My assessment is follow up of the previous assessemnt of order number 37836. I need the same tutor who wrote this as mentioned in the last assessment. Please go through with the links and files.
Running Head: GENDER DIVERSITY IN LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT1 GENDER DIVERSITY IN LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT 2 ASSIGNMENT 1.1 OUTLINE FOR BUSN20019 GENDER DIVERSITY IN LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT GENDER DIVERSITY IN MANAGEMENT TEAM LEADS TO INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE ORGANIZATION ENVIRONMENT Submitted toSubmitted By Dr. Evi LanasierAnurag
[email protected] 12089089
[email protected] Table of Contents 1. Field of Research3 2. Source of Secondary Data3 3. Research Questions3 4. Search Terms3 5. Information from Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Articles to be used in Literature Review3 References3 1. Field of Research Workplace management is a challenging task, especially when it involves the allocation of job responsibilities to different individuals. However, according to the data of Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012), if an organisation consists of management personnel mostly from only one type of gender, then it might limit the variety of ideas that emerge from managerial decision-making. Therefore, maintaining gender diversity in management teams is presently a core concern for many organisations (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012). 2. Source of Secondary Data Two publically accessible sources where specific data can be found for the current topic are https://exchange.telstra.com.au/proud-among-world-leaders-gender-equality/, where gender diversity in Telstra has been illustrated with their success stories also report for past years are also available on there website and https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/icms_docs/195396_annual-report-2018.pdf, (P-3-11)where the 2018 annual report of Woolworths has been presented to give evidence of success of implementing gender diversity in their workplace. Both these sources can be used for examples to highlight the benefits of gender diversity in leadership management. 3. Research Questions i. What are the possible impacts of promoting gender diversity in the work culture on the company’s innovative thoughts and development? ii. What are the factors hindering the management team from implementing a gender diverse environment in the atmosphere of the company? Specific Research Question: What is the impact of gender diversity in leadership management? Variables: Gender diversity, Leadership management 4. Search Terms Gender diversity, leadership management, innovation in company, development of organisation environment 5. Information from Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Articles to be used in Literature Review According to Henry, Foss, Fayolle, Walker and Duffy (2015) and Ho, Li, Tam and Zhang (2015), gender diversity at any function of an organisation proves to be useful due to the division of labour and responsibilities of work between both the genders. Therefore, as suggested by Ruiz-Jimenez, del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes and Ruiz-Arroyo (2016), if people, from both masculine and feminine genders, are included in equal number into the management team, a pool of ideas can be brainstormed, which, as supported by Kelan and Wratil (2018), in turn, would lead to developing a better work culture and innovative thinking from all managers. References Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2012) 4102.0 - Australian Social Trends, Dec 2012 Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/
[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features30Dec+2012 Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2012)MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/
[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/1001.0~2016-17~Main%20Features~Management%20of%20Human%20Resources~5 Fuller, K. (2017) Proud among World Leaders Gender Equality—Telstra. Retrieved from https://exchange.telstra.com.au/proud-among-world-leaders-gender-equality/ Henry, C., Foss, L., Fayolle, A., Walker, E., & Duffy, S. (2015). Entrepreneurial leadership and gender: Exploring theory and practice in global contexts. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(3), 581-586 Ho, S. S., Li, A. Y., Tam, K., & Zhang, F. (2015).CEO gender, ethical leadership, and accounting conservatism. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(2), 351-370 Kelan, E. K., & Wratil, P. (2018). Post‐heroic leadership, tempered radicalism and senior leaders as change agents for gender equality. European Management Review, 15(1), 5-18 Ruiz-Jimenez, J. M., del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, M., & Ruiz-Arroyo, M. (2016). Knowledge combination capability and innovation: The effects of gender diversity on top management teams in technology-based firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 503-515 Woolworths, (2018) Annual Report .Retrieved from https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/icms_docs/195396_annual-report-2018.pdf BUSN20019 ASSESSMENT 1 STEP 2 – MARKING RUBRIC In case of high Turnitin similarity scores, markers analyse the similarity score on a case by case basis and you will see relevant comments in your assignment, if necessary. If high similarity derived purely from reference lists and/or the fact that you may have copied the assessment brief into your submission, no comments are made as you can find this information out yourself by exploring the similarity score on your Turnitin report. Late submission penalties are being applied to this assignment as per the university regulations. Any students deemed to have conducted Academic Misconduct are being reported and will be informed of the outcome of the investigation and any related penalties via their student email address. Criteria 0 (Not Shown) 1 (Poor) 2 (Unsatisfactory) 3 (Satisfactory) 4 (Good) 5 (Very Good) 6 (Excellent) 1. Aim and research question(s) 10% Entirely unsuitable or irrelevant; or missing. Incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate for the topic OR too vague/too many Incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate for the topic OR too vague/too many Effective presentation of aim and objectives OR aim and RQs; may be inconsistent or somewhat unclear Convincing presentation of aim and RQs; may be slightly inconsistent or unclear Highly competent presentation of aim and RQs; consistent and clear Superior presentation of aim and RQs; entirely consistent and clear 2. Preliminary critical literature review 20% Incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate for the topic Work presented is not suitable as a LR and/or it is incomplete and/or inappropriate for the topic. Work presented is not suitable as a LR and/or it is incomplete and/or inappropriate for the topic. Effective review of a limited amount of suitable literature; effective structure; may be overly descriptive Convincing review of an acceptable amount of suitable literature; well structured; may not be critical throughout Highly competent review of a justifiably good amount of suitable literature; very well structured; generally critical and may clearly identify gaps to be addressed Superior review of a justifiably good amount of suitable literature; excellent structure; critical throughout; clearly identifies gaps to be addressed 3. Organisation of the project (research plan including: an overview of your proposed methods of data collection and data analysis; Gantt chart schedule; and clear presentation of raw publicly available secondary data sources/links) 20% Entire section or large parts thereof missing OR entirely unsuitable content. Somewhat incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate/ highly unrealistic for the topic Slightly incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate/ highly unrealistic for the topic Demonstrated ability to effectively organise the project; all aspects covered; may be somewhat unrealistic, unclear and/or inconsistent; lacks detail Demonstrated ability to convincingly organise the project; all aspects covered; generally realistic, clear and consistent; may lack detail Demonstrated ability to highly competently organise the project; all aspects covered; realistic, clear and consistent; may lack detail Demonstrated ability to organise the project in a superior manner; all aspects covered in appropriate detail; realistic, clear and consistent throughout 4. Feasibility of project within time-frame 10% Entirely unfeasible OR insufficient information to judge. Unfeasible but sufficient information to judge. Unfeasible but sufficient information to judge. This project may be feasible but requires greater focus. It looks like this project will be feasible in its current proposed format. Feasible project in its current proposed format. Certainly feasible project in its current proposed format. 5. Written communication 20% Incomprehensible OR entirely incorrect writing OR highly unprofessional presentation of written work. Very poor writing with only few sentences readable and/or unsuitable writing style and/or not proofread; OR very unprofessional presentation of written work. Poor writing with a majority of sentences unreadable and/or unsuitable writing style and/or not properly proofread; OR slightly unprofessional presentation of written work. Satisfactory writing that is reasonably readable and suitable for formal business communications; more proofreading required. Generally professional in presentation of work. Good writing that is generally readable and suitable for formal business communications; more proofreading required. Professional presentation of work. Very good writing that is readable and suitable for formal business communications; minor improvements are feasible. Very professional presentation of work. Superior writing that is highly readable and highly suitable for formal business communications; extensive proofreading completed. Very professional presentation of work. 6. Quality and appropriateness of references, and accuracy of referencing 20% No use of the APA referencing system in the assignment, or the reference list; OR no appropriate references used; OR highly inaccurate referencing. Very poor use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and/or in the reference list; OR mostly inappropriate references used. Unsatisfactory use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and/or in the reference list; OR a number of inappropriate references used. NOTE: submissions with less than 10 peer-reviewed articles will not achieve a pass grade on this criterion even if the referencing style is accurate. Satisfactory use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list; 10 peer-reviewed articles used; mistakes and/or omissions present. Competent use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list; generally correctly cited sources (of which 10 or more are peer-reviewed) but small omissions and/or errors of judgment may be present. Very good use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list with almost entirely correctly cited sources (of which 10 or more are peer-reviewed). Faultless use of the APA referencing system in the body of the assignment and in the reference list with completely correctly cited sources. Extensive body of peer-reviewed sources used (i.e. every claim is supported). BUSN20019 ASSESSMENT 1 STEP 2 – MARKING RUBRIC In case of high Turnitin similarity scores, m arkers analyse the similarity score on a case by case basis and you will see relevant comments in your assignment, if necessary. If high similarity derived purely from reference lists a nd/or the fact that you ma y have copied the assessment brief into your submission, no comments are made as you can find this infor mation out yourself by exploring the similarit y score on your Turnitin report. Late submission penalties are being applied to this assignment as per the university regulations. Any students deemed to have conducted Academic Misconduct are being reported and will be informed of the outcome of the investigation and any related penalties via their student email address. Criteria 0 (Not Shown) 1 (Poor) 2 (Unsatisfactory) 3 (Satisfactory) 4 ( Good ) 5 ( Very Good) 6 (Excellent ) 1. Aim and research question(s) 1 0% Entirely unsuitable or irrelevant; or missing. Incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate for the topic OR too vague/too many Incomplete OR insufficiently presented OR inappropriate for the topic OR too vague/too many