Read the case study about David Jones and address the following questions/issues based on the case and further research: Mahar, K. L. (2017). David Jones. In D. M. Waddell, A. Creed, T. G. Cummings, & C. G. Worley,

Notes:

1.     Please number and put sub-headings for each question and each key point in the question clearly. Support your key points with relevant concepts/models/theories and company examples.

2.     Study the questions, marking sheet and marking rubrics provided carefully.

3.     Address all the questions and issues raised.

4.     Make sure that you write according to the allocated marks.

Cover page

      N/A

 Table of content

N/A

1

An overview of this report:

·        company background (1 mark)

·        the purpose of this report (1 mark)

·        the key sections covered in this report (1 mark)

3

2

Research and discuss David Jones’ current financial and operational situation.

(Research and discuss 2 aspects

X 3 marks each = 6 marks)

6

3

Based on your evaluation of the ‘three-pronged approach’ suggested by Paul Zahra, do you agree or disagree with the suggestions? Why? What would you do differently and why?

  (Evaluate the ‘three-pronged approach’ for 6 marks) +

  (Agree/disagree with reason(s) for 2 mark) +

  (Justify different idea/s for 4 marks) = 12 marks

12

4

Evaluate THREE popular planned change models and suggest the best planned change model that can be applied to the David Jones

case study. Justify your choice.

(Evaluate 3 planned change models X 4 marks each = 12 marks) +

(Justify the best model for 4 marks) = 16 marks

16

5

Which one of the four ‘scale of change’ models best fit the changes made by David Jones? Explain and justify your choice.

(Justify the best model for 5 marks)

5

6

David Jones desires a strong online presence to compete with other retailers. If you were responsible for this project, suggest and justify the activities required to gain an online presence. 

(Suggest and justify 3 aspects of the activities X 4 marks each = 12 marks)

12

7

Suggest and justify how you would apply John Kotter’s 8-step model to implement the activities you suggested in Q5, above.

(Suggest and justify application of the 8 steps of the model X 2 marks each = 16 marks) 

16

8

Assume you are responsible to implement a particular change project in David Jones in next 6 months. How would you apply a motivation theory/ model to gain support from the staff and motivate them to implement this change project? Justify your answer.  

(Briefly discuss the change project for 3 marks) +

(Briefly discuss the selected motivation model for 3 marks) +

(Suggest and justify 3 applications of the selected motivation theory/model X 3 marks each = 9 marks) =  15 marks

15

9

In order to implement any change programme, one must first conduct proper research. Good research is the foundation for good                    decisions.

Evaluate ONE (1) major qualitative method and ONE (1) major quantitative method of data collection that you will use to decide

how to apply the motivation theory/model in implementing the change project discussed in Q8, above. 

(Evaluate 2 research methods X 5 marks each = 10 marks)

10

10

Conclude your key findings in each section of this report.

                                                                     TOTAL

100

‘A’ Grade Description

‘B’ Grade Description

‘C’ Grade Description

‘D’ Grade Description

Question with 2 marks

2 marks

1.5 marks

1.0 mark

0-0.5 marks

Question with 3 marks

3 marks

2.0-2.5 marks

1.0-1.5 marks

0-0.5 marks

Question with 4 marks

3.5-4.0 marks

2.5-3.0 marks

1.5-2.0 marks

0-1.0 mark

Question with 5 marks

4.5-5.0 marks

3.0-4.0 marks

1.5-2.5 marks

0-1.0 mark

Criterion  One:

Ideas and understanding

·    Excels in responding to assessment tasks

·    Interesting; demonstrates development of complex ideas

·    Appropriately limits and defines terms. Central ideas are clearly and succinctly communicated

·    Understands and critically evaluates supporting evidence /reference material

·    A sound course, responding to assessment tasks

·    Attempts to define terms, not always successful

·    Clearly states central ideas, but may have minor lapses in development

·    Begins to acknowledge the complexity of central ideas and the possibility of other points of view

·    Shows careful reading of supporting evidence/ reference material but may not evaluate them critically

·    Adequate, but less effective response to assessment tasks

·    Presents central ideas in general terms, occasionally depending on generalisations and/or dictionary definitions

·    Limited exploration of other points of views

·    Shows basic comprehension of supporting evidence /reference material with occasional lapses in understanding

·    Does not respond appropriately to the assessment task

·    Lacks central ideas

·    Supporting evidence /reference material misunderstood or inadequate

·    Ineffective development of ideas

·    Assessment too brief

Criterion  Two:

Supporting Evidence

·    Uses citations appropriately and effectively, providing sufficient evidence

·    Explanations supported and justified convincingly

·    Support points using a range of relevant citations

·    Begins to interpret and justify the evidence, explaining connections between evidence and main ideas

·    Generalizations sometimes used to support points

·    Sometimes depends on unsupported evidence or personal experience

·    Occasionally assumes that evidence speaks for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed

·    Occasional lapses in logic

·    Uses irrelevant or inadequate supporting evidence /reference material throughout

·    Supporting evidence /reference material consistently not acknowledged

Criterion Three:

Organisation and coherence

·    Uses logical structure appropriate to assessment tasks

·    Transitional sentences often develop and link ideas and identify their logical relations

·    Paragraphs have topic sentences guiding the reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas

·    Shows a logical progression of ideas and uses transitional sentences

·    Some logical links may be faulty but each paragraph clearly relates to central ideas

·    Occasionally lists ideas arranged randomly (rather than using any evident logical structure)

·    While each paragraph may relate to central idea, logic is not always clear

·    Arrangement of sentences within paragraphs may occasionally lack coherence

·    Lacks organisation, paragraph coherence and uses few or inappropriate transitional sentences

·    Paragraphs lack topic main ideas and may not all relate to assessment tasks

Criterion Four:

Style

·    Chooses words for their precise meaning and uses discipline appropriate language

·    Writing style fits assessment task

·    Sentences are varied, yet clearly structured, focused and succinct

·    Generally uses words and discipline appropriate language accurately and effectively

·    Sentences generally clear, well-structured and focused, though some sentences may be awkward or ineffective

·    Occasionally uses relatively vague and simple words

·    May use some non-academic language occasionally 

·    Sentence structure generally correct, but sentences may occasionally be wordy, unfocused, repeatitive or confusing

·    Too vague and abstract

·    Overall, contains awkward or grammatically incorrect sentences

·    Majority of sentence structure is too simple with use of non-academic language

Criterion Five:

Mechanics

(Spelling, punctuation, grammar, referencing and formatting)

·    Almost entirely free of mechanical errors

·    May contain mechanical errors, which may distract the reader but not impede understanding

·    Contains several mechanical errors, which may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede the overall understanding

·    Contains many mechanical errors that block the reader’s understanding and ability to see connections between ideas