BUS105 Cross-cultural Management

Learning
Assessment Type Weighting Due
Outcomes
Essay 30% Week 6 a, b, c
Defining and applying
Cross-cultural
communications
(Individual Essay)
(2,000 words)
Presentation of Cross- 20% Weeks 8- 9 d, f
cultural Research
(Group Presentation)
(30 minutes
Exam 50% Exam Week e
and any of a, b, c

Assessment 1 Individual Essay (2,000 words)

For cultural dilemmas in business Trompenaars proposes the reconciliation method as a way dealing
with opposing values. Is reconciliation a panacea - to what extent can the reconciliation method be used
to resolve all dilemmas?

This assessment is due in week 6, FRIDAY, 10 am. Students are required to provide secondary
support and analysis in their discussion. See the Learning Support Hub for additional support on Essay
writing.

Submission guidelines
To be submitted in electronic form as a word-processed file to www.turnitin.com

A school assessment cover sheet to be included with your paper.

A minimum requirement of this assessment is the use of at least 5 academic sources to support your
submission.

Assessment 2

Group Presentation (Groups of FIVE students)

This assignment creates an opportunity for students to focus on countries that are of
importance to them. They will research that country and show the key cultural characteristics
and considerations potential employees from that country would need to be aware should
they come and work in Australia.

Created: 4 Septmebr 2016

Modifed: 27 September 2017 Version: 2
Review Date: January 2018 Page 1 of 4
This online version is a controlled document. Any printed versions are considered uncontrolled versions of the document.
 I) Groups will choose one country and evaluate ideas and cultural themes that
potential employees from these countries might need to consider when working in
Australia.

II) Responses must include at least one theory and set of ideas discussed in class, such
as Hofstede, GLOBE, Hall or Tropenaars.

III) Groups must include a visual proposal as to how the potential employee would
deal with apparent cultural differences with a maximum of 15 pages/PowerPoint
slides.

IV) Upon completion of the presentation, each group should be prepared to answer two
(2) questions from the lecturer.

Apart from the initial briefing and materials supplied, students must conduct secondary
research and use theories to support their decisions.

You have to submit a hardcopy of your presentation along with any supporting documents.
Each group will present a 20 minute presentation in the Week 9 tutorial. This means that all
your group members must belong to the same workshop session. No exceptions.

Each group member must supply their name(s) and student number and state their name
before commencing their delivery. Groups should pay attention to their:

Physical appearance and attire,

Communication skills,
Effective use of language and props in the presentation,
Professionalism and attitude, and
Coordination and timing.

Groups will not be provided with equipment other than what is already in the room. All
groups must use PowerPoint but may bring posters/props/handouts and other paraphernalia to
enhance your presentation.

Assessment 3 Final Exam

The exam will be a closed book examination in the timetabled period of Week 12.

The questions will cover all topic areas covered in the lectures and tutorials, all the named
chapters in the text book and any readings given to students throughout the term.

See the Learning Support Hub for additional support on Exam Preparation.

Created: 4 Septmebr 2016

Modifed: 27 September 2017 Version: 2
Review Date: January 2018 Page 2 of 4
This online version is a controlled document. Any printed versions are considered uncontrolled versions of the document.
Assessment Criteria Individual Essay
Criteria: Fail
The outcome shows: Unsatisfactory
performance
Ability to identify and Key concepts are not
apply key concepts identified and applied
in discussion.
(35%)
Failure to meet
minimum referencing
requirements.
Sound theoretical Lacks theoretical
base /research to support/evidence in
support strategies discussion.
Failure to meet
(30%) minimum referencing
requirements.
Critical analysis Lacks critical analysis
in discussion.
(20%) Failure to meet
minimum referencing
requirements.
Clarity of expression Incomprehensi ble
(sound sentence due to poor language
structure, grammar competence. Failure
and spelling within
to meet minimum
presentation)
referencing
(15%) requirements
Mark range out of 0- 49.5
100
Created: 16 January 2014
Modifed: 16 January 2014
2
Review Date: January 2015
This online version is a controlled document. Any printed versions are considered uncontrolled versions of the document.
Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Just satisfactory Good quality Superior quality Outstanding quality
performance showing more demonstrating showing creativity
than satisfactory independent thinking and originality
performance
Key concepts are Key concepts are Key concepts are well Key concepts are
somewhat identified and satisfactory identified identified and applied in strongly identified
applied in discussion. and applied in discussion. discussion. and applied in
discussion.
Poorly supported with Satisfactory supported Well supported with Strongly supported
limited theories in with theories in theories in discussion. with theories in
discussion. discussion. discussion.
Limited critical analysis in Critical analysis is Good critical thinking Strong critical
discussion. satisfactory in discussion. demonstrated in thinking
discussion. demonstrated in
discussion.
Satisfactory but with Some language mistakes Very well presented with Excellent
difficulties in but good communicatio n few minor mistakes due presentation that
communicatin g ideas. of ideas, basically well to distractions. demonstrates
presented. careful revision to
avoid minor
mistakes.
50 - 64 65 -74 75-84 85+
Version:
Page 3 of 4
Assessment Criteria Group Presentation

Criteria: Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction

The outcome shows: Unsatisfactory performance Just satisfactory performance Good quality Superior quality demonstrating Outstanding quality showing
showing more independent thinking creativity
than satisfactory performance and originality
Links to course readings Incomplete research and Limited research and Good research and documented Excellent research into the Research of outstanding quality,
and additional research links to any readings documented links to any links to the material read. issues with clear links to class clear links to a wide range of
(35%) readings. and related readings. theoretical ideas.
Attention to purpose Fails to address the task set. Some of the work is focused on Has addressed the main purpose Has addressed the purpose of Has addressed the purpose of the
the aims and themes of the of the assessment. the assessment coherently and assessment comprehensively and
(20%)
assessment. with some attempt to imaginatively.
demonstrate imagination.
Delivery and enthusiasm Little or no confidence, Limited evidence of interest in Demonstrates interest in topic Demonstrates interest in topic Confident, vital and honest style
interest or enthusiasm. Poor and engagement with the topic. and engagement with class. and engagement with class. gives audience a powerful sense of
(15%) eye contact, body language Adequate eye contact, body Mostly confident and fluent Excellent method involving presenters convictions; natural
& clarity of speech.
language & clarity of speech. flow of ideas; clear overview, matching verbal and non-verbal language amuses, provokes,
pleasant, acceptable but routine. style; good projection with delights.
inflection.
Presentation (visual) Not all material is relevant Material presented is relevant Material included is relevant to Material is carefully structured Material is imaginatively presented
and/or is presented in a but lacks structure or visual topic and has been structured. with clear message and visual resulting in clarity of message and
(15)% disorganised manner. impact. Visual aspect of presentation is effect. information.
limited.
Direct answers to 2 Unable to answer direct Direct questions are answered Direct questions are answered Direct questions are well Direct questions are well analysed
questions posed questions posed. poorly with no relation to satisfactory with some relation answered with good relation to with good relation to relevant
(15%) relevant theories. to relevant theories. relevant theories. theories.
Mark range out of 100 0- 49.5 50 64 65 -74 75-84 85+

Created: 16 January 2014

Modifed: 16 January 2014 Version:
2
Review Date: January 2015 Page 4 of 4
This online version is a controlled document. Any printed versions are considered uncontrolled versions of the document.