MG629 Developing Leadership & Management Skills

I’m working on a report and need a sample draft to help me learn.

Assignment Brief Academic Year 2022-23

Internal approval: Suzanne Doria, Sept 2022

Assignment task

This assignment tests your ability to critically analyse leadership practices and firm performance using
academic theory to underpin your work using a real leader and business as the focus for your work. LO1,
LO3.

The case study we shall be using is ‘Theranos Inc.’ a health diagnostic firm once valued at over $9bn that
proposed to revolutionize the healthcare system with its innovative blood testing system. See;
https://watchdocumentaries.com/the-inventor-out-for-blood-in-silicon-valley/ for a documentary film on the
rise and fall of the firm under the leadership of its CEO Elizabeth Holmes.

Your task is to analyse the leadership style of Elizabeth in relation to how well the firm performed under her
reign as founder and CEO.

Your work should consider:

 Management and leadership styles.

 Firm performance and measurement.

 Risks, legal and ethical issues.

This 2,500-word (+/-10%) report should have a front cover with a clear title, your student ID number and
word count, an executive summary of no more than 250 words; a contents page; and a maximum of 4
pages of appendices are allowable. Note, the words used in these pages are not included in the word
count. All words appearing in tables, charts and diagrams are also not included in the word count. There
should be a minimum of 20 references from reputable sources and referenced using the Harvard system
used to support your argument. The briefing document should be professionally formatted and
presentable to a Director of a business.

Module code
and title:

MG629 Developing Leadership &
Management Skills

Module leader: Dr. Chinedu Uwabuike

Assignment
No. and type:

CW1: 2,500 Word report
Evaluating Leadership in an
Organisation.

Assessment
weighting:

70%

Submission
time and date:

4th November 2022 before 2
pm.

Target feedback
time and date:

3 weeks after submission
deadline.

The Inventor: Out For Blood In Silicon Valley

This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your
achievement of the following module learning outcomes:

LO 1: Understand and critically evaluate contemporary theories and models of management and
leadership.

LO 3: Analyse the significance and impact of leadership performance in relation to overall business
performance.

Referencing and presentational requirements

Please reference your work using the Harvard style as defined in Cite Them Right Online
(http://www.citethemrightonline.com).

 Pages should be numbered.

 All work to be submitted as Arial 11 font with line and a half spacing.

 All writing should be in the third person passive.

 Written work must be word-processed.

 The module title and code number must be clearly marked on the front cover.

 Work you submit for assessment must be properly referenced – a guide to the Harvard system of
referencing can be found on the Bucks website at bucks.ac.uk/referencing.

 You may seek clarification from the module tutor at any time.

 There is no excuse for failing to submit your work in accordance with the guidance, work that does
not meet the necessary standards in that respect will be marked accordingly.

 No collaboration is allowed.

Submission details

 You are required to submit your work electronically. Please use the relevant submission point in the
Upload My Assignment area on LSST Connect before the time and date specified.

 Please ensure that your work has been saved in an appropriate file format. Turnitin will only accept the
following file types: Microsoft Word, PDF. Your file must also contain at least 20 words of text, consist of
fewer than 400 pages and be less than 40MB in size.

 You can submit your file as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your
file more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version.

Once you have submitted your file, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be
sent to your LSST e-mail address. Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original
electronic copy of the file.

Academic integrity

Academic integrity means taking responsibility for your own work.

http://www.citethemrightonline.com/

When you submit an assignment, you are effectively making a declaration that it is your own work and that
you have acknowledged the contribution of others and their ideas in its development (for example, by
referencing them appropriately).

For further information and guidance, please see the University website: https://www.bucks.ac.uk/current-
students/registry-helpdesk-and-academic-advice/academic-integrity-and-misconduct

You are also expected to take responsibility for maintaining and managing confidentiality issues in your
work. You should maintain and respect confidentiality in relation to the protection of personal, technical
and/or commercial information of a sensitive nature in their assessed work, whatever the format.

Confidentiality issues will vary from subject to subject and you are encouraged to seek advice from your
course team if you are unclear about requirements in your context. For further information and guidance,
please see the University website: https://www.bucks.ac.uk/academic-confidentiality

https://www.bucks.ac.uk/current-students/registry-helpdesk-and-academic-advice/academic-integrity-and-misconduct

https://www.bucks.ac.uk/academic-confidentiality

Assessment Criteria Academic Year 2022-23

0-34 (F) –
Fail

Not successful

35-39 E –
Marginal fail

Below required
standard

40-49 (D)
Pass

Satisfactory

50-59 (C)
Pass
Good

60-69 (B)
Pass

Very Good

70-79 (A)
Pass

Excellent

80-100 (A+)
Pass

Outstanding

Criterion 1

Knowledge and
understanding

25%

(Key indicators for
Knowledge and
understanding)

• Depth of knowledge
and understanding

• Engagement with
subject-specific theories,
paradigms, concepts,
and principles

• Background
investigation, analysis,
research, enquiry and/or
study.

