MBK7005M Building and Leading High Performing Teams

ASSESSMENT DETAILS

Assessment is by one assignment, a critical essay of 6000 words (100%) which integrates
theory and practice. The assignment must include a clear structure with an abstract, a list of
references and, where appropriate, appendices and diagrams. You must make appropriate
use of journal articles and texts. References should follow the Harvard system – see the
guide at https://www.yorksj.ac.uk/library/referencing/guides/.

The assignment should contain:

1. A critical review of theories of team working, particularly ideas about how teams in
organisations can be effective in achieving results, including theories of team
leadership (50% of the available marks).
2. An analysis of a team of which you have personal experience, either as a member or
a leader, in relation to relevant theories of team working (30% of the available
marks).
3. An assessment of your own abilities as a team leader or team member, using
appropriate theories; identify areas of strength and areas where you might benefit
from development (20% of the available marks).

Note the mark allocations to each part of the assignment.

To preserve confidentiality, please anonymise the organisation or organisations you discuss

in the assignment, eg by calling them Company X, or Governmental Organisation Y, or
International Organisation Z. Similarly, where you write about private individuals, call them
manager A, or leader B.

N.B. The word count will include quotations but exclude footnotes, list of references,
appendices, tables and graphs. Appendices will not count against the word limit but should
not contain large amounts of text. (It will be expected that they will normally contain
diagrams or tables or visual images). Appendices should not contain material that is
essential to meeting the assignment brief. If you exceed the wordcount by more than 10%,
you will be penalised.

You are encouraged to proofread your work thoroughly before submission. You may ask
others to proofread your work on your behalf for matters of punctuation, grammar and
spelling, but UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES should they comment on the subject content of
your work. While errors may be highlighted for your attention, edits and corrections must be
your own. You are reminded that any work submitted should be yours and yours alone. If
the paper has been proofread (especially it that involved correcting the English) this must be
stated on the cover of the paper and a copy of the original, pre-correction, paper retained for
possible review by the University. The regulations on Academic Misconduct (including
cheating and plagiarism) can be viewed here: Academic Misconduct.

Module: MBK7005M Building and leading high performing teams Page 1 of 5


(100-85)
Overarching indicators: All requirements in the
assignment brief have been
achieved to an exceptionally
high level, beyond that
expected at Level 7, with
features consistent with
Level 8 (doctoral study).
SUMMARY DESCRIPTOR: Learning accredited at Level 7 (Master’s) will reflect the ability to display mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge and
skills, employing advanced skills to conduct research or advanced technical/professional activity, accepting accountability for related decision-making, including
use of supervision.
Assessment criteria
Subject knowledge & Exceptional subject
understanding knowledge and conceptual
understanding at the
forefront of the discipline.
Authoritative approach to
complexity.
Higher cognitive skills & Rigorous and sustained
originality criticality, independent
thinking and original insight;
convincing conclusions
and/or application to
practice.
PASS GRADES
(84 - 70)
All requirements in the
assignment brief have been
achieved to a high standard,
and many at an exceptionally
high level.
Comprehensive subject
knowledge and conceptual
understanding, informed by
recent developments in the
discipline, demonstrating
reading/research at significant
depth/breadth. Informed &
confident approach to
complexity.
Strong and sustained criticality
and independent
thinking/original insight;
persuasive conclusions and/or
application to practice.
(69 - 60)
All requirements in the
assignment brief have
been met fully, at a good
or very good standard.
General characteristics
Detailed subject
knowledge and conceptual
understanding
demonstrating purposeful
reading/research.
Developing awareness of
complexity.
Detailed criticality and
evidence of independent
thinking/original insight;
logical and sustained
conclusions and/or
application to practice.
(59 - 50) (49 - 40)
All requirements in the One or more of the
assignment brief have requirements in the
been met. assignment brief have not
been met.
Broad subject knowledge Reproduction of taught
and conceptual content and/or tendency to
understanding, describe or report facts rather
demonstrating directed than demonstrate complex
reading/research. Some ideas. Any errors or
awareness of complexity. misconceptions are
outweighed by the overall
degree of knowledge &
understanding demonstrated.
General criticality and Limited criticality and
some evidence of independent thought, leading
independent thinking; to conclusions and/or
logical conclusions and/or application to practice that is
application to practice. poorly supported.
FAIL GRADES
(39 - 20) (19 - 0)
A significant proportion Most of the
of the requirements in requirements in the
the assignment brief assignment brief
have not been met. have not been met.
Insufficient evidence of Little or no evidence
knowledge and of knowledge and
understanding of the understanding of
subject and its the subject and its
underlying concepts. underlying
concepts.
Mainly descriptive Little or no evidence
and/or inadequately of criticality and
supported conclusions independence of
and/or application to thought.
practice.

Written and/or oral Professional,
communication sophisticated/innovative
communication, with
exceptional clarity and/or
audience-engagement.
Adherence to academic Exemplary academic
conventions [e.g. correct conventions
referencing formats]
Professional and fluent
communication that holds the
attention of its reader/
audience throughout.
Demonstrates academic
conventions that are accurate
and relevant to the level of
study/beyond
Fluent and coherent
communication.
Demonstrates consistent
and accurate academic
conventions
Mostly fluent and Communication that is difficult Limited clarity and/or Highly limited clarity
coherent communication. to follow at times because of structure in and/or structure in
poor clarity/structure. communication. written and/or oral
communication.
Demonstration of Inconsistent demonstration of Inadequate Inadequate
appropriate academic academic conventions demonstration of demonstration of
conventions, which may academic conventions academic
include some errors or conventions
inconsistencies

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING SCHEME

Module: MBK7005M Building and leading high performing teams Page 1 of 5