Reference no: EM133996909 , Length: Word Count:1000

Emotional Intelligence, Cultural Intelligence and Diversity

Assessment - Emotional Skills

Task
Each student must submit a 1000-word self-reflection report based on the assessment instructions outlined below.

Assessment Description
In this assessment, students will be assessed on their ability to analyse the key features of emotional and cultural intelligence and reflect on their own strengths and areas for development in relation to EI and CI, and to apply these concepts to modern workplace contexts by examining their implications for leadership, teamwork, and the transformation of organisational cultures.

Assessment Instructions
To begin, you will be tasked with completing a personalised emotional skills self-assessment, which can be accessed through MyKBS. After completing the self-assessment, you will receive an individual results profile. Using these results, students are required to produce a 1,000-word self-reflective report that explores their Emotional Intelligence (EI) using Goleman's Model and contemporary EI frameworks, with a particular focus on the self-awareness and self-management domains. To support this reflection, students must include screenshots of their self-assessment results and select one Emotional Intelligence tool introduced in Workshop 2 (Slide 19), such as mindfulness, journaling, gratitude, strength spotting, or a meditation app, to demonstrate how it can support the development of their EI in practice. Then, create a personalised action plan that identifies at least two emotional intelligence competencies for development across each domain, proposes actionable strategies to improve workplace effectiveness, and reflects on how the EI assessment tool supported your learning. No AI shortcuts — Only authentic assignment help from real expert tutors.

Ethical Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
The ethical use of generative AI in this subject is grounded in academic judgement, transparency, and proper scholarly practice. Generative AI tools may support your learning and assessment work, but they do not replace your responsibility for understanding, authorship, or academic integrity.

As a minimum expectation, in this assessment, you must cite at least five (5) credible sources. Sources should be selected based on their relevance and quality rather than on quantity alone and should include a mix of authoritative and relevant materials such as academic literature, industry or government reports, reputable organisational publications, and credible media sources. All sources used must be cited in text and listed in the reference list in a consistent referencing style.

References must point to original source material rather than to AI tools, AI-generated summaries, or URLs produced by generative AI systems. If a generative AI tool suggests a source, link, or citation, you are required to locate, access, and verify the original publication independently and reference that original source. AI-generated or intermediary URLs that do not link directly to the authentic source are not acceptable as references.

For example, if ChatGPT suggests a report, article, or web page, you must confirm that the source exists, access it through its official publisher or host, and cite the original publication using the required referencing style. Links or citations that cannot be independently verified or that redirect to non-authoritative pages may be treated as invalid references.

AI-assisted content generation: In this assessment, you may use generative AI tools to assist with idea development, drafting, restructuring, or refining content only for the action plan. Where AI directly generates text, images, tables, or other substantive content, this use must be made transparent through an appendix.
The appendix explains how AI was used and how you evaluated, adapted, or rejected its outputs. It does not replace formal referencing in the main body of the assessment. Any sources that inform AI-assisted content must still be cited and referenced in the main text.

Across all forms of use, you are expected to exercise academic judgement, remain accountable for your work, and ensure that your submission reflects your own learning.
Where required, your appendix at the end of the written submission should include the following: Purpose of use
Tool used
Prompt or task description Example outputs
Student evaluation and revision

Section Entry
Purpose of use To support initial idea generation and clarification of key concepts related to diversity and inclusion in the workplace, prior to consulting academic sources.
Tool used ChatGPT.

Prompt or task
description Explain what diversity in the workplace means and why it is important for organisational performance.
Example outputs The AI described workplace diversity as differences in characteristics such as culture,
gender, age, disability, and perspectives, and suggested benefits including improved innovation, broader decision-making, and improved employee engagement.
Student evaluation and revision The output provided a broad overview but lacked critical depth and academic referencing. It was therefore used only as a starting point and refined by integrating peer-reviewed literature on diversity management, inclusive leadership, and social
identity theory from the prescribed readings to strengthen academic grounding.

Referencing Style Requirements
KBS accepts any referencing style as long as it is used consistently across the assessment. Students who need guidance on referencing can access the Kaplan Harvard Referencing resources