Scribd
Upload
20 views

Assessment 2 Guidelines - Communication Strategies

This assessment requires students to analyze the suitability of three examples of professional communication for their intended functions. Part A requires analyzing and revising a business letter. Part B requires critiquing two video clips of formal presentations on their communication strategies and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

Aravindh Ramu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
20 views

Assessment 2 Guidelines - Communication Strategies

This assessment requires students to analyze the suitability of three examples of professional communication for their intended functions. Part A requires analyzing and revising a business letter. Part B requires critiquing two video clips of formal presentations on their communication strategies and effectiveness.

Uploaded by

Aravindh Ramu
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

MGT3018 Assessment Two: Strategic Communication

To be submitted on Unihub via Turnitin by 9pm (UAE time) on Monday 15 April 2024

Assessment Two requires you to analyse the suitability of three examples of professional
communication for the functions they were intended to serve. The task is divided into two
parts, A and B. Part A requires you to write a brief commentary (500 words) on a
professional document provided by the module leader (see details below). Then, based on
your commentary, you will edit and redraft the document. Part B requires you to write a
critique of two short video clips (500 words each) that will be supplied to you (see below for
practical arrangements).

It makes sense for you to start work on Part A first (partly because people usually find it
easier initially to work on printed text, partly because the videos will not be posted until
later).

Why are we doing this?

As explained in several MGT3018 classes, although a great deal of communication in


managerial roles involves active performance (e.g. presenting, requesting, feeding back,
discussing, encouraging, etc), a significant amount involves something related but slightly
different: evaluating the communication performance of others. Such evaluation is required
for example in assessing interview performance, conducting appraisal, judging the suitability
of colleagues for deployment into particular professional roles, etc. The professionalism of
such evaluation depends on developing skills in appreciating the distinctive strengths, but
also weaknesses, of other people's (and organisations’) communication skills. Managing
effectively within a large organisation requires an additional ability besides: an ability to
communicate clearly about other people’s and organisations’ communication, rather than
simply understanding and evaluating those skills privately.

Assessment Two contributes to development of your managerial capacity in both these


respects: the two parts, taken together, test your ability to identify and assess evidence of
effectiveness in performance of specified professional tasks and to convey your impressions
and judgement as precisely and clearly as possible.

What you have to do

Part A

Your task is to write a 500 word analysis and evaluation of a business letter supplied by the
module leader. Then, based on your analysis and evaluation, you will edit and redraft the
original document. To do this effectively, you need to assess how far you think the
document is successful in achieving the function or purpose you believe it is supposed to
serve. If you think it is highly successful in achieving that purpose, then you must say why
and illustrate the choices as regards content and presentation that have been made in order

1
to achieve the desired effect. If on the other hand you think the document is only partly
successful, or perhaps even not successful at all, in achieving its function, then your task is
to explain why not. Success in this task depends on being able to articulate your impressions
and justify them by pointing to relevant evidence. You must show your ability

 to describe the document’s function in clear and commonsense terms


 to show how the document has been planned, written and presented in order to
achieve that function
 to explain how far it is successful or unsuccessful in matching content, presentation
and function, basing your account on evidence from the relevant theories and
concepts from the module (e.g. politeness theory & rhetorical analysis)
 to edit and redraft the document based on your analysis

Overall you must argue a case, not simply express an opinion. The grade you are given for
this task will be based on the insight and coherence of your commentary, not on whether
you've arrived at a judgement about the document.
Your commentary should be approximately 500 words. There is no word limit for the
redrafted text; however, it is unlikely to differ much in word count from the original.

Part B

Two clips of video material will be made available to you as the basis for a broadly similar
task. Each clip shows an example of a formal professional communication. The first clip
shows a formal verbal warning being delivered by a supervisor, and the second clip is an
example of a company’s strategic communication. Your task is to examine the strategies
used in each communication and then comment on how effective the communication was in
achieving its aims.

Remember that you are not marking the performance in each video; you are analysing each
on the choice of communication strategy and the details, strengths and weaknesses of how
they communicated in a particular professional persona and prescribed setting. Pay
particular attention to the following aspects of their presentations:

1 How fully and appropriately did each communication – considered as a whole - reflect
the aims of the situation?
2 How coherent and clear is each communication – considered as a whole - and how
far each is successful or unsuccessful in matching content, presentation and function,
basing your account on evidence from the relevant theories and concepts from the
module (e.g. SCARF model for video 1 & corporate communication theory for video 2)
3 How well did the speaker(s) project his or her role (including how they managed their
authority)? And how clearly did the speakers signal the purpose of the interaction?
4 Was the style chosen suitable for a presentation of this type?
5 How easy was it to understand each presentation, in terms of the language used and
in terms of delivery?
6 How successfully did each presentation address and establish rapport with the
audience outlined in the scenario?

2
Your written evaluation of the two video clips does not need to be very long (approximately
1000 words in total – 500 words for each video). But please make sure that you illustrate -
i.e. give examples of - the choices made by speakers in terms of what they have chosen to
say; and how they might have said broadly the same thing differently, achieving a different
effect.

Any discussion of academic theories such as the SCARF model or politeness theory, must be
accurately cited and referenced.

Finally, pay attention to the overall coherence, clarity, grammar, punctuation and spelling of
your own submitted written work. The professionalism of your work will be taken into
account in giving you a grade.

The two video clips will be made available in two ways. They will be posted on the unihub
module page; and they will be shown in class.

DO NOT FORGET TO INCLUDE IN-TEXT CITATIONS AND A LIST OF REFERENCES USED FOR
THIS ASSIGNMENT.

You might also like