Faculty of Business and Law
ACADEMIC YEAR 2021/22
Assessment Brief
Submission and feedback dates
Submission deadline: Before 14:00 on 3rd November 2022
Marks and Feedback due on: 6th December 2022
N.B. all times are 24-hour clock, current local time (at time of submission) in the UK
Submit assessment
Module title and code: Understanding Organisations and People UMOD63-15-1
Component and type: Component B - Essay
Assessment title:
Assessment weighting: 60% of total module mark
Size or length or assessment: 1500
Module learning outcomes assessed by this task:
1. Understand the nature and role leadership and power in shaping organisations and the ways in which they function.
2. Understand and apply a range of both mainstream and critical approaches to the understanding of people in organisations
3. Identify and understand the range factors that influence the behaviour of individuals between individuals and within organisations
Completing your assessment
What am I required to do on this assessment?
For this assignment you are expected to analyse the case study provided on Arlan Hamilton using theory from SU2 Power and Politics and SU3 Leadership. Your essay should argue, based on your analysis, what kind of leader Hamilton is and how she approaches power and politics.
Where should I start?
Downloading this brief is a great start. Next:
• Reread your notes and download the lecture slides for SU2 Power and Politics and SU3 Leadership
• Download and read the Arlan Hamiliton case study (don’t do any extra research into her outside of this case).
• Your face to face tutorials
What do I need to do to pass?
The points below are for students looking to get in the 40’s. For guidance on how to get a higher mark make sure you also read the next section.
• Do not do any extra research into Arlan Hamilton. Base your assignment solely on the information provided in the case.
• Use relevant theories around power & politics and leadership to support your analysis of Arlan Hamilton’s management practices. Just using theories from the lecture slides is enough to pass.
• Link the theories to examples from the case study.
• Do not spend your word count ‘describing’ theories or ‘describing’ in too much detail the examples from the case study. Description should be kept to a minimum the emphasis should be on discussion, analysis and building an argument.
• Reference any ideas which are not your own.
• Use UWE Harvard Referencing.
What do I need to do achieve higher marks this assessment?
In addition to the points above, in order to get a 2:1 or first you also need to:
• Let us know your overall argument in the introduction: “This essay will argue that Arlan Hamilton is a…” You can then build this argument throughout your essay.
• Make detailed links between theory and case study examples. Use words like ‘therefore’ to demonstrate how this analysis links back to your overall argument.
• Make sure every point is supported by strong evidence. Avoid making broad statements which cannot be supported.
• Build a balanced argument that shows you understand there is more than one perspective. Make sure you include theory from both the managerialist and critical perspectives.
• Draw upon a range of sources from the module reading list. Do not just rely on the lecture slides if you are aiming for a higher mark.
• Use signposting to guide the reader through your essay. Your essay should have a coherent narrative and the reader should be able to follow your argument throughout each section.
• Use the full word count efficiently to maximise your marks. This usually means doing more than one draft. When you redraft remove any words/sentences which don’t contribute to your overall argument. Use these extra words to pack in more analysis and evaluation.
• Include some critique of theory and link this to your overall argument.
How does the learning and teaching relate to the assessment?
This assessment draws upon the lecture and seminar teaching from SU2 Power and Politics and SU3 Leadership. The online workshops in SU2 and SU4 will also be entirely focussed on this assessment.
What additional resources may help me complete this assessment?
Try to take advantage of extra resources and support:
• FAQ Document on Blackboard
• Sample structure (template) on Blackboard
• UWE library study skills pages
• Library and Learning Hub workshops (bookable on infohub)
What do I do if I am concerned about completing this assessment?
UWE Bristol offer a range of Assessment Support Options that you can explore through this link, and both Academic Support and Wellbeing Support are available.
How do I avoid Assessment Offences on this module? 2
Use the support above if you feel unable to submit your own work for this module. To avoid assessment offences make sure you write the assignment yourself. If you’re struggling reach out to the module team and avoid the temptation to do things like copy and paste sections of a friends essay. You also might see adverts for companys that will write essays for you but these are not trustworthy and can lead to you getting into a lot of trouble.
When you submit your essay you might see a Safe Assign percentage. Sometimes this can be quite high if you have used lots of quotes and references, but as long as you have written the essay yourself this isn’t usually something to worry about.
Marks and Feedback
Your assessment will be marked according to the following marking criteria.
You can use these to evaluate your own work before you subm
MARK THEORY, KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING (30%) ANALYSIS OF ORGANISATIONAL PRACTICES (30%) CRITICAL EVALUATION, COHERENT ARGUMENT (30%) EFFECTIVE SCHOLARSHIP
& COMMUNICATION (10%)
70+ Demonstrates a detailed and comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the theories and concepts used.
Shows excellent evidence of reading widely.
Extensive reference to wide range of relevant literature. Perceptive analysis which raises insightful issues and creates a deeper understanding of the given organisational context.
Very good integration of theory and practice, connections are made between what a given theory says and how it connects to the given organisational context.
Well chosen, interesting and highly relevant examples given. Excellent evidence of critical thinking and well supported evaluations.
Concepts are not unquestioningly accepted at face value and are questioned in the light of the analysis, pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses are considered and a sound judgement is formed and expressed.
Development of strong, coherent argument that consistently addresses the purpose of the assignment.

