1500 +-

ORG30003 – Organisation Theory and Practice – S2, 2020   

1   

ASSESSMENT TASK TWO: SHORT ESSAY

Assessment overview

Organisation design is not (and cannot be) based on simplistic principles that can be applied

in all situations. Differences and changes in the organisation’s operating environment require

different approaches to organisation design. For example, division of labour is valuable and

widely used, but jobs can become too specialised. Centralized decision-making may work

well in some situations, but in other circumstances other structural designs are more

effective. This is the premise of contingency theory (sometimes called situational theory),

which explains how planned dimensions (or designed aspects) of an organisation interact

with contingency factors (also called contextual dimensions) in today’s complex and

turbulent environments.

The purpose of this assessment task is for you to demonstrate your understanding of some

key aspects of organisational design, how their effectiveness is influenced by contextual

factors, and how organisations can adjust those in response to shifting stakeholder agendas.

Submission details

Please submit your assignment online using the submission link in Canvas under

“Assignments”.

Word limit: 1,500 (+/- 10%)  

Weighting: 20%

Due date: End of teaching week 4, Sunday, 30 August 2020, 23:59pm (AEST)  

Assessment task

According to Daft et al.’s (2017, pp. 24-26) framework structural dimensions and contextual

dimensions of organisation design interact with one another and can be adjusted to achieve

organisational effectiveness.

 Please choose two structural dimensions and two contextual dimensions from

Daft et al.’s framework to explain how organisations can respond effectively to

a major change in their operating environment.

 Please select one practical example to illustrate your argument, which can

either be a best-practice example, or an example of an organisation that has

struggled to respond to change in the past.

ORG30003 – Organisation Theory and Practice – S2, 2020   

2   

Tipps for analysis

In addressing this assessment task, you may wish to consider the following points:

 What is the nature of the relationship between structural and contextual dimensions?

 What dimensions do managers have control over?

 What are the distinctive features of turbulent environments?

 How much control can organisations exercise over turbulent environments?

 How are stakeholders impacted by organisation design choices?

It is recommended that you use 5-10 references from various academic sources to develop

and support your argument. Please make sure that evidence from case examples is clearly

referenced, or that examples from your personal work experience are clearly explained as

such.

Assessment criteria

1. Effective use of relevant information from a variety of sources

2. Analysis of relations between phenomena in discussion, using sound argumentation and relevant evidence (evaluate information critically)

3. Knowledge and interpretation of relevant key concepts and issues

4. Ethical issue analysis in response to shifting stakeholder agendas

5. Organisation and presentation of ideas in writing (effective structure and expression)

See Marking Guide on the next page.

ORG30003 – Organisation Theory and Practice – S2, 2020   

3   

 

  Criteria: 

High Distinction  80‐100% 

Distinction  70‐79% 

Credit  60‐69% 

Pass  50‐59% 

No pass 

Using  information  effectively  

(20%) 

Consistently communicates, organises  and synthesises information from a  broad range of high‐quality digital  sources and in a compelling manner. 

Communicates, organises and  synthesises information from a  broad range of digital sources and in  a compelling manner. 

Communicates, organises and  synthesises information from a  range of digital sources. 

Communicates, organises and  synthesises information from a  limited range of digital  sources. 

Communicates irrelevant or  fragmented information (e.g.  taken out of context or  incorrectly paraphrased). 

Analysis –  Evaluate  information  critically 

(30%) 

Systematically and methodically  discriminates between assertion or  personal opinion and information  substantiated by robust and relevant  evidence. Identifies and rectifies  logical flaws. 

Systematically discriminates  between assertion or personal  opinion and information  substantiated by relevant evidence.  Identifies logical flaws. 

Discriminates between assertion  or personal opinion and  information substantiated by  relevant evidence. Identifies  logical flaws. 

Discriminates between  assertion or personal opinion  and information substantiated  by evidence. 

Conflates or confuses  assertion and personal  opinion with information  substantiated by robust  evidence. Lacks logic or  confuses logic with emotion. 

Knowledge  and  Interpretation 

(20%) 

Excellent knowledge and  interpretation of selected material:   advanced understanding of the issues. 

Very good knowledge and  interpretation of selected material:  pertinent understanding of the  issues. 

Good knowledge and  interpretation of selected  material: adequate understanding  of the issues. 

Satisfactory knowledge and  interpretation of the key  concept: adequate  understanding; some related  concepts and/or issues may be  misunderstood. 

Fragmented or insufficient  knowledge of the key  concept, major  misunderstandings of  related concepts. 

Ethical Issue  Analysis 

(20%) 

Clearly identifies the inherent ethical  choices and implications involved in a  professional and/or contemporary  situation. Brilliantly demonstrates an  understanding of the effects of  perspective, context, personal views,  and laws. Integrates clear descriptions  of relevant ethical ambiguities/  dilemmas into the overall analysis. 

Clearly identifies the inherent  ethical choices and implications  involved in a professional and/or  contemporary situation.  Understands the effects of  perspective, context, personal  views, and laws. Integrates clear  descriptions of relevant ethical  ambiguities/ dilemmas into the  overall analysis. 

Can identify/ name the inherent  ethical choices and implications  involved in the professional  and/or contemporary situation.  Clearly describes relevant ethical  ambiguities/ dilemmas. 

Can identify/ name the  inherent ethical choices and  implications involved in the  professional and/or  contemporary situation.  Satisfactorily describes  relevant ethical ambiguities/  dilemmas. 

Struggles to or is unable to  identify the ethical issue(s).  May identify some of the  professional and/or  contemporary stakeholder  issues or recognises relevant  decision‐making dilemmas  but fails to clearly describe  them. 

Structure and  Expression  (10%) 

Excellent organisation of ideas; clear  and nuanced writing style; accurate  grammar, spelling and referencing. 

Very good organisation of ideas;  clear writing style; accurate  grammar, spelling and referencing. 

Good organisation of ideas; mostly  clear writing style; mostly accurate  grammar, spelling and  referencing. 

Satisfactory organisation of  ideas; some ambiguities but  mostly accurate grammar,  spelling and referencing. 

Unsatisfactory organisation  of ideas. Inaccurate  grammar and spelling affect  the clarity of the argument.