LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE Custom Essay

MBAThe length of the report is 3500 (plus or minus 10%)
??:LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE
Report on the relevance or applicability of leadership theories to NGOs.
Much of the research on leadership set for this course and referenced in your text is based on “for profit” enterprises. Your report will discuss the relevance or applicability of leadership theories from your text

to NGOs or Non-Government Organisations. These also sometimes known as Not for Profits.

Within your report, you should:
• briefly define and identify the key characteristics of NGOs
• compare and contrast leadership practices between NGOs and “for profit” business enterprises.
• discuss the application of key leadership theories as they apply to NGOs. You may choose to focus on one or two leadership theories and discuss their relevance in some depth.
It is expected that the research supporting this report will be based on:
• leadership theory and practice in general
• leadership literature applied specifically to NGOs
A list of academic articles on leadership and culture is provided at the beginning of your Study Guide that might assist you in your search for relevant material, but you are expected to search for additional

relevant academic articles from the library databases. Please keep in mind that not all references provided on Study Guides are consistent with the Harvard style. You must refer to the Harvard Referencing

Guide 2014 (available on Moodle) to ensure that your referencing style is correct.

Required:
1. recognize the contribution made by leaders in different organisational settings, and to understand the characteristics of successful leaders
2. Understand the principles underlying leadership development and good governance
3. Describe the challenges and tasks of leadership at different levels of the organisation, in particular in the leadership of teams
4. discuss different theoretical approaches and models in the study of leadership and governance.
??:
Title Page
Executive summary
Table of content
Introduction: aim; scope; background(general characteristics of NGO’s)
Leadership practices-NGO’s vs profit making prganizations (compare and contrast)-style, attitude—situational/ transactional leadership style
Leadership theories/NGO’s vs profit making organization (look up journals of leadership and NGO’s, give examples)
Conclusion
Recommendation: leaders should do…..
References list(at least 12)
Appendix
Assessment Criteria
Knowledge & Understanding 16
Evaluation 16
Identification and use of the literature 4
Communication skills 4
Total marks 40

Assessment Due Date Week 10 Thursday (08-May-2014) 12:00 PM AEST

MGMT20125 – Leadership and Governance Assessment 2 (Report) Marking Criteria Sheet

Student Name Student Number: Campus: Topic (Option 1 or Option 2):

Criteria and Standards HD D Cr P F
1. Knowledge & Understanding

(16 Marks) • In depth, knowledge and fully comprehensive understanding of leadership theory (theories)/model(s)
• Superior proficiency in application of leadership theory(theories)/model(s)
• Demonstrates high degree of originality of thought, suggesting major implications for how leadership is applied in organisations
• Scholarly application of leadership theory (theories)/model(s) to answer research question • Knowledge and accurate
understanding of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
• Highly proficient in the application of leadership theory(theories)/model(s)
• Demonstrates and attempts to develop originality of thought, suggesting major implications for how leadership theory (theories)/model(s) is applied in organisations
• Competent application of leadership theory (theories)/model(s) to answer
research question • Knowledge and understanding at intermediate competent level of leadership theory (theories)/model(s)
• Relevant concepts applied correctly
• Demonstrates and attempts to develop originality of thought for how leadership theory (theories)/model(s) is applied in organisations
• Application of leadership theory (theories)/model(s) to answer research question • Knowledge and accurate
understanding of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
• Highly proficient in the application of leadership theory(theories)/model(s)
• Demonstrates and attempts to develop originality of thought, suggesting major implications for how leadership theory (theories)/model(s) is applied in organisations
• Competent application of leadership theory (theories)/model(s) to answer
research question • Insufficient knowledge and
understanding of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
• Relevant concepts missing, incorrectly applied or misunderstood
• Little evidence of originality of
thought for how leadership
theory(theories)/model(s) is applied in
organisations
• Little evidence of application of
leadership theory(theories)/model(s) to answer research question
Mark A
2. Evaluation

(16 Marks) •Scholarly demonstration of critical analysis of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
• Scholarly justification of decisions using a wide variety of sources
• Critical use of sources
• Superior ability to analyse and discuss data critically • Considerable demonstration of critical analysis of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
• Clear justification of decisions using a wide variety of sources
• Critical use of sources
• High ability to analyse and discuss data critically • Critical analysis of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s)
demonstrated generally
• Decisions justified using a wide
variety of sources
• Mostly critical use of sources
• Ability to analyse and discuss data critically • Critical analysis of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s) somewhat demonstrated
• Decisions justified using a limited variety of sources
• Uncritical use of sources
• Limited ability to analyse and discuss data critically • Critical analysis of leadership
theory(theories)/model(s) poorly demonstrated if at all
• Decisions not justified
• Uncritical use of (few) sources
• Very limited ability to analyse and discuss data critically
Mark B
3. Identification and use of the literature

(4 Marks) • Highly proficient and scholarly use of a wide range of relevant academic journals and literature
• Superior skill demonstrated in use of correct referencing style (Refer to Harvard Referencing Guide 2014)
• Proficient in paraphrasing key comments and sparing use of direct quotations • Scholarly use of a wide range of relevant academic journals and literature
• Skill demonstrated in use of correct referencing style (Refer to Harvard Referencing Guide 2014)
• Paraphrased key comments and used direct quotations very sparingly • Used a wide range of academic
journals and literature most of which were relevant
• Reasonable skill in use of correct referencing style (Refer to Harvard Referencing Guide 2014)
• Direct quotations used sparingly • Limited use of relevant academic journals and literature
• Some inaccuracies in use of correct referencing style (Refer to Harvard Referencing Guide 2014)
• Quotations used frequently • Very limited use and/or insufficient range of relevant academic journals and literature
• Referencing is either insufficient or contains significant inaccuracies
(Refer to Harvard Referencing Guide 2014)
• Quotations over-used and/or used when irrelevant
Mark C
4. Communication Skills

(4 Marks) • Logical, clear and concise argument developed and supported by evidence
• Format criteria set out with no errors
• Superior writing style and English
expression
• Executive summary draws argument together in an influential and scholarly
manner • Logical argument developed and supported by evidence
• Format criteria set out with minimal errors
• Proficient writing style and English expression
• Comprehensive executive summary • Logical argument developed, some areas unclear and supported by evidence
• Format criteria set out with a few errors
• Reasonable writing style and English expression
• Very good executive summary • Argument developed, some areas unclear and partially supported by evidence
• Format criteria set out incomplete
• Fair writing style and English
expression
• Good executive summary • No central argument developed and/or not supported by evidence
• Presentation awkward and convoluted
• Format criteria poorly set out and incomplete
• Writing style and English expression poorly demonstrated if at all
• Poor Executive summary
Mark D
Mark E (if applicable):
Late Submission without Approval (days): (-5% × 40) / day – Total Marks = Mark A + Mark B + Mark C + Mark D + Mark E (if applicable) (Mark E is minus)
Total Marks /40