Assignment on Intergroup Dynamics

| November 13, 2015

Assignment on Intergroup Dynamics
Instructions:
Use 12-point font, 1.5 spacing;
left and right margins of 2.54 cm
Use the referencing conventions of the American Psychological Association (APA)
Questions
1. Some suggest that conflict in organisations is important, as it is required to bring about change. Not everyone agrees with this view (e.g. see De Dreu, 2008*). Write an argumentative essay, which addresses the following question: Can conflict in organisations be positive? You need to substantiate your arguments through academic literature. (maximum 5 pages)

2. Ramsey and Latting (2005) explain that organisational systems can contribute to dysfunctional conflicts and the unfair treatment of members of different social groups.

a. Describe the systems, structures, processes and patterns in your organisation that could be sources of conflict. Specify in your answer in which way you see these sources potentially contributing to dysfunctional conflicts and the unfair treatment of members of different social groups. (maximum 5 pages)
b. Develop a plan of how you would go about advocating or engaging with the systemic changes required to alter the potentially problematic systems, structures, processes and patterns identified above. (maximum 5 pages)

Reading and citations from:
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 2005; 41; 265 V. Jean Ramsey and Jean Kantambu Latting A
Resistance to Change: Unconscious Knowledge and the Challenge of Unlearning; Richard E. Clark
Discrimination at work: The Psychological and organisational Bases; Robert L Dipbpoye & Adrianne Colella
When and why do implicit measures predict behaviour? Empirical evidence for the moderating role of opportunity, motivation, and process reliance; Malte Friese a , Wilhelm Hofmann b & Manfred Schmitt
SELF-KNOWLEDGE: Its Limits, Value, and Potential for Improvement; Timothy D. Wilson and Elizabeth W. Dunn
Towards a process model of individual change in organizations; Jennifer M. George and Gareth R. Jones
Reaching One’s Personal Goals: A Motivational Perspective Focused on Autonomy; Richard Koestner
The Influence of Team Emotional Intelligence Climate on Conflict and Team Members’ Reactions to Conflict: Oluremi B. Ayoko, Victor J. Callan and Charmine E. J. Härtel – Small Group Research 2008 39: 121
7 Emotion in Organizations; Hillary, Anger, & Elfenbein – University of California, Berkeley Published online: 09 Apr 2008.
Affective Influences on Judgments and Behavior in Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective; Joseph P. Forgas
Moral, Cognitive, and Social: The Nature of Blame; Bertram F. Malle, Steve Guglielmo, and Andrew E. Monroe
Increasing emotional intelligence: (How) is it possible? ; Delphine Nelis , Jordi Quoidbach , Moïra Mikolajczak , Michel Hansenne
From imagery to intention: A dual route model of imagined contact effects; Richard J. Crisp, Senel Husnu, Rose Meleady and Sofia Stathi, Rhiannon N. Turner
Do You See What I Am? How Observers’ Backgrounds Affect Their Perceptions of Multiracial Faces; MELISSA R. HERMAN
Your assignment will be assessed according to the marking rubrics at the end of this document. Each question counts equally so your overall assignment mark will be the average of your marks for the three questions

Marking Criteria – Question 1
Criteria and qualities Fail 2- to 3 2+ to 1 Mark allocation
Introducing the idea Neither implicit nor explicit reference is made to the topic that is to be examined
0-4.5 marks Readers are aware of the overall problem, challenge, or topic that is to be examined.

5-6.5 marks The topic is introduced, and groundwork is laid as to the direction of the report.
7-10 marks

