1.1 Critically assess the links between team performance and strategic objectives

The supplied Unit 702 brief requires two different forms of assessment: a 450–550 word memorandum explaining how team performance is measured against strategic objectives, followed by a 950–1,100 word evaluation of an actual team performance plan. The main difficulty is not defining performance management. Learners must connect organisational strategy with measurable team targets, current performance, monitoring methods, individual commitment, delegation, coaching, influence and workplace politics. There is also an apparent assessment-mapping issue in the supplied version: AC 3.3 appears in the learning outcomes but is not explicitly assigned to either task.

QUALIFI ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT

Qualifi Level 7 Diploma in Strategic Management and Leadership

Assignment brief – Unit 702 Manage Team Performance to Support Strategy

INTRODUCTION

Prior to attempting this coursework assignment, Learners must familiarise themselves with the following policies:

• Qualifi Quality Assurance Standards
• Qualifi Quality Policy Statement
• Centre Specification Can be found at https://qualifi.net/qualifi-level-7-diploma-in-strategic-management-and-leadership/

The aim of this unit is to allow learners to explore how team performance can be evaluated and optimised to realise strategic objectives. Learners will further be introduced to, and encouraged to discuss, some of the management models, concepts and ideas which could be used to help you set departmental, project, team and their own objectives.

Unit details

• Qualification: Qualifi Level 7 Diploma in Strategic Management and Leadership
• Unit: 702 Manage Team Performance to Support Strategy
• Unit reference: Y/506/9067
• Level: RQF Level 7
• Credits: 15
• Task 1: 450–550 word memorandum
• Task 2: 950–1,100 word evaluation

ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES

All work must be submitted in a single electronic document (.doc/.docx file). The assignment must be the Learner’s own work and not copies of theories or models. Direct quotes should be kept to a minimum and shown in inverted commas. Models described and other quotes used must be properly attributed and referenced as appropriate. Learners must acknowledge or reference any sources that have been used to complete the assignment, listing reference material and web sites used.

PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION

In submitting the assignment Learner’s must complete a statement of authenticity confirming that the work submitted for all tasks is their own. The statement should also include the word count. Plagiarism and collusion are treated very seriously. Plagiarism involves presenting work, excerpts, ideas or passages of another author without appropriate referencing and attribution. Collusion occurs when two or more learners submit work which is so alike in ideas, content, wording and/or structure that the similarity goes beyond what might have been mere coincidence.

APPENDICES

Separate Appendices should not be used. Any use of tables, graphs, diagrams, Gantt chart and flowcharts etc. that support the main report should be incorporated into the back of the assignment report that is submitted. Any published secondary information such as annual reports and company literature, should be referenced in the main text of the assignment but not included.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Where a Learner is using organisational information that deals with sensitive material or issues, they must seek the advice and permission from that organisation about its inclusion. Where confidentiality is an issue, Learners are advised to anonymise their assignment report so that it cannot be attributed to that particular organisation.

WORD COUNT POLICY

Learners must comply with the required word count, within a margin of +10%.These rules exclude the index (if used), headings and information contained within references and bibliographies. When an assessment task requires learners to produce presentation slides with supporting notes, the word count applies to the supporting notes only.

REFERENCING

A professional approach to work is expected from all learners. Learners must therefore identify and acknowledge ALL sources/methodologies/applications used. The learner must use an appropriate referencing system to achieve this. Marks are not awarded for the use of English; however the learner must express ideas clearly and ensure that appropriate terminology is used to convey accuracy in meaning.

SUBMISSION OF ASSIGNMENTS

All work must be submitted in a single electronic document (.doc/.docx file) in your Learning Portal or to submit to the Assessor/Centre Administrator.

MARKING AND GRADES

Qualifi uses a standard marking rubric for all assignments, and you can find the details at the end of this document. Unless stated elsewhere, Learners must answer all questions in this document.

LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

ASSIGNMENT TASKS

Learners may use their own employment context, or that of another organisation with which they are very familiar, as the basis for their assignment. However, in the case that they are not able to do so, please use the below scenario:

Scenario

You are a senior manager in a business unit of a medium sized enterprise, with functional management and organisational leadership responsibilities. You are responsible for all aspects of the performance management of your team and its contribution towards the achievement of business goals.

Task 1:  FORMATIVE TASK - Team Performance and Strategic Objectives

You are responsible for the induction process for a new colleague. Produce a memorandum for them, in which you explain how the performance of teams in your organisation is measured against the organisation’s strategic objectives. Your answer must include the following:

• An outline of the organisation’s strategic objectives (LO1.1)
• Identify and explain the various methods used to assess how well a team meets these objectives (LO 1.2)
• An evaluation of the sophistication of these methods as tools for performance evaluation (LO 1.3)

Formatting:

• 450-550 words
• Justified alignment
• Single-spaced
• 12pt Times New Roman font
• Use an appropriate referencing system for footnotes and citations

Task 2: SUMMATIVE - Evaluating a Team Performance Plan

Undertake an evaluation of a performance plan for a team within your organisation. Your answer must contain the following:

• An outline of the plan with respect to the organisation’s strategic objectives, and the means by which performance is measured (LO 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1, 4.2)
• Identify and explain potential strengths and weaknesses of the plan, including actions intended to improve performance (LO 2.3)
• A judgment about the overall effectiveness of the plan, including discussion of securing commitment of individuals to strategic objectives. (LO 2.4, 3.1, 3.2)

Formatting:

• 950-1100 words
• Justified alignment
• Single-spaced
• 12pt Times New Roman font
• Use an appropriate referencing system for footnotes and citations

MARKING DIRECTIONS:

1. For each of the criteria listed in the first column, circle one box in the corresponding column to the right which best reflects the student’s work on this particular assessment activity (e.g., project, presentation, essay).
2. Provide specific feedback to a student about each of the criteria scores he/she earned by writing comments and suggestions for improvement in the last row titled “Instructor’s comments.
3. To arrive at a mark, total the boxes and divide by 5 to arrive at a final mark

Example:

Common reasons Unit 702 work is referred

Use only unit-specific problems:

• The strategic objective is stated, but the team target is not mathematically or operationally linked to it.
• Tools such as KPIs and balanced scorecards are described without evaluating their limitations.
• The required target is discussed without showing current performance.
• Delegation, mentoring and coaching are defined but not assessed against the plan.
• Organisational politics is discussed as theory without evidence from the chosen workplace.
• The conclusion calls the plan “effective” without comparing actual results against agreed targets.
• AC 3.3 is omitted because it is not visibly mapped in the task wording.

When the difficulty is the full assessment route

Unit 702 does not test each performance-management concept separately. The strategic objective, current team result, required target, monitoring method, improvement action and individual commitment must lead to one defensible judgement about the plan. Learners who need support organising that chain across both tasks can review Assignment Bank UK’s assignment writing help, particularly where the problem is assessment-criterion mapping rather than a lack of management theory.

1.1 Critically Assess the Links Between Team Performance and Strategic Objectives

The wording of the supplied task can cause an important mistake. It asks learners to outline the organisation’s strategic objectives, while AC 1.1 requires a critical assessment of how team performance contributes to those objectives. Listing objectives such as growth, customer retention or cost reduction is therefore insufficient. The answer must identify the team result that could influence each objective, examine the evidence connecting them and judge how substantial that contribution actually is.

A strong AC 1.1 response should follow this chain:

Strategic objective → relevant team activity → measurable team result → organisational effect → limitation → judgement

For example, an objective to reduce customer attrition cannot be linked to a customer-service team merely by stating that the team handles complaints. The learner could examine whether improvements in first-contact resolution, complaint closure time and service quality coincide with higher retention. The relationship should then be tested critically: customer-service performance may influence retention, but pricing, product reliability, competitor activity and customer demographics can also affect the result. The defensible judgement is therefore that the team provides a measurable but not exclusive contribution to the strategic objective.

The same test should be applied to every claimed link: