Instructions and marking criteria
Word limit: 1,000 words
Draw on concepts in Units 1, 2 and 3 to reflect on the approaches that you use as a change agent to influence people, analyse and evaluate two approaches that you think need to be improved, and frame plans for improving each of them.
The assessment should be structured in two parts.
In each part, present an action learning review in which you draw on concepts in Units 1, 2 and 3 to:
- analyse and evaluate one of your influencing approaches that you think needs to be improved in terms of its effectiveness and/or its alignment with your values
- outline an approach that you believe will be more effective and/or better aligned with your values, and a plan for implementing it.
In each of the two reviews, you could focus on your influencing approach in a particular situation or on a pattern/habit of using a particular kind of approach to influence people.
Each improvement plan should include details of:
- the type of situation in which you will be using the approach
- your influencing methods and the thinking and mindset guiding your approach
- the improved outcomes you intend and how you will evaluate your success
- possible obstacles to success and how you will deal with them.
|Use of course concepts Range and relevance of course concepts used Is an appropriate range of relevant course concepts deployed in the analysis, evaluation and improvement plans? Concreteness and accuracy in application of course concepts Is each concept supported with succinct, specific descriptive detail that shows that the concept is understood and applied accurately? Integration of concepts How skillfully and insightfully are concepts connected and integrated?||30%|
|Analysis and evaluation of previous approaches to motivating & influencing others and the identification of improvement issues How clearly are the two improvement issues identified?How well is the identification of the improvement issues supported by an analysis and evaluation of how particular incidents and challenges were handledHow well is the analysis and evaluation anchored in and supported by specific details of incidents and challengesHow clearly are the improvement issues related to your goals and values in motivating and influencing||30%|
|The two improvement plans Are the goals and steps in the plan SMART+?Does the goal in each plan clearly address the improvement issue?Are the steps in each plan logically sequenced and clearly related to the goal?How creative and insightful is the plan for addressing the improvement issues?How clearly are possible obstacles identified?Are specific and practical ways of dealing with the obstacles outlined?Does the plan include clear and specific detail about:how implementation success will be monitored and evaluated?the evaluation criteria that will be used?how the plan will be reviewed and revised in the light of the evaluation?||30%|
|Presentation Are points expressed clearly and succinctly?Are there errors in spelling, grammar, formatting or typography?How effectively are paragraphs and other structural devices used to highlight and sequence key ideas?Are points referenced in accordance with the referencing requirements posted in the course website?Does the assessment comply with the word limit and the formatting requirements?||10%|