| Category | Assignment | Subject | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | University of East London (UEL) | Module Title | MS70123E Leading and Managing Across Cultures |
| Academic Year | 2025-26 |
|---|
1. Module Team details
2. Module overview
3. Preparing for your Assessment
4. Summative Assessments
Summative Assessment 1
Summative Assessment 2
5. Learning materials
6. Maintaining Academic Honesty and Integrity
7. Meeting Deadlines
8. Getting Support
9. Glossary and Acronyms
The module provides students with a critical understanding of the cross-cultural management and leadership by providing them with practical, conceptual and critical understanding of how current enquiry and research into managing and leading across and in different cultures is discussed and practiced.
The aims of this module are to:
LO1: Critically review and evaluate major contemporary research and debates in the field of cross- cultural management.
LO2: Critically discuss the impact of national culture on work organisations and various types of teams including virtual/remote teams.
LO3: Critically evaluate the role of management, leaders and people practitioners and factors in managing across cultures.
LO4: Appraise the significance of communication in analysing culture including areas of business negotiation, and in managing effectively across and in different cultures
LO5: Evaluate how national culture shapes individuals’ motivation, psychological contacts, and orientation to work.
LO6: Identify desirable intercultural competencies and the link between culture, ethics, and managerial competencies
Specific expectations students can have of tutors:
Specific expectations tutors will have of students:
Kindly refer to the Course Handbook for a detailed outline of how this module forms part of your course
A key part of your learning will be preparation for your summative assessment. You will be provided feedback on your formative assessments, and this will help you to better understand what is required of you when you submit your summative assessment. Please see below guidance on your formative assessment and how to access your feedback.
|
Assessment |
Teaching Weeks in which Assessment Support Takes Place |
Type and Form of Assessment Support to be Provided |
Student Preparation Required Prior to or After the Support Session |
How will the Support Session to be Delivered |
|
A1 Support session |
7 |
Assessment Workshop and Group Support |
Each group to bring the presentation ready to show to the lecturer and explain the plan for the presentation. |
Face to face |
|
A2 Individual written assessment and Debate participation. |
Week 11 |
Assessment Workshop Assessment Seminar to provide guidance on the debate and 1-2-1 feedback on written report |
Students must bring their written report to present to the tutor. Students must be prepared to explain verbally what the content of the report is. |
Face to face Face to face |
Do You Need This MS70123E Leading and Managing Across Cultures Assignment?
Order Non Plagiarized Assignment| Assessment title | Presentation |
| Submission date and time | Week 8/9 |
| Word Count (or equivalent) | 20 Minutes presentation |
| Where to submit | Turnitin |
| Feedback date | 15 working days after submission via Blackboard |
| Assessment Weighting | 50% |
The objective of this assessment is to foster a critical approach to the study of cross-cultural management and leadership within the context of the "Leading and Managing Across Cultures" module. Ultimately, the assessment strives to equip students with a holistic perspective on cross- cultural management and leadership, enabling them to excel in globalised professional landscapes.
Your group of 5-6 members is to choose a company to work on the following scenario:
A multinational organisation with offices in country Y and Z has recently restructured its organisation to form two distinct cross-cultural teams to work on a global project. The company has tasked both teams with developing a new product for an international market. Each team has its unique approach to project management and work culture.
Please note: The scenario above is a skeleton to be used as guidance that should be adapted and tailored your chosen organisation and countries selected.
From the list below chose two countries and critically analyse what are the issues and conflicts that might arise among these teams due to cultural differences.
Your presentation must apply different models and approaches that are relevant to topics of:
Ensure that your presentation is focused and that there is sufficient, current, and relevant data, information available from academic and credible published sources for independent critical analysis and discussion. Do not just rely on organisations’ websites for information.
Your presentation must include detailed critical analysis and discussions of the issue, making use of relevant theories and concepts to elucidate and support your analysis and arguments. Your presentation must demonstrate your extensive desk research on the chosen cultures. Your presentation must include an introduction/background, findings, critique, and conclusions. Each member must have a clear role to play.
| No. | Learning Outcome |
|
1,2,3,4,5,6 |
LO1: Critically review and evaluate major contemporary research and debates in the field of cross-cultural management. LO2: Critically discuss the impact of national culture on work organisations and various types of teams including virtual/remote teams. LO3: Critically evaluate the role of management, leaders and people practitioners and factors in managing across cultures. LO4: Appraise the significance of communication in analysing culture including areas of business negotiation, and in managing effectively across and in different cultures LO5: Evaluate how national culture shapes individuals’ motivation, psychological contacts, and orientation to work. LO6: Identify desirable intercultural competencies and the link between culture, ethics, and managerial competencies. |
Assignment 1 Marking Criteria
|
A1 Marking criteria for group research and presentation |
|
|
Marking Scheme |
Marks |
|
Introduction: · Business scenario description illustrated by an example. · Clear identification of the chosen organisation and justification for selection. · Rationale of the relevance of the topic in a business and cultural context. · Definition of key cultural/business terms to frame the analysis. · Aim and objectives of the presentation. · Scope and limitations to establish focus and boundaries. |
10% |
|
Concepts, models theories: · Identify and explain relevant cultural theories, models, and frameworks (e.g., Hofstede, Trompenaars, Hall, GLOBE etc). · Critically evaluate the similarities, differences, and debates between key theorists. · Demonstrate awareness of the evolution of cross-cultural management thought and its relevance to international business. · Assess the strengths and limitations of established frameworks in explaining cultural dynamics. · Present a well-structured theoretical discussion supported by academic sources. |
25% |
|
Applied Analysis and Critical Evaluation · Apply relevant theories and models to analyse real-world organisational contexts. · Examine how cultural differences may create challenges, misunderstandings, or conflicts within international teams. · Use theoretical frameworks to explain the underlying causes of these challenges and conflicts. · Critically evaluate strategies for overcoming such challenges, drawing on evidence from practice and literature. · Present a coherent and well-supported analysis that integrates theory with real-world examples. |
35% |
|
Conclusion & recommendations · Summarise the key insights drawn from the theoretical discussion and applied analysis. · Provide clear and logically derived conclusions linked back to the aims and objectives of the presentation. · Develop practical, evidence-based recommendations for organisations operating in cross-cultural contexts. · Propose realistic and theoretically informed solutions to potential cultural challenges and conflicts. · Critically evaluate the feasibility and potential impact of the proposed recommendations. · Present conclusions and recommendations in a structured, concise, and professional manner. |
10% |
|
References and Presentation · Use credible, up-to-date, and relevant academic and professional sources to support arguments. · Ensure accurate in-text citations and a complete reference list in accordance with Harvard referencing conventions (UK). · Demonstrate clear organisation, logical flow, and |
20% |
| Assessment Criteria | 100–80% (Outstanding) | 79–70% (Excellent) | 69–60% (Very Good) | 59–50% (Good) | 49–0% (Fail) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction (10%) | Provides an exceptionally clear, engaging, and well-structured business scenario with excellent organisational and country choices, fully justified with strong academic and practical rationale. Demonstrates deep understanding of relevance, precise aims and objectives, and well-defined scope and boundaries. | Presents a highly relevant and well-explained scenario with very good organisational and country choices, justified with sound reasoning. Aims and objectives are clear, and scope is well considered with only minor gaps. | Provides a relevant scenario with good organisational and country choices, mostly justified. Aims and objectives are clear but could be sharper; scope and boundaries addressed but not fully developed. | Provides a basic scenario with limited organisational or country justification. Aims and objectives are present but vague, scope is simplistic or underdeveloped. | Scenario unclear, irrelevant, or missing. Organisation and country choices not justified. Aims, objectives, and scope are absent or poorly articulated. |
| Concepts, Models, and Theories (25%) |
Outstanding demonstration of cultural theories, models, and frameworks with exceptional clarity. Provides deep critical evaluation of similarities and differences between key theories, demonstrating sophisticated Theoretical discussion is |
Excellent explanation of cultural theories and models, with very good critical evaluation of similarities and differences. Theoretical discussion is well-structured, showing strong understanding and supported by high-quality sources. insights may be less developed. |
Very good use of relevant theories and models, with clear evaluation of similarities and differences. The discussion is logical, mostly well-supported with academic sources, though critical. | Good explanation of theories and models, though limited in scope or depth. Some evaluation of similarities and differences attempted, but analysis descriptive. Structure adequate. | Fails to demonstrate understanding of cultural theories and models. Weak or missing evaluation, poorly structured, little or no use of academic sources. |
| Applied Analysis and Critical Evaluation (35%) |
Exceptional application of Demonstrates advanced ability to integrate theory with practice. |