Max 10 marks
Flow of the report The report appears to have no direction, with subtopics appearing disjointed.
0-9 marks There is a basic flow from one section to the next, but not all sections or paragraphs follow in a natural or logical order. At times findings from different sources have been listed rather than being integrated to build a coherent argument.
9.5 – 13.5 marks The report goes from general ideas to specific conclusions. Transitions and adjacent paragraphs tie together so that a logical argument is being built
14 – 20 marks
Max 20 marks
Coverage of content Major sections of pertinent content have been omitted or greatly run-on. The topic is of little significance to the research question
0-12 marks A number of relevant arguments are included, but not covered in as much depth, or as explicitly, as expected. The way the arguments are presented might not always be logical, but significance to the assignment topic is evident
12.5 – 17 marks A great number of relevant arguments are included in depth without being redundant. Each argument is appropriately substantiated by literature. Arguments are logical and clear and significance to the assignment topic is unquestionable
17.5 – 25 marks
Max 25 marks
Clarity of writing and writing technique It is hard to know what the writer is trying to express. Writing is convoluted. Misspelled words, incorrect grammar, and improper punctuation are evident
0-12 marks Writing is generally clear, but unnecessary words are occasionally used. Meaning is sometimes hidden. Paragraph or sentence structure is too repetitive

12.5 – 17 marks Writing is crisp, clear, and succinct. The writer incorporates the active voice when appropriate. The use of pronouns, modifiers, parallel construction, and non-sexist language are appropriate

17.5 – 25 marks
Max 25 marks
Conclusion: A synthesis of ideas There is no indication the author tried to synthesize the information or make a conclusion based on the literature under review.
0-4.5 marks The author provides concluding remarks that show an analysis and synthesis of the ideas referred to in the review. Some of the conclusions, however, were not supported in the body of the report.
5-6.5 marks The author was able to make succinct and precise conclusions based on the review. Insights into the problem are appropriate. The conclusion follows strongly from the arguments provided in the body of the report.
7-10 marks
Max 10 marks
Citations/References: Proper APA format Citations for statements included in the report were not present, or references which were included were not found in the text, or non-academic references were used
0-4.5 marks Citations of academic references within the body of the report and a corresponding reference list were presented. Some formatting problems exist, or components were missing
5-6.5 marks All needed citations were included in the report. References are relevant and where appropriate recent (not more than 10 years old). References matched the citations, and all were encoded in APA format.
7-10 marks

Max 10 marks
Total Max 100 marks
Marking Criteria – Question 2
Criteria and qualities Fail 2- to 3 2+ to 1 Mark allocation
Logic: Presentation of arguments The assignment appears to have no direction, with sections appearing disjointed. It is not clear from the writing how conclusions were reached. 0-9.5 marks Arguments provided have been built in such a way that the reader is able to follow the logic.

10 – 13.5 marks Transitions and adjacent paragraphs tie together so that logical arguments are being built. Rather than to structure the assignment skill-by-skill cross-references have been made between the different intergroup skills where appropriate
14 – 20 marks

Max 20 marks
Depth of arguments and insight The arguments provided are not relevant to the intergroup skills under examination. The writing suggests that the intergroup skill has not been understood.

0-29.5 marks A number of relevant arguments are included, but not covered in as much depth, or as explicitly, as expected. The way the arguments are presented might not always be logical, but significance to the assignment topic is evident. The analysis often remains at a surface level.
30 – 41.5 marks A great number of relevant arguments are included in depth without being redundant. Arguments are logical and clear and significance to the assignment topic is unquestionable. An in-depth analysis has been provided.
42 – 60 marks
Max 60 marks
Clarity of writing and writing technique It is hard to know what the writer is trying to express. Writing is convoluted. Misspelled words, incorrect grammar, and improper punctuation are evident.
0-9.5 marks Writing is generally clear, but unnecessary words are occasionally used. Meaning is sometimes hidden. Paragraph or sentence structure is too repetitive. The document is neat and spelling and grammar are correct.
10 – 13.5 marks Writing is crisp, clear, and succinct. The writer incorporates the active voice when appropriate. The use of pronouns, modifiers, parallel construction, and non-sexist language are appropriate. The document is neat and spelling and grammar are correct.
14 – 20 marks

Max 20 marks
Total Max 100 marks

Get a 5 % discount on an order above $ 150
Use the following coupon code :
2018DISC
BE335 coursework, Autumn 2015
Assignment 2: LASA 1—Financial Decisions

Category: essay

Our Services:
Order a customized paper today!