The work demonstrates
a limited and/or
substantially inaccurate
or no understanding of
key aspects of the
subject, with few if any
examples of coherent
and detailed
knowledge, which is
unlikely to be at, or
informed by, the
forefront of defined
aspects of the
discipline e.g., recent
research, latest
techniques.

The work does not:
Show awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
nor any awareness of
the case study and
actors involved.

The work demonstrates
insufficient
understanding of key
aspects of the subject,
including some
coherent and detailed
knowledge, little of
which is at, or informed
by, the forefront of
defined aspects of the
discipline e.g., recent
research, latest
techniques.

The work does not:
Show enough
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
nor any awareness of
the case study and
actors involved.

The work demonstrates
a basic yet systematic
understanding of key
aspects of the subject,
including some
coherent and detailed
knowledge, at least
some of which is at, or
informed by, the
forefront of defined
aspects of the discipline
e.g., recent research,
latest techniques.

The work:
Shows enough
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with some awareness
of the case study and
actors involved.

The work demonstrates
a sound breadth and
depth of systematic
understanding of key
aspects of the subject,
including some
coherent and detailed
knowledge, some of
which is at, or informed
by, the forefront of
defined aspects of the
discipline e.g., recent
research, latest
techniques.

The work:
Shows good
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
and good awareness of
the case study and
actors involved.

The work demonstrates
a sophisticated and
critical systematic
understanding of key
aspects of the subject,
including coherent and
detailed knowledge,
much of which is at, or
informed by, the
forefront of defined
aspects of the discipline
e.g., recent research,
latest techniques.

The work:
Shows very good
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
and very good
awareness of the case
study and actors
involved.

The work demonstrates
a highly accomplished
systematic
understanding of key
aspects of the subject
beyond what has been
taught, including
coherent and detailed
knowledge, most of
which is at, or informed
by, the forefront of
defined aspects of the
discipline e.g., recent
research, latest
techniques.

The work:
Shows excellent
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
and excellent
awareness of the case
study and actors
involved.

The work demonstrates
an exceptional
systematic
understanding of key
aspects of the subject,
including coherent and
detailed knowledge well
beyond what has been
taught, all of which is
at, or informed by, the
forefront of defined
aspects of the discipline
e.g., recent research,
latest techniques.

The work:
Shows exceptional
understanding and
awareness of the
subject matter of
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
and outstanding
awareness of the case
study and actors
involved.

Criterion 2

Analysis and
criticality

The work demonstrates
a limited or no ability to
work independently and
deploy relevant
techniques of analysis
and enquiry accurately;

The work demonstrates
an insufficient ability to
work independently,
deploying accurately
established techniques

The work demonstrates
a sufficient ability to
work independently,
deploying accurately
established techniques

The work demonstrates
a sound ability to work
independently,
deploying accurately
established techniques

The work demonstrates
a sophisticated ability to
work independently,
deploying accurately
established techniques

The work demonstrates
a highly accomplished
ability to work
independently,
deploying accurately
established techniques

Assessment Criteria Academic Year 2022-23

0-34 (F) –
Fail

Not successful

35-39 E –
Marginal fail

Below required
standard

40-49 (D)
Pass

Satisfactory

50-59 (C)
Pass
Good

60-69 (B)
Pass

Very Good

70-79 (A)
Pass

Excellent

80-100 (A+)
Pass

Outstanding

25%

(Key indicators for
analysis and criticality)

• Logic and argument

• Use and range of
independently
selected sources

• Analysis and
synthesis

• Organisation and
communication of
ideas and evidence

The work shows
insufficient knowledge
of the subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is
inappropriate.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is absent.

The communication
and organisation of the
work lacks flow and
coherency.

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline;

The work shows limited
knowledge of the
subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is mostly
inappropriate.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is absent.

The communication
and organisation of the
work is weak and lacks
flow and coherency.

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline;

The work shows
satisfactory knowledge
of the subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is satisfactory.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is satisfactory
but lacks depth and
breadth.

The communication
and organisation of the
work is satisfactory and
struggles for flow and
coherency.

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline;

The work shows good
knowledge of the
subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is good.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is good.

The communication
and organisation of the
work is good, with the
flow and coherency of
the argument clear to
the reader.

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline.

The work shows very
good knowledge of the
subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is very good.
The use of wider and
less obvious sources
enhances the work.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is very good,
with excellent
integration within the
argument and evidence
used.

