To what extent should new leisure industry managers adopt the ideas set out in Douglas McGregors Theory X?
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 McGregors Theory X?
Recommended reading:
Mintzberg, Henry [1998], Covert Leadership: notes on managing professionals. Harvard Business Review, November-December 1998
Carson, Charles M. (2005), A historical view of Douglas McGregors 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. 239264.
Therese Yaeger, Thomas C. Head, (2011),Douglas McGregors 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. Parti
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT ??
Jermaine Byrant
Nicole Johnson
OVER
RATING
YEARS