Adept handling of the material, well reasoned and written, with a clear line of thought.
Coherent structure; well signposted.
References are accurately and appropriately recorded.
60+
Demonstrates a good knowledge and understanding of theories and concepts – clearly stated and accurate – but some areas could be stronger.
Shows good evidence of reading, going beyond the more basic texts and sources.
Reference to a good range of relevant literature media. Good evidence of analysis, that creates insight and understanding.
Good integration of theory and practice – not focussing on either one too much
Good number and quality of examples. Some evidence of critical thinking, sound judgement, clear reasoning and support for evaluations
Development of a coherent argument that addresses the purpose of the assignment.

Material is well-handled, with clear evidence of reasoning and narrative thread. Well written.
Good structure and signposting
References accurately and appropriately recorded.
50+
Broadly adequate knowledge, but contains errors.
Clumsy - may use technical language, but doesn’t show full understanding
Adequate evidence of reading.
Some reference to relevant literature. Reasonable analysis in places, but sometimes lapses into description rather than analysis
Some linkage between theory and practice (some strong, some weak links)
Adequate number and quality examples. Adequate evidence of judgment, with some attempt at evaluation but tendency towards description.
Has an argument but sometimes difficult to follow. Generally addresses the purpose of the assignment.

Satisfactory handling of the material, but the reader may sometimes have to work to follow the line of thought. Adequately written
Reasonable structure and signposting
References adequately recorded but may contain occasional minor errors.
40+ Weak knowledge and understanding of theories and concepts (generalised/incomplete/has errors).
Limited evidence of reading – core text/lecture material only.
Few references to relevant literature. Limited analysis, tending toward description.
Little linkage between theory and practice (focussing on one at the expense of the other)
Weak or few illustrations and examples. Poor judgment, some unsupported assertions. Largely descriptive.
Weak argument – not developed.
Does address the purpose of the assignment in parts, but often strays off the point. Poorer handling of the material and the reader has to work to follow the line of thought.
Some structuring and signposting, but much to improve.
Referencing may contain errors
37
30
20
0 Knowledge and understanding of theories and concepts is very weak or non-existent.
Little or no evidence of reading.
Very few or no references to relevant literature. Little or no analysis which is heavily descriptive.
No linkage between theory and practice (Either: mostly practice-based with very little reference to theory, OR, theory-based with very little reference to practice)
Very poor, very few, irrelevant or no illustrations or examples. Unsupported assertions and value judgments.
Little or no obvious argument.
Fails in large part to address the purpose of the assignment.

Handling of the material is weak, with little/no obvious line of thought. Hard to read.
Poorly structured.
Referencing very weak or missing.
1. In line with UWE Bristol’s Word Count Policy, word count includes everything in the main body of the text including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists, etc. It does not include the title, student number, references, bibliography and/or footnotes (provided footnotes only include references).
2. UWE Bristol’s UWE’s Assessment Offences Policy requires that you submit work that is entirely your own and reflects your own learning, so it is important to:
• Ensure you reference all sources used, using the UWE Harvard system and the guidance available on UWE’s Study Skills referencing pages.
• Avoid copying and pasting any work into this assessment, including your own previous assessments, work from other students or internet sources
• Develop your own style, arguments and wording, so avoid copying sources and changing individual words but keeping, essentially, the same sentences and/or structures from other sources
• Never give your work to others who may copy it
• If an individual assessment, develop your own work and preparation, and do not allow anyone to make amends on your work (including proof-readers, who may highlight issues but not edit the work) and
When submitting your work, you will be required to confirm that the work is your own, and text-matching software and other methods are routinely used to check submissions against other submissions to the university and internet sources. Details of what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it can be found on UWE’s Study Skills pages about avoiding plagiarism