The communication
and organisation of the
work is very good, with
the flow and coherency

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline;

The work shows
excellent knowledge of
the subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
a strong, coherent and
logical argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is excellent.
The use of wider and
less obvious sources
enhances the work and
demonstrates originality
in their thinking and
work.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is excellent, with
excellent integration
within the argument
and evidence used.

The communication
and organisation of the

of analysis and enquiry
within the discipline;

The work shows
outstanding knowledge
of the subject areas;
leadership,
management, firm
performance,
performance metrics,
fiduciary duty, ethics,
investor relations and
stakeholder analysis,
with which to formulate
an exceptionally strong,
coherent and logical
argument.

The range, age and
validity of secondary
research sources &
literature is outstanding.
The use of wider and
less obvious sources
enhances the work and
demonstrates originality
in their thinking and
work.

Analysis of the case
study and synthesis of
relevant academic
theory is outstanding,
with exceptional
integration within the
argument and evidence
used.

Assessment Criteria Academic Year 2022-23

0-34 (F) –
Fail

Not successful

35-39 E –
Marginal fail

Below required
standard

40-49 (D)
Pass

Satisfactory

50-59 (C)
Pass
Good

60-69 (B)
Pass

Very Good

70-79 (A)
Pass

Excellent

80-100 (A+)
Pass

Outstanding

of the argument clear to
the reader.

work is excellent, with
the flow and coherency
of the argument clear to
the reader and presents
original conceptual
thinking.

The communication
and organisation of the
work is outstanding,
with the flow and
coherency of the
argument clear to the
reader and presents
original conceptual
thinking.

Criterion 3

Application and
practice

25%

(Key indicators for
application and practice)

• Development and/or
application discipline-
specific specialist skills

• Accuracy, coordination,
and proficiency in
completion of practical
tasks/processes

Work demonstrates a
limited or no ability to
select and apply
appropriate, discipline-
specific methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is not
evident within the work.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is clearly
missing and/or
inappropriate for the
standard required as a
manager.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is

Work demonstrates an
insufficient ability to
select and apply
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is weak
within the work.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is clearly
missing and/or
inappropriate for the
standard required as a
manager.

Work demonstrates a
sufficient ability to
select and apply
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is
acceptable within the
work.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is evident but
this is acceptable and
mostly appropriate for
the standard required
as a manager.

Work demonstrates an
ability to select and
apply in a consistent
and informed manner
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is good.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is evident and
what is presented is to
a good standard and
appropriate for the
standard required as a
manager.

Work demonstrates an
ability to select and
apply in a capable and
effective manner
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is very
good.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is evident and
what is presented is to
a very good standard
and appropriate for the
standard required as a
manager.

Work demonstrates an
ability to select and
apply in a highly
accomplished manner
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is excellent.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is evident and
what is presented is to
an excellent standard
and appropriate for the
standard required as a
middle manager.

Work demonstrates an
ability to select and
apply in a highly
accomplished and
innovative manner
appropriate,
disciplinespecific
methods and
techniques to develop
and apply knowledge
and understanding and
to initiate, and in turn:

The development and
application of
secondary research
skills, analysis,
evaluation and
synthesis of data and
information is
outstanding.

The ability to draw
conclusions for the
reader is evident and
what is presented is to
an outstanding
standard and
appropriate for the

Assessment Criteria Academic Year 2022-23

0-34 (F) –
Fail

Not successful

35-39 E –
Marginal fail

Below required
standard

40-49 (D)
Pass

Satisfactory

50-59 (C)
Pass
Good

60-69 (B)
Pass

Very Good

70-79 (A)
Pass

Excellent

80-100 (A+)
Pass

Outstanding

clearly absent with no
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work fails to
address all the required
elements set out in the
briefing.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
clearly absent with no
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work fails to
address all the required
elements set out in the
briefing.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
acceptable with some
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work mostly
addresses the required
elements set out in the
briefing.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
good with some
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work meets all the
required elements set
out in the briefing.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
very good with clear
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work meets all the
required elements set
out in the briefing.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
excellent with clear
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and/or
integrated into the
work.

The work meets all the
required elements set
out in the briefing.

standard required as a
senior manager.

The ability to read and
follow instructions is
outstanding with clear
evidence of conceptual
awareness of the wider
business contexts
involved that could be
researched and
integrated into the
work.

The work meets all the
required elements set
out in the briefing.

Criterion 4

Transferable skills

15%

(Key indicators for
transferable skills)

• Written, verbal and
electronic communication
• Numeracy and digital
literacy
• Personal motivation,
organisation, and time-
management

Work demonstrates
limited or no ability to: