Case Study Analysis

Assessment Task Description
Assessment Part 1: Case Study Analysis (Report)
Weighting: 25%
Date due: Week 10
Word limit: 2000 words
Purpose: to assess the following Learning Outcomes:
a. Explain the difference between domestic and international HRM
b. Examine issues and methods faced by managers in staffing, recruiting and selecting the candidates on both
levels and challenges faced due to cultural differences
c. Methods and challenges of training and development of employees.
Students will also be assessed on their ability to work in a team.
Your task: Students must identify the IHRM issues covered by the assigned case study, research management
theories (especially those contained in the textbook), expert opinions and current management practice regarding
the identified issues, and prepare for the presentation. Students must ensure that they apply the relevant
management theories covered in this unit when analyzing and recommending actions in their report.
Report structure:
• • Title page: name of the case, members of the group, date of submission
• • Executive Summary: key findings of the group
• • Table of Contents: with section numbers and headings
• • Introduction: Summarize the case and point out the important case facts
• • Key Management Challenge: identify the symptoms and problems

• issues

• Case Analysis: identify and apply relevant management theories and address root causes of identified

• • Recommendations
• • Full ‘in-text’ referencing: citing at least four academic sources
• • Reference list: using the A.P.A. referencing style
Do not focus on a problem that has already been solved also do not focus on many problems at the same time.

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines MGT307 – International Human Resources Management
School	Business
Course Name	Bachelor of Business
Unit Code	MGT307
Unit Title	International Human Resources Management
Trimester	Trimester 1, 2019
Assessment Author	Ms. Tanmaya
Assessment Type	Group
Assessment Title	Report
Weight	25%
Total Marks	25

 

Section to be included in the report	Detailed Description of the Criteria	Marks
Criteria 1	Executive Summary	10
Criteria 2	Introduction: A brief outline of the background to the organization, its parent country and host country	10
Criteria 3	Provide discussions on the differences between how the HRM works in the Parent country and how the same organization works in the host country.	35
Criteria 4	Provide recommendations for the future directions/opportunities/options for the other companies (Whether the company succeeded or failed) Conclusion	20
Criteria 5	Provide at least 10 academic sources of information, and five non-peer review articles Your case study analysis must be fully referenced using the APA style of referencing.	15
Criteria 6	Meetings and journal documentations and contribution provided in appendix OR Matrix Schedule of Group Members work at meetings and documented discussions of cooperation.	10
Total	100

 

Marking Rubric Criteria/ Grades	High Distinction (HD) [Excellent] = or >80%	Distinction (D) [Very Good] 70%-79%	Credits (C) [Good] 60%-69%	Pass (P) [Satisfactory] 50%-59%	Fail (N) [Unsatisfactory] <50%
Criteria 1	Concise and specific to the project	Topics are relevant and soundly analyzed.	Generally relevant and analyzed.	Some relevance and briefly presented.	This is not relevant to the assignment topic.
Criteria 2	Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately	Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically but did not source reference material appropriately	Demonstrated ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately	Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately	Did not demonstrate ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately
Criteria 3	All elements are present and very well integrated.	Components present with good cohesive	Components present and mostly well integrated	Most components present	Proposal lacks structure.
Criteria 4	Logic is clear and easy to follow with	Consistency logical and convincing	Mostly consistent logical and convincing	Adequate cohesion and conviction	Argument is confused and disjointed

 

strong arguments
Criteria 5	Clear styles with excellent source of references.	Clear referencing style	Generally good referencing style	Sometimes clear referencing style	Lacks consistency with many errors

Comments: