Research Weighting 20% No authoritative sources, no evidence of research or not relevant for the task. Very limited understanding. The research has not been linked to the main text. Less than 2 authoritative sources or sources are not relevant for the task. Limited understanding. Little evidence of meaningful integration of the research with the main text. 2-3 scholarly sources. Some sources lack relevance or authority but are still appropriate for the task. Adequate understanding. The research could be incorporated with the main text more consistently. 3-4 scholarly sources. Sources are mostly well-chosen, authoritative and appropriate for the task. Good understanding. The research is integrated with the main text. 4-5 scholarly sources. Sources are well- chosen, authoritative and are appropriate for the task. Excellent understanding. The research is very well integrated with the main text. In-text citations and Reference list APA formatted Weighting 5% More than 5 errors. 4-5 errors. 2-3 errors. 1 error. No errors.

Writing Weighting 5% No consideration for presentation. Muddled writing that is very difficult to follow. Numerous grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. Acceptable presentation. Long winded and some clear writing presentation. Some grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. Tidy presentation. Mostly clear writing but at times long winded. Writing style lacks consideration. Few issues around grammar. Less than 5 spelling errors. Professional presentation. Clear writing mainly to the point. Considered writing style. Excellent grammar with only minor oversights. Less than 3 spelling errors. Polished presentation. Clear and concise writing. Mature and appropriate writing style. Excellent grammar, correct in all aspects. No spelling errors.

Organisation/ logic Weighting 5% No flow. No argument. Poorly organised and difficult to read. Does not flow logically from one part to another. The argument is not clear. Generally well organised although the flow of the argument is not always logical. Argument is clear and mostly sound. Coherently organised and logical formation of sound argument. Exceptionally well structured. Logic is easy to follow. Arguments are sound and convincing.

Importance of managing conflict and its outcomes Weighting 15% Clear evidence of lack of understanding, fails to identify importance of managing conflict Lack of knowledge of theory and poor understanding of application. Unconvincing evaluation Lack of understanding of objectives and their purpose. Little comprehension of link between theory and managing conflict Incomplete and weak evaluation Reasonable understanding of the importance of managing conflict and different approaches, including conflict resolution Displays sound knowledge of theory in managing conflict and its outcomes Thorough understanding of the importance of managing conflict and different approaches, including conflict resolution Displays good knowledge of theory in managing conflict and its outcomes Excellent understanding of the importance of managing conflict and different approaches, including conflict resolution Displays extremely high and in depth knowledge of theory in managing conflict and its outcomes

Conflict management skills Weighting 20% Clear evidence of lack of understanding fails to identify purpose of conflict management skills. Lack of knowledge of theory and poor understanding of application. Unconvincing evaluation Lack of understanding of purpose of conflict management skills Little comprehension of link between theory and conflict management skills Weak evaluation Reasonable assessment of the skill gap and the skills required are justified Sound development plan is outlined to acquire the skills needed Competent assessment of the skill gap and the skills required are justified Good development plan is outlined to acquire the skills needed – both short- term and long-term Excellent assessment of the skill gap and the skills required are justified Detailed development plan is outlined to acquire the skills needed – both short- term and long-term

Conflict management style comparison Weighting 10% Clear evidence of lack of understanding fails to identify purpose of the comparison. Lack of knowledge of theory and poor understanding of application. Unconvincing comparison Lack of understanding of purpose of the comparison. Little comprehension of link between theory and understanding of application Weak comparison Reasonable description of the ideal/preferred conflict management style Sound comparison contrasting on the advantages and disadvantages of the styles in both personal and professional contexts Competent description of the ideal/preferred conflict management style Good comparison contrasting on the advantages and disadvantages of the styles in both personal and professional contexts Excellent description of the ideal/preferred conflict management style Excellent comparison contrasting on the advantages and disadvantages of the styles in both personal and professional contexts

Mar king schedule Criteria E (0-39) D (40-49) C (50-64) B (65-79) A (80-100) Conflict management style analysis Weighting 20% Clear evidence of lack of understanding, fails to identify the purpose of conflict style assessment Lack of knowledge of theory and poor understanding of conflict style application. Unconvincing assessment Lack of understanding of the purpose of conflict style assessment Little comprehension of link between theory and conflict style Weak analysis of their own conflict style Reasonable analysis of their own conflict style using at least one tool to assess the conflict management style and personality Sound description of the conflict style and self-reflection linking theory Competent analysis of their own conflict style using at least two tools to assess the conflict management style and personality Good description of the conflict style and self-reflection linking theory Excellent analysis of their own conflict style using at least two tools to assess the conflict management style and personality. Similar traits have been explained and connected well An insightful analysis for the self-reflection on their own conflict management style

Activity Title: Assignment 01 Paper Number and Title: MGT102 – Introduction to Business Operations Level 5, 15 Credits Lear ning outcome: 2 & 3 Discuss the effects of different conflict management styles Conditions: This is a compulsory assignment. It must be submitted and it makes up 15% of your final result for this paper. The completed assignment is to be submitted to your facilitator via Blackboard by the due date. Any work of others such as articles, journals. The internet or textbooks must be referenced following the latest APA referencing guidelines.