Assignment Brief
This case study describes how a mining company desires to continue to be business-sustainable, i.e. to continue to make money. However, as it turns out, the mining company has been heavily criticised on social media, news outlets, and experienced criticisms and support from different sides of the political divide. As part of the exploration phase, the company has decided to engage the community to prepare them for the new mining activity. Some members of the community welcomed the new investment, welcoming jobs, the influx of new workers and therefore anticipated an increase in economic activity.
The company has embarked on a social sustainability initiative. The mining company has established a new function to develop community relations through contributing to a school initiative and also other community actions, e.g. charities, donations, public sporting events. However, members of the public flooded the company's social media page with complaints about the company disrespect and accused the company of being hypocritical in their intentions. The accusations were about the use of a charity to increase their market share. The company did not have any plan to respond and this vitriolic attack came as a surprise. The company shut down its social media page and withdrew from the campaign.
You have been engaged by the company to do a study on this failed campaign and to write a report. The purpose of this is to enable the company to learn from what occurred and for proposals to be considered to avoid this situation.
Prepare a report, to your executives, highlighting to them some of the points of view that may not have been considered in their campaign.
Your report should be 2500 words maximum, excluding references and appendices.
As a guide, you should consider these points:
1. Propose a risk management framework that may be incorporated into future projects at planning stage;
2. using Neohumanism as one of the two conflict based perspectives, explain the methodology for avoiding, as best as possible, individual employees from being partisan to this conflict;
3. using Radical Structuralist the second conflict based perspective, explain in your report why there is a predicable negative backlash from the public against this marketing campaign;
4. propose a set of questions that the project teams may ask in the future, to avoid the pressure in individuals;
5. make well argued proposals, that are well grounded in literature, that would help future campaigns;
6. demonstrate your ability to research this topic through the identification of at least 10 journal articles to support your work.
To repeat, it is necessary for you to demonstrate your ability to present the issues by selecting the appropriate perspectives to support your recommendations, or why you are offering a few competing viewpoints.
Click here for: Additional assistance
Click here for the RMIT CoB Referencing Guide: RMIT CoB Referencing Guide
Actions
If you need an extension, please read: Extensions of time for submission of assessable work. (Links to an external site.)
RMIT Electronic Submission of work for assessment
I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment, I have read, understood, and agree to the Course Learning Outcomes and rubric. I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the assessment declaration.
Rubric
Organisational Analysis Individual Report (40 Points)
|
Organisational Analysis Individual Report (40 Points)
|
|
Criteria
|
Ratings
|
Pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Analysis and responding to project requirements
1) Embark and clarify 2) Respond to or initiate research 3) Define the problem and specify 4) Define purpose
|
|
4.0 to >3.16 Pts
Advanced and Self-Developing (HD)
In addition to demonstrating the Advanced level of competence, the work shows evidence of highly original or insightful selection of information. The work demonstrates curiosity in approach to enquiry and critical analysis.
|
3.16 to >2.76 Pts
Advanced (D)
Respond to questions/tasks required by and implicit in a close inquiry. Competence in choosing from several provided structures to clarify questions, terms, requirements, expectations, and ethical, social, cultural and individual (ESCT) issues. Evidence of selection of information for relevance and appropriateness to the task.
|
2.76 to >2.36 Pts
Competent (CR)
Evidence of selection of information for the task but it is not always relevant or fully discussed. Has understood and addressed the task requirements. Able to work independently from highly structured directions and modelling from educator-prompted research.
|
2.36 to >1.96 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Adequate response to the task, but is limited in expression of ideas and selection of information. Shows some understanding of the task but may not have addressed all requirements. Demonstrates ability to improve after structured directions and modelling from educator-prompted research.
|
1.96 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Inadequate response to the task, and limited in expression of ideas and selection of information. Shows inadequate understanding of the task and may not have addressed all requirements. Demonstrates inability to improve after structured directions and modelling from educator-prompted research. Neglecting to follow submission processes, neglecting to submit final report to Turnitin.
|
|
4.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeAnalysis of context, problem and solutions
1) Find and reflect on research
|
|
8.0 to >6.32 Pts
Advanced and and Self-Developing (HD)
In addition to demonstrating the Advanced level of competence, a wide variety of source types has been selected to critically improve the response to the task that demonstrates a critical awareness of research concentrations and contributions.
|
6.32 to >5.52 Pts
Advanced (D)
A wide variety of source types has been selected to critically improve the response to the task. Developed competence in collecting and recording appropriate research from self-selected sources where information is not obvious. Reflects insightfully on the research process. Illustrates clarity in the enquiry approach.
|
5.52 to >4.72 Pts
Competent (CR)
Locates and records data/information from more than the prescribed number of sources. A variety of source types has been selected to improve the response to the task. Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to collect and records appropriate research from self-selected sources. Satisfactory ability to reflect on the research process.
|
4.72 to >3.92 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Locates and records data/information from a prescribed number of sources across a specified range. Able to demonstrate satisfactory reflection on the research process.
|
3.92 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Fails to locate and record data/information from a prescribed number of sources across a specified range. Unable to demonstrate satisfactory original reflection on the research process, including neglecting to submit final report to Turnitin.
|
|
8.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Identification of contextual and solution themes
1) Generate and evaluate
|
|
10.0 to >7.9 Pts
Advanced and and Self-Developing (HD)
Demonstrate an ability to reflect insightfully and to improve own processes used. Evidence of extremely solid, thorough, comprehensive written work. High level of academic integrity. Demonstrates the result of consistent hard work, use of sources and/or independent scholarship. Provides evidence of substantive self-determined criteria directly relevant to aims of the task.
|
7.9 to >6.9 Pts
Advanced (Dist)
Uses appropriate academic methodologies to search for and select a range of reliable and credible sources. Critically evaluates selected information/data according to specified criteria. Evidence of self-determined criteria directly relevant to aims of the task. Demonstrates a capacity to be discerning about the way in which information is presented.
|
6.9 to >5.9 Pts
Competent (CR)
Uses mostly academic methodologies to search for and select a range of sources. Some evidence of self-determined criteria in addition to specified criteria.
|
5.9 to >4.9 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Some use of academic methodologies to search for sources. Credibility and reliability of selected material may be inconsistent. Evaluates selected information/data using specified criteria. Able to demonstrate satisfactory reflection on the research process.
|
4.9 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Inability to demonstrate use of academic methodologies to search for sources. Does not demonstrate satisfactory credibility nor reliability of selected materials. Does not evaluate selected information/data using specified criteria. Unable to demonstrate satisfactory reflection on the research process, including neglecting to submit final report to Turnitin.
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDevelopment and organisation of research structure and content
1) Organise and manage information 2) Individual task processes and functions
|
|
4.0 to >3.16 Pts
Advanced and and Self-Developing (HD)
The work is clearly structured and convincingly supported by appropriate evidence, argument or illustration. The work demonstrates a process to development that follow a transparent pattern.
|
3.16 to >2.76 Pts
Advanced (Dist)
Structure and organisation used to enhance comprehension and convey information coherently and logically. Alignment of the key idea with the topic and all main ideas outlined logically and clearly. Evidence of self-determination in individual processes: negotiation, delegation, and cooperation.
|
2.76 to >2.36 Pts
Competent (CR)
Structure and organisation appropriate to task requirements and information mostly integrated and relevant. Some individual self-determination processes evident.
|
2.36 to >1.96 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Structure and organisation largely appropriate and information is coherent and integrated. Alignment of the key idea with the topic and main ideas generally outlined clearly. Satisfactory evidence of self-determination.
|
1.96 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Inappropriate structure and organisation and information not always coherent nor integrated. Alignment of the key idea with the topic and main ideas not outlined clearly. Limited evidence of self-determination. Unable to follow final submission processes, including neglecting to submit final report to Turnitin.
|
|
4.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeMaking the case for the solution AND Justification and identification of advantages and disadvantages
1) Analyse and synthesise 2) Critically analyse and using evidence
|
|
10.0 to >7.9 Pts
Advanced (HD) and Self-Developing
Advanced ability to ask emergent, relevant and researchable questions. Material is deployed in a disciplined way and demonstrates a sophisticated comprehension of key issues of debate and is advanced in ability to critically review, analyse, synthesise and apply theoretical and technical body of knowledge in a broad and creative way to a range of areas and diverse contexts.
|
7.9 to >6.9 Pts
Advanced (DI)
Competent in interpreting several sources of information/data and synthesising to integrate knowledge into standard formats. Demonstrates a high level of critical analysis and synthesis through the selection, interpretation and integration of multiple sources of information/data.
|
6.9 to >5.9 Pts
Competent (CR)
Demonstrates critical analysis and synthesis through the selection and integration of a range of information/data. Competent use of theory and generally credible evidence to support arguments and demonstrate individual understanding. Uses conceptual skills to express ideas and offer some perspectives.
|
5.9 to >4.9 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Attempts analysis and limited synthesis through the selection of sources of information/data. Able to use given theory and evidence to demonstrate individual understanding. Able to use some conceptual skills to express ideas and offer limited perspectives.
|
4.9 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Unsatisfactory attempts at analysis and limited synthesis through the selection of sources of information/data. Unable to use given theory and evidence to demonstrate individual understanding. Unsatisfactory attempt to use some conceptual skills to express ideas and offer limited perspectives. Inability to demonstrate original justification of solution, including neglecting to submit final report to Turnitin.
|
|
10.0 pts
|
|
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePresentation of the solution
1) Communicate and apply 2) Use of discipline specific language and genre 3) Grammar and spelling 4) In-class processes (ESCT)
|
|
4.0 to >3.16 Pts
Advanced (HD) and Self-Developing
Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of key discipline- specific language and scholarly application. Students used prescribed genre to develop & demonstrate understanding to a pre-specified audience. Provide constructive and supportive discussions with peers and educator to account for ethical, social, cultural and individual issues (ESCT).
|
3.16 to >2.76 Pts
Advanced (Dist)
Students used discipline-specific language and prescribed genre to demonstrate understanding from a stated perspective and for a specified audience. Developed clear understanding of organisational problem and specified ECST issues.
|
2.76 to >2.36 Pts
Competent (CR)
Students communicate with each other and relate their understanding throughout set task. Use prescribed genre to develop and demonstrate understanding to a prescribed audience. Demonstrated knowledge of discipline-specific language evident, but not fully utilised to support scholarly discussion. Showed some understanding of ethical, social, cultural and individual issues (ESCT).
|
2.36 to >1.96 Pts
Satisfactory (PA)
Mostly general vocabulary with ability to use discipline-specific and academic language although with an acceptable level of errors. Able to discuss, listen and perform satisfactorily. Showed limited understanding of ethical, social, cultural and team issues (ESCT), e.g. in-class participation.
|
1.96 to >0 Pts
Unsatisfactory (NN)
Mostly general vocabulary with an inability to use discipline-specific and academic language. Unable to act as a team (e.g. in-class activity): unsatisfactory attempts to discuss, listen and perform. Did not consider ethical, social, cultural and in-class issues (ESCT). Inability to demonstrate the originality of the solution, including neglecting to submit the final report to Turnitin.
|
|
4.0 pts
|
|
Total points: 40.0
|
Previous
youwe
AssignmentBrief.docx
