Module Title: Leadership and Change in Public Service Management.

Coursework 2

You are required to submit a 2,000 words Proposal for Change. The change is either based on a health or related issue that you select from your own work experience. Alternatively, what you have experienced as a public service user may influence the change you want to propose. This coursework requires you to write in the third person (e.g., ‘it is suggested that’) and NOT in the first person (e.g. do not write ‘I’).

Word count: 2,000 words (plus/minus 10%)

Weighting: 70%

Method of Submission: Through Turnitin on Moodle

The coursework has the intention to assess the following Learning outcomes:

3. Appraise theories of effective leadership and evaluate the application of leadership approaches within a professional practice.
4. Critically analyze the structure, culture and processes of introducing change in organizations.
5. Evaluate the impact of government policy on the effectiveness of public service delivery.
6. Critically discuss the importance of introducing change for quality improvement and making impact public service performance.

Guidance for doing the coursework

The coursework has the intention to relate you closely to the reality of contemporary public service management. This gives you the opportunity to demonstrate the application of leadership principles and theories and change to real events.

 

A case study from your own experience

Either way, your Proposal for the Change draws from your own experience.

When writing the proposal, it is therefore helpful to consider a situation or problem that you would like to change.  This could be one in which you are playing (or have played) a part, or one in which you were (or have been) simply an observer. Alternatively, you could consider an issue that is likely to arise in the future as the focus for the Change proposal.

Situations suitable for analysis and change would be:

• Any problem you think needs resolving if it is not being properly handled
• A management decision that does not seem to have achieved the intended objective or involved full consideration of broader organizational factors.
• A change in work practices not yet adequately planned.
• The implementation of measures arising from government reforms.
• An occurrence that you have experienced as a user of a public service;

Those of you who do not have a workplace in which to base the proposal will consider an event or situation that you have experienced – a less than optimal experience that you would like to prevent happening again. If you have not had a specific personal experience, you could consider a change based on the experience of a friend or relative went through. A good proposal would clarify about what happened, before analyzing the situation and proposing a change(s) that you think would stop the situation happening again.

 

Structure of the Proposal for Change

In order to address the coursework’s learning outcomes, the proposal should incorporate specific leadership and management theories and principles covered in the module. You are required to present the analysis in the form of a management report using the following subheadings.

Title of the Change Proposal – clearly identifies the topic and issue for changing

Executive Summary

Your report should have a summary of not exceeding 350 words (included in the word count).  The summary should give a brief outline of the main issues and the action points.  It should be able to ‘stand-alone’ for presentation to management at the organization where the incident occurred. While you written this part last, it still presented at the front of the proposal.

1. Introduction: It should outline the issue and signal the reader to the main areas for discussion in proposal.
   • Background
     • Analysis of the change: It gives the background information about the topic of the change including analysis of the change needed. Using literature, clarify the theories, principles and developments surrounding the topic and the service of interest to your proposal – what it is about, how is it understood, what does it involve, and definitions of the key terms (all backed with literature).
     • Statement of the problem: It helps to provide a paragraph of no more than five short sentences clearly stating the problem driving your proposed Change immediately following your analysis of the change terrain (Background).
     • Aim of the Change: Having stated the problem, clarify what the aim of your proposal for change is. This should be a paragraph of no more than two short sentences. Remember, the AIM is not the same thing as the OBJECTIVE.
     • Objectives: Immediately following the aim, give specific indications of what you want to do in order to achieve the aim. It is advisable to have a minimum of THREE and a maximum of FOUR objectives that are SMART
     • Rationale: It is important for you to give a justification of why you want to undertake the Change. This may include the relevance of your change Objectives to achieve improvement in delivery or management of the concerned service.

 

• Implementation Method: This section of the proposal explains HOW you are going to do the proposed change following its analysis (subsection 1.2.1 through to 1.2.5). The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle, for example is a helpful approach for consideration in implementing the proposed change. You are required to present a clear Action Plan with timelines.

 

• Evaluation Strategy: This section identifies and explains how you will know whether the change is a success or not. Clarify the evaluation question(s) that needed to be utilized and the measures to put in place in order to monitor progress with the change – i.e. state what you want to see that is different from your past experience and using the PDSA cycle may be helpful here.
• Conclusion: The conclusion should draw together the report, and include a reflection on any lessons you have learnt from the analysis.

