Describe the topic of hybrid working and set it in its contemporary context. This can be in the UK and/or globally. In this section first address two

Assessment Criteria

Learning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment:

•   1.Critically analyse and explore ways in which globalisation and long-term economic, environmental and demographic trends affect employment, work and organisations
•   2. Critically evaluate the current and future impact of technological trends and new organisational forms on working lives
•   3. Critically analyse and explore the impact of management methods on working lives

Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment:

•   Critically evaluate the impact of long term global economic, environmental and demographic trends and make relevant proposals to address them
•   Be able to formulate business decisions by understanding the ways in which technological developments and new organisational forms affect management, employment and working lives
•   Competently formulate and present a business and social justice strategy for promoting equitable and sustainable people practice in the workplace

Feedback /Marking criteria for this Assignment

 Lateness Penalty: For each day or part day up to five days after the published deadline, coursework relating to modules submitted late will have the numeric grade reduced by 10 grade points until or unless the numeric grade reaches the minimum pass mark (50). Where the numeric grade awarded for the assessment is less than the minimum pass mark no lateness penalty will be applied. If the coursework is submitted more than 5 days after the published deadline, it will not be marked and a grade of zero will be awarded. Please note: Referred coursework submitted after the published deadline will be awarded a grade of zero (0).”

 Extensions: Students do not have an automatic right to an extension. If you require an extension, this must be requested in advance of the submission deadline. Please give your reason(s) for needing an extension. Not all Assessments are eligible for an extension. Please check above.

Assignment Title:
Critically explore the challenges and benefits of hybrid working for women in work

Description of the assignment, task, content and structure:

2,000 words (10%+or-)

A report style with numbered headings

Title page

1.0 Introduction

2.0 The topic and current context

3.0 The debates regarding women workers and hybrid working

4.0 sustainable recommendation

1.0 Introduction: (approx. 250 words)

Begin with a short introduction explaining what will be in the report

2.0 The context: (approx. 500 words)

Describe the topic of hybrid working and set it in its contemporary context. This can be in the UK and/or globally.

In this section first address two issues. Firstly, is this question making assumptions about caring responsibilities and gender? Secondly, why would hybrid working be irrelevant to many women in work?

Then consider the trends that make this topic relevant – below are some prompts to help you think about what to write in this part of the report, they are NOT questions that you are to answer, they are simply a guide.

Why is the topic relevant, have recent changes prompted this? Is Hybrid working increasing in workplaces? Is there more attention and discussion on it? Is it sector specific? What external factors make it more relevant and why? Use sources to show current trends.

3.0 Main discussion: (approx. 1,000 words)

Be selective, limit yourself to two aspects to debate surrounding the pros and cons of hybrid working on women in work, develop them into a coherent debate and discussion based on key literature. It could be that the same topic or issue has arguments for and against in terms of pros and cons.

4.0 recommendation: (approx. 250 words)

Select one key challenge you have identified in terms of hybrid working and women workers, make a recommendation for a sustainable organisational policy that might help with that challenge, be realistic and base this on any real-world examples you can find.

Any specific instructions: Mark scheme:

Presentation and Structure
Harvard Referencing Intellectual Curiosity
Content and findings
Business Application, Integration of literature and analysis

10 10 30 50

Academic Integrity, Plagiarism, Essay Mills and other Academic Misconduct Offences

•   You are NOT allowed to copy any information into your assignment without using quotation marks and a reference – this is ‘plagiarism’ (a type of academic misconduct).
•   You are NOT allowed to copy from other students (or allow other students to copy from you) – this is ‘collusion’.
•   You are NOT allowed to copy from your own assignments on other modules – this is ‘self- plagiarism’.
•   You must NEVER buy assignments from websites (essay mills) – this is called ‘contract cheating’ and it is now illegal in the UK.
•   Contract cheating is a serious academic misconduct offence and also includes arranging for help with an assessment such that there is also reasonable doubt as to whose work the assessment represents. It extends to input from a fellow student, friend, relative, or any other person, with or without payment of any kind.
•   Unauthorised use of artificial intelligence (AI) is not allowed and will be treated as academic misconduct.

  

•  

If you commit academic misconduct, your mark will be reduced, or, depending on the severity of

the offence you may get 0% for the assignment in question or 0% for the module, and get a

disciplinary warning. Repeat offenders normally face disciplinary action.

