|
BMO0264 (LOA) – Subject to External Moderati |
|
|
Module Title |
Leading Managing and Developing People |
|
Module Leader |
|
|
Module Tutors |
|
|
Assessment Type (Should match MSD) |
Written Assignment |
|
Academic Year |
25/26 |
|
Term Assessment Applies to |
Term 1 |
|
Assessment weighting |
100% |
|
Group/Individual |
Individual Coursework |
|
Word Count/Duration |
2500 words |
|
Module Learning Outcomes |
1.Demonstrate a conceptual and critical understanding of theories, principles and practices in Human Resource Management (HRM) and Human Resource Development (HRD) 2.Evaluate major theories relating to motivation, commitment and engagement at work and how strategically these are put into practice by organisations 3.Debate and critically evaluate the characteristics of effective leadership and the methods used to develop leaders in organisations 4.Critically discuss the aims and objectives of the HRM and HRD functions in organisations and how these are met in practice 5.Assess the contribution made by HRM and HRD specialists in different types of organisations 6.Be able to contribute to the promotion of flexible working and effective change management in organisation |
|
Arrangements For the Return of Work and Feedback |
|
|
Submission Date |
12/12/2025 |
|
Feedback Date |
16/01/2026 |
|
Submission Time (if applicable) If you have any technical issues submitting your work, please contact the Module Leader as soon as possible. |
15.00 UK time |
|
Submission Method |
Electronically via module site in Brightspace |
|
Assignment Specific Resources |
|
|
Software |
NA |
|
Equipment |
NA |
|
Guidance on AI Usage. |
|
|
☐ |
Level 1- Not Permitted The use of AI tools is not permitted in any part of this assessment. |
|
☒ |
Level 2 – Some use Permitted Some use of AI tools is permitted in the research/early stages of this assignment, but you must ensure that the work you submit is your own. If you use AI tools, you should acknowledge or reference this in your work. Use the Text reference builder to learn how to reference AI generated ideas. The sorts of questions to consider when using AI are:
|
|
☐ |
Level 3 – Integrated The use of AI tools is integrated in this assessment. Further guidance is included in this assessment brief. Ensure any AI generated material is clearly identified and referenced both within the assignment and in the reference list, using: |
|
General Study Guidance |
|
|
|
|
|
Exceptional Circumstances If you wish to make an EC claim against this module, you can access details on the procedure for claiming ECs, on the Registry website; Consideration of Personal Circumstances – University of Huddersfield |
|
|
|
Extensions/Late Submission If you wish to submit an extension on this module, you can access details on the procedure for submitting extensions on the website: Extensions for Taught Students – University of Huddersfield |
|
|
|
Support and Guidance General help, support and guidance information for your course and time at University can be found here or you can speak to your module leader or Personal Academic Tutor for School based support. |
|
|
|
Regulations |
|
The regulations governing assessments can be found here |
|
Assessment Task |
|
If you are a manager, how would you deal with any two of the following? In a 2500-word essay, critically evaluate your specific approach. Your essay should demonstrate critical thinking and problem-solving skills and use evidence-based arguments to support your approach. 1.A worker with two children; one of whom has diagnosed autism, the other attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. 2.An employee whose 90-year-old mother lives independently 40 miles away and whose short-term memory is progressively failing. 3.An employee consistently exceeds performance targets but exhibits bullying or undermining behaviour toward colleagues. Letting them go could hurt team output; keeping them could damage morale and culture. 4.An employee requests not to work on certain days due to religious observance, but their absence creates recurring scheduling conflicts or burdens teammates during peak periods. 5.An employee discloses a mental health condition that affects their punctuality and communication. They request accommodations, but their role requires strict deadlines and real-time responsiveness. 6.A younger employee pushes for rapid change and innovation, while a senior team member resists, citing experience and stability. Both are valuable, but their friction is affecting team dynamics. 7.An employee raises serious ethical concerns about a manager but has a history of poor performance and interpersonal conflict. Leadership must investigate without appearing retaliatory or dismissive. 8.A high-potential employee is due for a promotion but is also about to go on extended parental leave. Delaying the promotion may seem unfair; proceeding may create resentment among peers. 9.An employee from a culture with different norms around hierarchy and communication style is perceived as disrespectful or disengaged by peers and managers, despite good intentions and work ethic. 10.An employee with a physical disability requests accommodations that significantly alter how a core task is performed. The company wants to support them but is unsure if the role can be restructured. 11.An employee loses a close family member and returns to work quickly but is clearly struggling. They insist they’re fine, but their performance and interactions are suffering. 12.An employee discloses they are in an abusive relationship and need flexible hours or time off. They don’t want others to know, but their absences are affecting team deliverables. |
