theory to practice.	Sound and logical application of the model; clearly justified diagnosis. Draws on discussion to support application. Good relationship of theory to practice.	Comprehensive and well argued application of the model that considers the implications of the application. Comprehensive, clear and well reasoned relationships are drawn between theory and practice.		Outstanding and insightful application of the model that assesses and evaluates the implications of the application. Sophisticated and analytical relationships are drawn between theory and practice.
Draw conclusions from your assessment and summarise the course of action you recommend.	3 & 4	Few or limited and unsubstantiated conclusions that do not emanate from the previous analysis and discussion.	Limited evidence of findings / conclusions based on previous analysis and discussion. Adequate but basic summary provided.	Good, reasonably thorough summary provided. Evidence of findings / conclusions firmly grounded previous analysis and discussion.	Comprehensive summary provided. Good development of outcomes grounded in previous analysis and discussion		Clear and analytical summary provided; conclusions are well grounded in the previous analysis and discussion.
Mark / 20		1 – 4	5 – 8	9 – 12	13 – 16		17 – 20
Develop and use formal academic and writing skills. Language is appropriate: reflects 300 academic level and is neither-colloquial, nor opinion-based. In text citations Draws on appropriate academic literature. Complete and correct reference list in APA 6 (minimum of 10). Grammar and mechanics (e.g. spelling and punctuation) are accurate. Within word limit. Presentation clear and in essay format		Extremely unclear, lacks structure; many mechanical errors and few or no citations. Limited or no referencing.	A structure is apparent, all questions answered. Some mechanical errors. Few citations, fair or poor reference list. APA 6 style used with some errors.		Clarity of expression, accurate spelling and punctuation, citations are used throughout to support points made. Reference list reflects citations and follows APA 6 style accurately.		Demonstrates a high level of expertise at writing in an academic style. No mechanical errors. Exceeds minimum requirement for appropriate citations and references. Exemplary use of APA 6 style.
Mark / 5		0 – 1	2 – 3		4 – 5
					Total	/ 30
Comments: