To what extent should new leisure industry managers adopt the ideas set out in Douglas McGregor’s Theory X?
Order Description
BA IN MANAGEMENT AND LEISURE
11281 INTRODUCTION TO MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP
ASSESSMENT TASK
“Most professional workers require little direct supervision from managers. Indeed, many hospital physicians and university professors like to describe their structures as upside down, with themselves in charge at the top and with the managers on the bottom to serve them.”
From: Mintzberg, Henry [1998], Covert Leadership: notes on managing professionals. Harvard Business Review, November-December 1998
To what extent should new leisure industry managers adopt the ideas set out in Douglas McGregor’s Theory X?
Recommended reading: (But you can use other books, articles or websites as well that have relation with topic)
Use 6-7 reference at least.
• Mintzberg, Henry [1998], Covert Leadership: notes on managing professionals. Harvard Business Review, November-December 1998
• Carson, Charles M. (2005), A historical view of Douglas McGregor’s Theory Y, Management Decision, Vol. 43, No. 3, p. 450
• Bobic and Davis, [2005] A Kind Word for Theory X: Or Why So Many Newfangled Management Techniques Quickly Fail. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 239–264.
• Therese Yaeger, Thomas C. Head, (2011),”Douglas McGregor’s legacy: lessons learned, lessons lost”, Journal of Management History, Vol. 17 Iss 2 pp. 202-216
Assessment Criteria-
These will be on a ‘levels of response’ framework and cover:
• Content [selection and review of relevant source material]
• Analysis [depth of understanding shown]
• Application [of readings and relevance to leisure]
• Evaluation [including concluding judgement]
The essay should contain an appropriate introduction, together with effective use of English and referencing.
Write no more than 2000 words
Assignment to be submitted via Turnitin by 12 noon on Thursday 8th December 2014
LEVELS OF RESONSE MARK SCHEME
A. Content- 20 marks
Level Four, 17- 20 marks: All relevant content present
Good throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Well selected content used and applied with accuracy. Full range of key subject terms used with confidence. Where appropriate, good use of readings to support answer.
Level Three 11-16 marks: Most of the relevant content present
Reasonable throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Good selection of content used and applied- in general- with accuracy. Good range of key subject terms used with confidence. Where appropriate, some use of readings to support answer.
Level Two 6-10 marks: Weak with some understanding
Limited use of relevant subject content. Perhaps a scattergun approach with limited analysis and a lack of confidence in application. Some key subject terms used with confidence. Little evidence of readings to support answer.
Level One 1-5 marks: Very weak
Weak with a number of errors. Little, if any, relevant content. Little or no use of readings to support answer. Poor and lacking clarity and focus.
B. Analysis- 25 marks
Level Five- 21-25 marks: Excellent analysis
Excellent throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Narrative illustrates excellent understanding of relevant theory, showing a broader knowledge beyond the reading list. Clear evidence of issues and recent research. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning. Good awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing sound appreciation of alternative points of view
Level Four 16- 20 marks: Good analysis
Good throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Good understanding of examples in the question, where provided, perhaps showing a broader understanding. Clear evidence of issues and recent research. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning. Good awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing some appreciation of alternative points of view
Level Three 11-15 marks: Sound analysis
Reasonable answer, including some correct application but limited in depth and scope- perhaps to core texts. Some weaknesses shown but reasonable application to issues- may include use of additional readings and papers with limited accuracy. Reasonable use of readings to support answer. Arguments clear but may not be fully developed and is perhaps confused in places with a few errors present.
Level Two 6-10 marks: Weak with some understanding
Limited and some errors are made. Partial application to issues with some errors in understanding. Limited use of readings to support the answer, perhaps beyond the main text. Partial but confused at times, lacking focus and development. Limited logic and coherence and may be basic or simplistic.
Level One 1-5 marks: Very weak
Weak with a number of errors. Little, if any, application to issues. Where appropriate, no use of readings to support answer. Poor and lacking clarity and focus.