|
13.A brilliant employee on the autism spectrum communicates in a way that others find abrupt or rude. Their work is excellent, but complaints about their tone are mounting. 14.A new hire discloses a past conviction after being hired. It doesn’t affect their current role, but some team members express discomfort or safety concerns. 15.An employee reveals they have a terminal illness but want to continue working as long as possible. Their productivity is declining, and the team is unsure how to support them. 16.A well-liked manager is accused of unconscious bias by several team members from underrepresented groups. The manager is shocked and defensive, and the team is divided. 17.A remote employee is discovered to be working two full-time jobs simultaneously. Their performance hasn’t suffered, but it violates company policy. 18.A long-tenured employee resists adopting an AI-powered system critical to the company’s digital transformation. They feel overwhelmed and fear being pushed out. 19.An employee begins transitioning and requests support with name/pronoun changes and time off for medical procedures. Some colleagues are supportive; others are uncomfortable or resistant. 20.An employee is caught misusing company funds and later admits to a gambling addiction. They ask for a second chance and offer to repay the money. 21.An employee’s partner has a degenerative disease. The employee’s availability is unpredictable, and they are emotionally drained but want to keep working. 22.An employee requests family leave to care for a partner who is not legally recognised as a spouse. The company policy only covers legal spouses or dependents. 23.An employee in recovery from substance abuse relapses and misses work. They ask for another chance and support, but this is their second incident in a year. 24.A team member is discovered to have been secretly recording meetings due to feeling unsafe or unheard. Trust is broken, but they claim it was for self- protection. 25.An employee refuses to attend mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training, citing personal or political beliefs. Their stance creates tension within the team. 26.An employee requests extended leave or flexible hours to care for a dying pet. Some colleagues feel this is not a valid reason for accommodation, while others empathise deeply. 27.An employee’s partner is facing deportation or visa issues. The employee is emotionally distressed and requests remote work from another country, which violates company policy. 28.An employee has PTSD from a previous workplace and reacts strongly to perceived microaggressions or feedback. They request a psychologically safe environment, but their reactions are disruptive. |
|
29.An employee needs frequent time off but doesn’t qualify for traditional family leave. 30.An employee is a vocal activist on social media for a controversial cause. Their views are personal but are drawing attention to the company and causing internal division. 31.A skilled employee refuses to use AI-based tools introduced to improve productivity, citing ethical concerns or fear of job displacement. Their resistance slows down team adoption. 32.An employee is being stalked or harassed outside of work and requests a change in work location. The company wants to help but must balance safety, cost, and operational feasibility. 33.An employee refuses to use biometric systems (e.g., fingerprint or facial recognition) for clocking in due to privacy or religious concerns. Alternatives may be available but could complicate standard procedures. 34.A team member frequently takes on extra work and helps others but is burning out. They don’t want to step back, but their health and long-term productivity are at risk. 35.An employee is involved in a public scandal unrelated to work. Their presence is causing discomfort among colleagues and reputational concerns for the company. 36.An employee is a whistleblower in another organisation and fears retaliation or surveillance. They request anonymity and flexibility, but their concerns are difficult to verify. 37.An employee is caring for a child with a rare illness that requires unpredictable travel and time off. The company wants to support them but struggles with planning and coverage. 38.A manager is romantically involved with a direct report. Both claim professionalism, but the situation raises concerns about favouritism and team dynamics. 39.An employee is neurodivergent and excels in technical tasks but struggles with team collaboration and meetings. They request to work independently, but the role requires cross-functional input. 40.An employee refuses to use gender-neutral language in communications, citing personal beliefs. Their stance is seen as discriminatory by some colleagues and violates company inclusivity policies, but they argue it infringes on their freedom of expression. |
|
|
|
Task Specific Guidance |
|
|
A suggested structure:
|
PGT Marking Criteria
These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed. They describe different levels of performance of a given criteria. Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria. The grades between Pass and Merit should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module. The higher-level categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the basic requirement, perform at a superior level beyond the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