Excellent application of theories to organisational contexts. Very good analysis of cultural challenges and conflicts with clear critical evaluation. Strong integration of theory and practice, supported by relevant examples and evidence. |
Very good application of theories with clear analysis of cultural issues. Some critical evaluation and integration with practice, though may lack depth or consistency. Examples relevant and generally well- applied. |
Good attempt to apply theories to practice with some analysis of cultural challenges. Evaluation limited and integration with examples uneven. Arguments supported but not strongly. |
Fails to apply theories to real-world contexts. Cultural challenges not analysed, no critical evaluation, arguments unsupported by evidence. |
| Conclusion & Recommenda tions (10%) |
Exceptional conclusion that concisely summarises Recommendations are practical, realistic, and theoretically informed, with clear evaluation of |
Excellent conclusion that summarises findings clearly and logically. Recommenda tions are relevant, realistic, and well-linked to theory and practice with very good evaluation of |
Very good conclusion that summarises main points with some critical reflection. Recommenda tions are clear and relevant, though evaluation of feasibility may be limited. |
Good conclusion that summarises findings adequately, though lacking depth or critical insight. Recommenda tions are basic, somewhat relevant, but underdevelop ed. |
Fails to provide a clear or relevant conclusion. Recommenda tions missing, unrealistic, or unsupported by analysis. |
| References and Structure (20%) |
Outstanding use of credible, up-to- date academic and professional Referencing flawless and |
Excellent use of relevant and current sources. Referencing accurate and consistent with only minor errors. Presentation well- structured and professional, with very good clarity and flow. |
Very good use of sources, mostly credible and relevant. Referencing generally accurate with some minor lapses. Structure logical, clarity good overall though some sections less strong. |
Good use of sources though limited in scope or quality. Referencing attempted but errors present. Structure adequate but uneven, clarity occasionally weak. |
Fails to use credible or relevant sources. Referencing incorrect or missing. Presentation poorly structured, unclear, and unprofessiona l. |
This matches your table layout. Let me know if it works for you!
This assessment covers the following employability skills, which you could demonstrate on your CV and at job interviews if you successfully pass the assessment.
Perseverance
| Assessment title | Individual written assignment (following the debate) |
| Submission date and time | Week 12,13,14 |
| Word Count (or equivalent) | Debate 20 minutes/ report up to 800 words |
| Where to submit | Turnitin |
| Feedback date | 15 working days after presentation |
| Assessment Weighting | 50% |
Submitting, feedback & grades online using Blackboard Main objectives of the Assessment 2
Assignment 2 is comprised of task A and task B. Task A is the participation in a debate and Task B is a written report synthesising the main outcomes of the debate. The objective of this assignment is to enhance students’ understanding of how cultural diffеrеncеs impact various aspects of business management and to develop their critical thinking, research, communication, public speaking, persuasion techniques and development of empathy by engaging with diverse viewpoints. Additionally it engages students to delve into the complexities of managing and working in diverse as well as confront biases and stеrеotypеs that may influence thеir perceptions of different cultures. This promotes sеlf-awarеnеss and a more balanced view of cultural diffеrеncеs in a globalised environment.
You will be given a scenario to debate with a group of peers in the class. This scenario could involve any part the module content you have studied during the semester.
You will be required to present arguments and counterarguments clearly and persuasively during the debate. This cultivates your ability to articulate ideas effectively and engage in constructive discussions.
You are expected to structure arguments, use persuasive language and engage the audience while demonstrating a global mind-set by exploring how business practices must adapt to different cultural contexts, as this is essential for leaders and managers who may work in international settings.
Please note that you must conduct research to gather information about cultures and management practices. This research could involve studying academic articles, case studies, real-world еxamplеs, and cultural dimensions models.
Upon the conclusion of the debate in which you participated, you are required to write a comprеhеnsivе report that synthesises the main discussions undertaken during the debate. In addition to outlining the key points raised, this report should emphasise the practical application of pertinent theories and concepts within real-world contexts.
LO1: Critically review and evaluate major contemporary research and debates in the field of cross-cultural management.
LO2: Critically discuss the impact of national culture on work organisations and various types of teams including virtual/remote teams.
LO3: Critically evaluate the role of management, leaders and people practitioners and factors in managing across cultures
LO4: Appraise the significance of communication in analysing culture including areas of business negotiation, and in managing effectively across and in different cultures
LO5: Evaluate how national culture shapes individuals’ motivation, psychological contacts, and orientation to work.
LO6: Identify desirable intercultural competencies and the link between culture, ethics, and managerial competencies.
