ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT600 Management, People and Teams / MGMT6009 Managing People and Teams
Assessment Team Performance Evaluation
Length Up to 1,500 words
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
a) Critically assess the key principles and theories underlying management to achieve high-performing organisations at projects, teams, and individual levels.
b) Critically evaluate and reflect on effective relationships between people and teams in organisations and projects.
c) Demonstrate effective communication and practical problem solving skills to manage people in a range of complex contexts.
d) Critically reflect on the roles and functions that managers perform in the context of the challenges and risks in the changing global environment.
e) Develop and justify contemporary management strategies to address a variety of people management issues to ensure best practice and quality outcomes.
Submission 12-Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 6.1 (Week 11)
6-Week Duration: Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 6.1 (Week 6)
Total Marks 100 marks
You are required to critically assess the performance of your team and recommend improvements based on the relevant concepts and frameworks you have learnt in this subject in a 1,500-word team evaluation report.
Please refer to the Instructions for details on how to complete this task.
Managers are responsible for the delivery of products/services and results whether that be in an operational or project context. This invariably requires not only the creation and development of teams including performance improvement but also the management of a variety of team, organisational, and cultural dynamics. This assessment requires you to conduct a review of team performance and demonstrate and apply your understanding of team processes and dynamics. In doing so, you will review the performance of the group to which you were allocated for the purpose of Assessments 1 and 2. This will help you to demonstrate analytical, evaluative, and problem-solving skills to develop strategies and actions for performance improvement.
1. Review your team’s performance in completing the first two assessments and make recommendations for improvement.
• In reviewing the team performance, considerations must be given to the following:
o How did your team come together and what phases or stages did it go through? o What roles did team members play? o What challenges were presented? o How did individual, team, and contextual dynamics impact performance?
o What would you do differently to improve performance?
o How would you apply your learnings in your current or future workplace?
• Please note that you are not required to review the quality and content of the assessments you produced as a team. Instead, you are required to review the performance of the team in completing the assessment tasks.
• You are required to specifically apply and discuss concepts from Modules 4, 5, and 6 as well as any relevant processes and concepts from earlier modules.
• The evaluation needs to be supported with evidence from academic research as well as examples from your own experiences and or observations. You will also find the module activities useful in prompting your thinking.
2. Write a team evaluation report of 1500 words using the following structure:
• Cover sheet: Student details (student name, ID number, subject code & name, assessment number and title)
• Executive summary
• Table of contents
• Introduction: Outline the purpose and structure of your report.
• Background: Briefly describe your team’s purpose and relevant contextual issues.
• Main discussion: Review your team’s performance covering key concepts from all modules. Exploring these within an appropriate theoretical framework would be appropriate here.
• Recommendations / action plan: Provide recommended strategies and actions to improve your team’s performance.
• Reference list
3. You are strongly advised to read the rubric, which is an evaluation guide with criteria for grading your assignment—this will give you a clear picture of what a successful report looks like.
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing in the Academic Skills webpage.
Submit this task via the Assessment 3 link in the main navigation menu in MGT600 / MGMT6009 Management, People, and Teams. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Note: All submissions must be in MS Word (.doc or .docx) format. and contain a signed cover sheet.
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online. Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard) 049% Pass
50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
75-84% High Distinction
Understands the relevant theoretical
models and concepts
Percentage for this
criterion = 40%
Limited understanding of the relevance of models, concepts, and theories.
Passable knowledge or understanding of the relevance of models, concepts, and theories.
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Thorough knowledge or understanding of the models, concepts, and theories.
Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates capacity to explain and discuss relevant concepts.
Highly developed understanding of the models, concepts, and theories.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well-demonstrated capacity to explain and discuss relevant concepts.
Sophisticated understanding of the models, concepts, and theories.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Expertly explains and discusses relevant concepts.
Application and discussion
Critical assessment of the team performance through the application and discussion of the
Limited application and discussion of the concepts relevant to the assessment of team performance.
Rudimentary level of application and discussion of the relevant concepts to provide an assessment of the
team performance. Shows ability to interpret information.
Well-developed application and discussion of relevant concepts to provide a critical assessment of the team performance with recommendations for improvement.
Thoroughly developed application of relevant concepts to provide a critical assessment of the team performance.
In-depth discussion on how learnings will be applied to manage team performance
Highly sophisticated application of relevant concepts to provide a critical assessment of the team performance.
Strong discussion on how learnings will be applied to improve team performance.
MGT600-MGMT6009_Assessment_3_Brief_Team Performance Evaluation_Module 6.1 Page 4 of 5
Percentage for this criterion = 40%
recommendations linked to the discussion.
Provides clearly justified recommendations based on the discussion.
Use of academic and
Critical discussion report meets the requirements
outlined in the
Well-structured report with clear flow of ideas
Appropriate use of credible resources
Correct citation of key resources using APA
Percentage for this
criterion = 20%
Poorly written. Does not adhere to the assignment brief.
Difficult to understand for audience; no logical/clear structure; poor flow of ideas; argument lacks supporting evidence. Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Inconsistent and inadequate use of good quality, credible, and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
No use of in-text references or no reference list. Many mistakes in using the APA style.
Written according to academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Little use of in-text referencing, or inadequate references consulted and added to references. Some mistakes in using APA style.
Written according to academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are well presented; mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Good use of in-text referencing and appropriate number of references used and listed in the reference list.
Minor errors in using the APA style.
Well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Information, arguments, and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear, and well supported by evidence.
Very good use of in-text referencing. All in-text references match with references listed.
No mistakes in using the APA style.
Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic.
Excellent and meticulous use of in-text referencing. All in-text references match with references listed in the reference list.
No mistakes in using the APA style.
MGT600-MGMT6009_Assessment_3_Brief_Team Performance Evaluation_Module 6.1 Page 5 of 5