C. Application- 25 marks
Level Five- 21-25 marks Excellent application
Well argued throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Good application to issues and research. Where appropriate, good use of readings to support answer. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning. Clear awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing wider appreciation of alternative points of view
Level Four 16-20 marks: Good application
Good throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Good application to issues and research. Where appropriate, good use of readings to support answer. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning Good awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing some appreciation of alternative points of view
Level Three 11-15 marks: Sound application
Reasonable answer, including some correct analysis but limited in depth. Some weaknesses shown but reasonable application to issues. Reasonable use of readings to support answer. Arguments clear but may not be fully developed and is perhaps confused in places with a few errors present.
Level Two 6-10 marks: Weak with some understanding
Limited and some errors are made. Partial application to issues with some errors. Limited use of readings to support the answer. Partial but confused at times, lacking focus and development. Limited logic and coherence and may be basic or simplistic.
Level One 1-5 marks: Very weak
Weak with a number of errors. Little, if any, application to issues. Where appropriate, no use of readings to support answer. Poor and lacking clarity and focus.
D. Evaluation- 30 marks
Level Five- 25-30 marks [mid point 29] Excellent evaluation
Excellent evaluation throughout with few errors and weaknesses.. Clear evaluation application to issues and research. Where appropriate, use of wide reading to support answer. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning. Very strong awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing clear appreciation of alternative points of view and good understanding of current issues. Clear and well-argued solutions included with a strong conclusion.
Level Four 18-24 marks (mid-point 21) Good evaluation
Good throughout with few errors and weaknesses. Good application to issues and research. Where appropriate, good use of readings to support answer. Relevant and precise with a clear and logical chain of reasoning. Good awareness of the inter-relatedness of management issues. Showing some appreciation of alternative points of view and good understanding of current issues. Clear and well-argued solutions included.
Level Three 11- 17 marks (mid-point 14) Sound evaluation
Reasonable answer, including some correct analysis but limited in depth. Some weaknesses shown but reasonable application to issues. Reasonable use of readings to support answer. Arguments clear but may not be fully developed and is perhaps confused in places with a few errors present. Limited appreciation of alternative points of view with some understanding of current issues. Some appropriate but constrained solutions included.
Level Two 6-10 marks (mid-point 8) Weak with some understanding
Limited and some errors are made. Partial application to issues with some errors. Limited use of readings to support the answer. Partial but confused at times, lacking focus and development. Limited logic and coherence and may be basic or simplistic. Little on alternative points of view- answer may not stick to the question and conclusion may simply be a general summing up
Level One 1-5 marks (mid-point 2) Very weak
Weak with a number of errors. Little, if any, application to issues. Where appropriate, no use of readings to support answer. Poor and lacking clarity and focus.
First Class:
Such answers fully answer the question in a coherent manner and can be expected to show excellence with respect to the following criteria:
• insight and depth of understanding of the material;
• the exercise of critical judgement along with clarity of analysis and of the expression;
• knowledge of the relevant literature.
Upper-second class:
Such answers are highly competent and provide a complete and generally well- structured answer to the question and can be expected to indicate the following qualities:
• good understanding of, and insight into, the material;
• clarity of analysis, of argument and of expression;
• knowledge of the relevant literature.
Lower-second class:
Such answers indicate some understanding of the issue and provide an adequate answer to the question. They can be expected to show most of the following features:
• a basic understanding of the material;
• clear analysis and argument even if limited in extent;
• some awareness of the relevant literature.
Third Class:
Such answers indicate only a rudimentary understanding of the issues and do not provide a full answer to the question. They can be expected to show a number of the following features:
• sparse coverage of the material with key topics missing;
• unsupported assertions and little clear analysis or argument;
• lack of clarity with important errors and inaccuracies.
Compensatable Fail:
Such answers fail to deal with the question in any way that suggests more than a fragmented and shallow acquaintance with the subject. They are generally short, error-prone and lack coherency.
Uncompensatable Fail:
Such answers fail to demonstrate any ability to engage with the question.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