|
|
Unacceptable |
Unsatisfactory |
Pass |
Merit |
Distinction |
||||
|
0 – 9 |
10-19 |
20-34 |
35-49 |
50-59 |
60-69 |
70-79 |
80-89 |
90-100 |
|
|
Fulfilment of relevant learning outcomes |
Not met or minimal |
Not met or minimal |
Not met or partially met |
Not met or partially met |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
Pass |
|
Response to the question /task |
No response |
Little response |
Insufficient response |
Adequate response, but with limitations |
Adequate response |
Secure response to assessment task |
Very good response to topic; elements of sophistication |
Clear command of assessment task; sophisticated approach |
Full command of assessment task; imaginative approach demonstrating flair and creativity |
PGT Generic Assessment Criteria
|
|
Unacceptable A superficial answer with only peripheral knowledge of core material and very little critical ability |
Unsatisfactory Some knowledge of core material but limited. |
Pass A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles |
Merit A coherent answer that demonstrate s critical evaluation |
Distinction An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability |
||||
|
|
0-9 |
10-19 |
20-34 |
35-49 |
50-59 |
60-69 |
70-79 |
80-89 |
90-100 |
|
Conceptual |
Entirely lacking |
Typically, only |
Knowledge of |
Marginally |
A systematic |
Approachin |
Excellent. |
Insightful. |
Striking and |
|
and critical |
in evidence of |
able to deal |
concepts falls |
insufficient. |
understanding |
g excellence |
Displays (for |
Displays (for |
insightful. |
|
understanding |
knowledge and |
with |
short of |
Adequate |
of knowledge; |
in some |
example): |
example): |
Displays (for |
|
of |
understanding |
terminology, |
prescribed |
knowledge of |
critical |
areas with |
high levels of |
excellent |
example): |
|
contemporary |
|
basic facts |
range |
concepts within |
awareness of |
evidence of |
accuracy; |
research |
publishable |
|
/ seminal |
|
and concepts |
Typically only |
prescribed |
current |
the potential |
evidence of |
potential; |
quality; |
|
knowledge in |
|
|
able to deal |
range but fails |
problems |
to undertake |
the potential |
flexibility of |
outstanding |
|
the subject |
|
|
with |
to adequately |
and/or new |
Research. |
to undertake |
thought; |
research |
|
(30%) |
|
|
terminology, |
solve problems |
insights; can |
Well- |
research; the |
possibly of |
potential; |
|
|
|
|
basic facts |
posed by |
evaluate |
developed |
ability to |
publishable |
originality and |
|
|
|
|
and concepts |
assessment |
critically |
relevant |
analyse |
quality. |
independent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
current |
argument, |
primary |
|
thought; |
|
|
|
|
|
|
research and |
good |
sources |
|
ability to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
can evaluate |
degree of |
critically. |
|
make |
|
|
|
|
|
|
methodologies |
accuracy |
|
|
informed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
judgements. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
technical |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
competence |
|
|
|
|
Presentation |
Length |
Length |
Length |
Length |
Length |
Good |
Very good |
Professional |
Highest |
|
(10%) |
requirements |
requirements |
requirements |
requirement met |
requirement |
standard of |
standards of |
standards of |
professional |
|
|
may not be |
may not be |
may not be |
and academic |
met and |
presentation |
presentation |
presentation |
standards of |
|
|
observed; does |
observed; |
observed; |
conventions |
academic |
; length |
|
|
presentation |
|
|
not follow |
does not |
does not |
mostly followed. |
conventions |
requirement |
|
|
|
|
|
academic |
follow |
follow |
Minor errors in |
mostly |
met, and |
|
|
|
|
|
conventions; |
academic |
academic |
language |
followed. |
academic |
|
|
|
|
|
language |
conventions; |
conventions; |
|
Possibly very |
conventions |
|
|
|
|
|
errors impact |
language |
language |
|
minor errors in |
followed |
|
|
|
|
|
on intelligibility |
errors impact |
errors impact |
|
language |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
on intelligibility |
on intelligibility |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Understanding |
Limited insight |
Limited |
Limited |
Some insight |
Practical |
Independent |
Authoritative, |
Authoritative, |
Authoritative, |
|
(20%) |
into the |
insight into |
insight into |
into the problem |
understanding |
, critical |
full |
full |
full |
|
|
problem or |
the problem |
the problem |
or topic |
of how |
evaluation |
understanding |
understanding |
understanding |
|
|
topic |
or topic |
or topic |
|
established |
of |
of all the |
of all the |
of all the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
techniques of |
full range of |
issues with |
issues with |
issues with |
|
|
|
|
|
|
research and |
theories |
originality in |
originality in |
originality in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
enquiry are |
with some |
analysis |
analysis |
analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
used to create |
evidence of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and interpret |
originality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
knowledge in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the discipline |
|
|
|
|
|
Use of |
Some |
Some |
Some |
Limited sources |
Comprehensiv |
Complex |
Full range of |
Full range of |
Full ran |