|
· Clear articulation of main points. · Coherent and logical progression of arguments. · Effective rebuttal of opposing viewpoints. · Depth of analysis and critical thinking. |
20% |
|
· Use of relevant and credible sources. · Integration of empirical data or еxamplеs. · Demonstrated understanding of theoretical foundations. |
20% |
|
· Respectful еngagеmеnt with fellow debaters. · Use of appropriate language and tone. · Contribution to the overall debate quality. · Unique insights or pеrspеctivеs offered. · Adhеrеncе to Rules and time Management. |
10% |
|
Content of written report · Clear and concise summary of main discussions from the debate · Critical analysis of the effects and impact of the debate. · Use of an adequate model of reflection · Coherent structure and organization of content. · Adhеrеncе to academic writing conventions, including proper citation and rеfеrеncing. |
50% |
|
Total |
100% |
| Assessment Criteria | 100–80% (Exceptional) | 79–70% (Excellent) | 69–50% (Good) | 49–0% (Fail / Weak) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clear articulation, logical flow, progressive and depth of analysis and critical thinking (25%) | Exceptional clarity and articulation of arguments with a very strong progression of ideas. Arguments logically structured and critically insightful, demonstrating deep analysis. | Clear articulation and progression of arguments with good logical flow. Arguments mostly well structured with very good depth of analysis and critical thinking. | Good articulation of points with reasonable clarity. Arguments generally logical but may lack depth or strong critical thinking. | Weak articulation. Arguments lack logical structure, coherence, or progression. Minimal evidence of critical thinking. |
| Use of relevant and credible sources, integration of data/analysis, understanding of foundations (10%) | Outstanding use of credible sources, data, and examples. Demonstrates exceptional understanding of foundational concepts and integrates evidence critically. | Excellent use of credible sources and data. Well-integrated evidence showing strong understanding of major concepts. | Good use of sources and examples, though integration may be basic. Demonstrates general understanding of concepts. | Flat or weak use of sources, poor integration, or little/no understanding of foundational concepts. |
| Respectful, appropriate language, contribution to debate quality, use of academic tone (10%) | Consistently professional, respectful, and appropriate language. Contributions significantly enhance discussion and demonstrate strong academic tone. | Generally respectful and appropriate language. Contributions positively support discussion with good academic tone. | Mostly respectful language with some contribution to discussion, though impact may be limited. | Poor or inappropriate language. Disrespectful tone or minimal contribution to discussion. |
| Written report: summary of debate, critical analysis, reflection, use of academic sources and conventions (50%) | Exceptional written report. Clear, concise, and well-structured summary with excellent critical analysis and reflection. Outstanding use of academic sources and correct referencing conventions. | Very good written report with clear structure and strong critical analysis. Good use of academic sources and mostly accurate referencing. | Adequate written report with basic structure. Some critical analysis present but mostly descriptive. Academic conventions partially followed. | Weak written report. Poor structure, minimal analysis, lack of reflection, and little or no use of academic sources or correct referencing. |
This assessment covers the following employability skills, which you could demonstrate on your CV and at job interviews if you successfully pass the assessment.
Academic Integrity means avoiding plagiarism and cheating and owning your own work, the unauthorised use of essay mills and AI content is also considered academic misconduct. This is when you submit a piece of work which is not completely your own, but which you are presenting as your own without acknowledging the author or properly referencing the original source. All your work must demonstrate Academic Integrity; it must be an honest and fair submission, complying with all the requirements of the assessment. Failure to meet these standards of behaviour and practice is academic misconduct, which can result in penalties being applied under the Academic Offences Regulations.
You should always try your best to submit your work on time. If your circumstances mean that you are not able to submit on time or are unable to attend an in-person assessment like an exam or in- class test, then you can request Exceptional circumstances for the assessment. An extension allows you to submit coursework up to 10 calendar days late without penalty, (calendar days include all weekends and bank holidays where the University is open). Without an extension, the maximum mark you will be able to get for that work will be the pass mark. Mitigation allows you a mitigated attempt without penalty if you fail an assessment or do not submit.
You can apply for an extension or mitigation by self-certifying that you have exceptional circumstances which affected your ability to undertake the assessment. Self-certifying means that evidence does not have to be provided, although the University reserves the right to request evidence. All self-certified requests must be made before the deadline and detail the exceptional circumstances that have prevented you from submitting by the original submission deadline. You can only self-certify three assessments per academic year. If you have used all your self- certification opportunities, or requested mitigation after the deadline, you will need to provide evidence of your exceptional circumstances for your request to be granted.
The Student Union Advice Service can provide support and guide you through the extension and mitigation process; you can access further information by visiting the UWLSU webpage.
Order Custom Answers for MS70123E Leading and Managing Across Cultures Assignment
Order Non Plagiarized AssignmentNeed help with your MS70123E Leading and Managing Across Cultures assignment? Our Online Assignment Help service provides expert guidance to make the concepts easy to understand. Whether you need management assignment help or other assignment help, our experts offer all the assignment writing services you need. We also offer Free Assignment Samples and Examples to help you get a clearer idea of how to structure your work. Our focus is on providing original, plagiarism-free content to help you succeed in your MS70123E Leading and Managing Across Cultures assignment. Let us help you achieve your academic goals!
Click here to view all assignment samples from the University of East London.
Hire Assignment Helper Today!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content