Student Support and Guidance

•   For further help on module content and assignment details, contact your Module Leader in his or her drop-in / office hours or by email.
•   Use the Learning Outcomes and HBS Grading Criteria (Rubric) to help inform you of the expectations of the assessment.
•   Use the Online Library to access quality business information resources:

90 – 100 Outstanding

Outstanding presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures &appendices. Articulate & fluent academic writing style with ideas cross referenced. No grammatical / spelling errors.

Outstanding selection of quality sources, well beyond core & recommended resources. Outstanding standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.

Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.

Outstanding exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate research.
Impressive choice and range of appropriate content.

Outstanding business insight & application. Outstanding integration of literature/data into work. Very impressive breadth and depth.

Outstanding level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection.
Highly developed/ focused work, with thorough consideration of all possibilities and aspects of the topic.

80 – 89 Excellent

Excellent presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing.

Articulate & fluent academic writing style. Only minor errors.

Excellent selection of quality sources. Evidence of independent searching beyond core & recommended resources.
Excellent standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.

Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.

Excellent level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated.
Evidence of appropriate reading.
Covers all relevant points & issues.

Excellent business insight & application.
Excellent integration of literature/data into work. Impressive breadth and depth.

Excellent level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Clearly developed points all of which are relevant to the topic

70 – 79 Very Good

Very good presentation & report structure, paragraphing, use of numbering, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Fluent academic writing style.

Very few grammatical errors & spelling mistakes.

Very good selection of mostly quality sources beyond the recommended resources. Few irrelevant/poor quality sources used.
Very good standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.

Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.

Very good level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated.
Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations.

Very good business insight & application.
Very good integration of literature/data into work. Very good use of literature/data with breadth and depth.

Very good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. A few less relevant ideas/points or would benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison.

60 – 69 Good

Good clear presentation & report structure, use of numbering & appendices.
Writing is mainly good with some flow and spelling &/ or grammatical errors seldom impede understanding.

Good selection of quality sources but some irrelevant/poor quality sources used beyond the recommended reading. Good standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.

Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.

Good grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented.
Good knowledge & understanding is demonstrated.

Minor errors / omissions in content/ calculations.

Good business insight & application.
Good integration of literature/data into work. Good use of literature/data with adequate breadth and depth.

Good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be addressed or developed further.

50 – 59 Clear Pass

Satisfactory basic report structure.
Not always written clearly & has grammatical & / or spelling errors which impede understanding.

See CASE with feedback

Satisfactory: Some quality sources used. Research did not go beyond the recommended sources.
Satisfactory referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.

See CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback

Satisfactory content / level of knowledge of the topic. Addresses most of the task. Some errors / omissions in content/ calculations. May benefit from further research.

Satisfactory business insight & application. Limited integration with literature/ data.

Use of literature/data but limited in breadth or depth.

Satisfactory: basic evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points irrelevant or superficially made so need further development.

See CASE with feedback

40 – 49 Marginal Fail

Weak report format. Limited or poor structure.
Muddled work with many spelling & / or grammatical errors.

Must see CASE with feedback

Weak: Limited evidence of appropriate research. Some use made of recommended reading, but the majority of sources are irrelevant/of poor quality. Weak use of Harvard referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied.

Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback

Weak: limited content / knowledge/ calculations. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.

Weak: unsatisfactory evidence of business application & insight
Work needs to show better links between practical application and theory.

Weak: limited evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection.
More development & comment needed. May need to do more than describe.

Must see CASE with feedback

20 – 39 Clear Fail

Inadequate report format and poor paragraphing / signposting. Inappropriate writing style
Poorly written &/or poor spelling & grammar.

Must see CASE with feedback

Inadequate: Little evidence of appropriate research. Few quality sources used from recommended reading. Inadequate use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or inconsistencies.

Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback

Inadequate: Lacking in relevant content/ knowledge/calculations. Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.

Inadequate: Lacks evidence of business application & insight. Some literature missing or irrelevant to topic.

Inadequate: Lacking / inadequate level of discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive.

Must see CASE with feedback

0 – 19

Little or Nothing of merit

Nothing of merit: Poorly written work, lacking structure, paragraphing / signposting.
Many inaccuracies in spelling & grammar.

Must see CASE with feedback

Nothing of merit: No evidence of research. No use made of recommended reading. Sources are irrelevant & of poor quality. No or little attempt to use the recommended Harvard referencing system.

Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback