Chapter One – Introduction
ProService Co is a professional
services
(consulting engineers and project management) firm with
five offices in the Asia Pacific region. The Head Office is located in Melbourne, Australia, with
satellite offices in Sydney, Brisbane, Wellington (NZ) and Hong Kong. The 420 employees are
distributed throughout the offices (see attached workforce profile) with most based in Australia.
The
organisation
has grown significantly over the past ten years, having been founded by its current
Managing Director (Shona Smith) and several current board members. An aggressive growth
strategy has increased employee numbers from a small team of 25 in 2002 to 420 today. This has
been managed through organic growth (recruitment of employees to the firm) and targeted
acquisitions of smaller firms in strategic geographical regions in order to acquire specific skill sets
and market position (e.g. project management & consulting in Hong Kong).
Such an aggressive approach has brought with it challenges as well as achievements.
Challenges include issues of sourcing and keeping professional staff with
high quality
skills in thin
labour
markets, dealing with cross-cultural interpersonal differences, managing inter-office teams in
a high functioning environment while managing high risk and time critical projects (e.g. design, build
and commissioning of high tech factories in China) and managing
cultural integration
of disparate
organisations
during acquisitions.
Assessment Submission Rules: Rule 1: Failure to acknowledge sources will lead to an overall fail grade. Rule 2: Incoherent English writing will lead to reduced marks due to the impediment it creates in determining whether or not the student has met the above standards. Capstone Case – Consultant report Criteria HD (High Distinction) 80% – 100% DN (Distinction) 70% - 79% CR (Credit) 60% - 69% PP (Pass) 50% - 59% NN (Fail) 0% - 49% Identify HR issues and activities within the context of the case organisation: Weight = 10% You provide a comprehensive identification and assessment of the key HR issues within the case. Your analysis includes all of the following aspects: • The correct identification of the key HR issues relevant to the case organisation • A highly detailed description of the nature of the problematic behaviours or processes identified which references information from the case. You provide a detailed identification and assessment of the key HR issues within the case. Your analysis includes all of the following aspects: • The correct identification of the key HR issues relevant to the case organisation • A detailed description of the nature of the problematic behaviours or processes identified which references information from the case. You broadly identify and assess key HR issues within the case. Your analysis includes at least two (2) of the following aspects: • Correct identification of some of the key HR issues relevant to the case organisation, although some major HR issues are overlooked • A broad description of the nature of the problematic behaviours or processes, with some case specific detail missing. You identify and assess some HR issues within the case, although some of the key HR issues are overlooked. There are aspects of your analysis that are either missing or unclear. Your analysis includes at least one (1) of the following aspects: • Description of HR issues without reference to the specific context of the case • Identification of HR issues without analysis of the nature of the problematic behaviours and processes. Your identification of HR issues within the case are inaccurate or missing Your analysis does not adequately describe the nature of the problematic processes or behaviours of the HR issues identified Your analysis does not contain sufficient contextual detail. Asses, using relevant HR theory, principles and practices the current and potential impact of HR issues upon the case organisation: Weight = 15% You provide a comprehensive assessment of the impact of each issue identified upon the operation and competitiveness of the case organisation. Your assessment draws upon at least five (5) entirely relevant sources of academic literature to illustrate the current and potential impact of the You provide a detailed assessment of the impact of each issue identified upon the operation and competitiveness of the case organisation. Your assessment draws upon at least four (4) relevant sources of academic literature to illustrate the current and potential impact of the issues identified upon the case organisation. You provide a broad assessment of the impact of some, but not all, issues identified upon the operation and competitiveness of the case organisation. Your assessment draws upon at least three (3) mostly relevant sources of academic literature to illustrate the current and potential impact of the The assessment provided of the impact of the issues identified upon the operation and competitiveness of the case organisation is very brief. Your assessment is highly opinionative, incorporating few sources of relevant academic literature to illustrate the current or potential impact of the The assessment provided is mostly opinion, and fails to incorporate relevant academic literature to illustrate the current or potential impact of the issues upon the case organisation. issues identified upon the case organisation. issues identified upon the case organisation. issues identified upon the case organisation. Propose and justify integrated HR strategies and recommendations to address identified problems or improve HR practices: Weight = 20% The recommendations developed in your report: • Directly reference, and effectively address all of the key HR issues identified in the body of the report • Reflect thorough consideration of the contextual factors relevant to the case organisation • Include guidelines as to the implementation of the proposed recommendations All recommendations developed demonstrate a high level of consideration and integration of relevant HR theory principles and practice. Recommendations are fully justified, drawing upon at least five (5) sources of relevant academic literature. The recommendations developed in your report: • Address all of the key HR issues identified in the body of the report • Reflect an understanding of most of the contextual factors relevant to the case organisation • Include some guidelines as to the implementation of the proposed recommendations All recommendations developed demonstrate consideration and integration of relevant HR theory, principles and practice. Recommendations are well justified and draw upon at least four (4) sources of relevant academic literature. The recommendations developed in your report: • Address most of the HR issues identified in the body of the report, although direct links may sometimes be missing • Account for some, but not all, contextual factors relevant to the case organisation • Include very minimal direction as to the implementation of the proposed recommendations The recommendations developed demonstrate a very broad level incorporation of relevant HR theory, principles and practice, with some recommendations lacking appropriate justification using academic literature. Your recommendations draw upon at least three (3) sources of relevant academic literature. The recommendations developed in your report: • Address some, but not all of the HR issues identified in the body of the report. Direct linkages between the issue and recommendation are frequently missing • Reflect very minimal understanding of the specific context of the case • Do not provide sufficient direction as to the implementation of the proposed recommendations The recommendations developed lack sufficient incorporation of relevant HR theory, principles and practice. Most recommendations lack the appropriate justification using academic literature. Your recommendations draw upon at least two (2) sources of relevant academic literature. Some strategies or recommendations are proposed which lack connection to the context of the case. The link between the recommendations developed and their corresponding HR issue is incoherent or unclear. The recommendations developed are not supported by relevant HR literature. Assessment Submission Rules: Rule 1: Failure to acknowledge sources will lead to an overall fail grade. Rule 2: Incoherent English writing will lead to reduced marks due to the impediment it creates in determining whether or not the student has met the above standards. Write using academic language and structure: Weight = 5% The report is professionally presented, and conforms to the required formatting standards which include all of the following elements: • A title page • A table of contents • Clearly defined sections (including report body and recommendations) which correctly apply the use of headings and sub-headings • Correctly formatted references and/or appendices Analysis and recommendations are presented in a concise and logical manner, including the consistent use of discipline specific academic language. The report is professionally presented, and conforms to most of the required formatting standards including: • A title page • A table of contents • Clearly defined sections (including report body and recommendations) which correctly apply the use of headings and sub-headings • Correctly formatted references and/or appendices Analysis and recommendations are presented in a mostly concise and logical manner, including the frequent use of discipline specific academic language. The report at times lacks professional presentation, and conforms to some of the required formatting standards including: • A title page • A table of contents • Clearly defined sections (including report body and recommendations) which correctly apply the use of headings and sub-headings • Correctly formatted references and/or appendices Analysis and recommendations are presented in a mostly logical manner. Some discipline specific language is used, however opportunities for greater incorporation exist. The report presentation lacks professionalism, and applies very few of the require formatting standards: • A title page • A table of contents • Clearly defined sections (including report body and recommendations) which correctly apply the use of headings and sub- headings • Correctly formatted references and/or appendices The presentation of information lacks clarity and cohesion. A minimal level of discipline specific language is used throughout the report. The report fails to adequately conform to the required standards of professionalism and formatting