Remember to show a logical structure, clear use of English and accurate referencing in this assignment.

Presentation of the coursework

You should appropriately reference the Proposal for Change using the Harvard Referencing style. You will get further guidance in the course of delivering the module.

• It must double spaced and written using an appropriate Font.
• Text aligned to both the Left & Right
• The word count does not include References. Keep within plus/minus 10% word count as exceeding this may incur penalty – 10% of the achieved mark deducted – even if it takes you below the threshold.

 

Marking criteria

The Proposal for Change (Coursework 2) will be also marked against the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences Assessment Marking criteria for Undergraduate courses attached to these Guides.  

Getting Feedback on assessments

This module is organized on the promise that students get feedback on their assessments within two weeks after the date of submission. Generic and Individual feedback will be provided as previously  explained

What the final product will look Like:

• Introduction and background
  • Introduction
  • Background / Literature review (present situation)
    • Statement of the problem (problem  / opportunities)
    • Aims & Objectives

     1.2.2.1   Aims of the proposal

     1.2.2.2     Objectives. (means of the outcome)

• Rationale (Justification) for the proposal

• Options (possibilities for solving the problem or exploiting the opportunity)
• Proposed change (Proposition)
  • Description
  • Implementation

3.2    Advantage & Disadvantages

3.3    Expected and possible outcomes

4       Conclusion and budget summary

5       References

 

Undergraduate Assessment Marking Criteria
%	RELEVANCE of the ANSWER		ARGUMENT and COHERENCE		EVIDENCE		Summary
First   90, 95, 100 82, 85, 88 72, 75, 78	Innovative response, answers the question fully, addressing the learning objectives of the assessment task.  Evidence of critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation.		A clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources.  Engagement with theoretical and conceptual analysis.		Wide range of appropriately supporting evidence provided, going beyond the recommended texts.  Correctly referenced.		An outstanding, well-structured and appropriately referenced answer, demonstrating a high degree of understanding and critical analytic skills.
Upper Second 62. 65, 68	A very good attempt to address the objectives of the assessment task with an emphasis on those elements requiring critical review.		A generally clear line of critical and evaluative argument is presented. Relationships between statements and sections are easy to follow, and there is a sound, coherent structure.		A very good range of relevant sources is used in a largely consistent way as supporting evidence.  There is use of some sources beyond recommended texts.  Correctly referenced in the main.		The answer demonstrates a very good understanding of theories, concepts and issues, with evidence of reading beyond the recommended minimum.  Well organised and clearly written.
Lower Second   52, 55, 58	Competently addresses objectives, but may contain errors or omissions and critical discussion of issues may be superficial or limited in places.		Some critical discussion, but the argument is not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places, with over-reliance on the work of others.		A range of relevant sources is used, but the critical evaluation aspect is not fully presented.  There is limited use of sources beyond the standard recommended materials.  Referencing is not always correctly presented.		The answer demonstrates a good understanding of some relevant theories, concepts and issues, but there are some errors and irrelevant material included.  The structure lacks clarity.
Third   42, 45, 48	Addresses most objectives of the assessment task, with some notable omissions.  The structure is unclear in parts, and there is limited analysis.		The work is descriptive with minimal critical discussion and limited theoretical engagement.		A limited range of relevant sources are used, without appropriate presentation as supporting or conflicting evidence, and very limited critical analysis. Referencing has some errors.		Some understanding is demonstrated but is incomplete, and there is evidence of limited research on the topic. Poor structure and presentation, with few and/or poorly presented references.
Fail   35, 30, 20, 10, 0	Some deviation from the objectives of the assessment task.  May not consistently address the assignment brief.  At the lower end fails to answer the question set or address the learning outcomes.  There is minimal evidence of analysis or evaluation.		Descriptive with no evidence of theoretical engagement, critical discussion or theoretical engagement.  At the lower end displays a minimal level of understanding.		Very limited use and application of relevant sources as supporting evidence.  At the lower end demonstrates a lack of real understanding.  Poor presentation of references.		Whilst some relevant material is present, the level of understanding is poor with limited evidence of wider reading. Poor structure and poor presentation, including referencing. At the lower end there is evidence of a lack of comprehension, resulting in an assignment which is well below the required standard.
Late submission	0		0		0		0