Human Resources Management Discussion ESSAY

Human Resources Management Discussion

ASSESSMENT 2A (30%): Answer ALL questions Submission Deadline – Sunday 28/11/2021 23:59 CEST

MINI-CASE: The EEA Water Department

A number of years ago, the European Environmental Agency (EEA) based in Copenhagen, Denmark created the Subsidy

Management Program (SMP) within the Water Department. The main functions of the program are to review requests for

government financial support for community projects and engineering design reports. Also, they need to perform operation

and maintenance inspections of waste-water treatment facilities. Paul Wagner, head of the SMP, supervised four engineers,

one technician, and one secretary. Three of the engineers were quite new to the agency within the last four months and had

arrived from a variety of European cities. The senior engineer, Winona Burrell, had approximately three years’ experience in

the SMP. She had gone through a robust selection process lasting a couple of weeks to ensure that as a leader of a team

of engineers she had the qualities required of her role. The rest of the SMP were recruited and selected in a less rigorous

manner but this had served the department well over the last few years and the department had managed to remain within

their yearly budget for hiring and training.

Winona Burrell’s experience meant that Paul Wagner assigned her the areas with the most complicated projects within the

department. The other three engineers were assigned areas with less complex projects but worked closely with Burrell to

learn all they could about the program from her over the next two months. These sessions varied between simple, routine

tasks that all the engineers needed to know to specific, specialists tasks that required in-depth, individual learning. Despite

being an engineer, Winona had spent time within the human resources department of another European agency, whilst

doing job rotation during a one-year internship. Here she learned to appreciate the value of developing people and was able

to transfer her methods and ideas on training to the engineers on her team at the SMP.

At the beginning of 2020, Paul Wagner decided the new engineers had enough experience to do more difficult tasks;

therefore, the SMP work could be shared on a more equal basis with each new engineer having responsibility for two or

three geographical areas. This arrangement seemed to work well as the whole Water Department succeeded in reaching its

objectives at the end of the first quarter. This was an excellent outcome as the whole team of SMP engineers had only been

fully together for about six months. However, at the same time as these results appeared, Paul Wagner was offered a job

with a consulting engineering company and he decided to leave the EEA. He gave two months’ notice to top management.

During those two months top management did not advertise for a new SMP head. However, on the Monday of Wagner’s

final week, senior management of the EEA met with staff of the Water Department. They announced that, until a permanent

SMP head could be found, they had appointed a temporary head of the SMP Samuel Kutzman, a senior engineer from

another EEA department – the whole SMP team were very surprised.

Q1. Compare and contrast the most likely differences in the recruitment and selection strategies (R&S) SMP

might use in hiring Winona compared to that of employees in the department. Justify your response using the

case, theories and concepts studied during the course. Moreover, evaluate the R&S actions of senior

management of the EEA in their appointment of a new SMP head.

Q2. Winona appears to have been able to develop her team of engineers quite successfully giving them the

training required and achieving department objectives. Discuss to what extent the EEA organisation might be

responsible for the success of this training? What training techniques might she have employed to address the

requirements of her team of engineers and the department.

COURSE CODE: BCO213 – COURSE NAME: HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT Task brief & rubrics

ASSESSMENT 2A (30%): Answer ALL (2) questions Submission Deadline – Sunday 28/11/2021 23:59 CEST

The mid-term, timed assignment will be made available on Moodle 48 hours before the submission deadline. Students need to complete the assignment and

upload their submission within this time-frame. The assignment will be a 450-600-word essay responding to questions linked to the learning outcomes listed.

TASK:

• This an INDVIDUAL task

• Respond to ALL questions in written form; i.e. diagrams, images, tables etc. should NOT be included in the text or word count

• Each response carries EQUAL WEIGHT

• The case-study is fictional

• Include reference sources using the HARVARD protocol

• Submission to Turnitin

Formalities:

• TOTAL Wordcount 2 questions 450 – 600 words (approx. 225-300 words per question)

• Cover, Table of Contents, References and Appendix are EXCLUDED from the total wordcount.

• Font: Arial 12 pts.

• Line-spacing 1.5 – 2.0

• Text alignment: Justified.

• The in-text citations, reference list and/or the bibliography must be in HARVARD’S style.

Submission Deadline:

ASSESSMENT 2: Submission Deadline – Sunday 28/11/2021 23:59 CEST; Weight: This task is 30% of your total grade for this subject.

Assessment 2 has the following learning outcomes:

• LO1 Understand the Human Resources function inside the enterprise, describe and analyse responsibilities and tasks

• LO2 Understand different stages of human resources planning

• LO3 Assess strategies for recruitment, selection and training.

Rubrics

Exceptional 90-100 Good 80-89 Fair 70-79 Marginal fail 60-69

Knowledge & Understanding

(20%)

Student demonstrates excellent understanding of key concepts and uses vocabulary in an entirely appropriate manner.

Student demonstrates good understanding of the task and mentions some relevant concepts and demonstrates use of the relevant vocabulary.

Student understands the task and provides minimum theory and/or some use of vocabulary.

Student understands the task and attempts to answer the question but does not mention key concepts or uses minimum amount of relevant vocabulary.

Application (30%) Student applies fully relevant knowledge from the topics delivered in class.

Student applies mostly relevant knowledge from the topics delivered in class.

Student applies some relevant knowledge from the topics delivered in class. Misunderstanding may be evident.

Student applies little relevant knowledge from the topics delivered in class. Misunderstands are evident.

Critical Thinking (30%)

Student critically assesses in excellent ways, drawing outstanding conclusions from relevant authors.

Student critically assesses in good ways, drawing conclusions from relevant authors and references.

Student provides some insights but stays on the surface of the topic. References may not be relevant.

Student makes little or non- critical thinking insights, does not quote appropriate authors, and does not provide valid sources.

Communication (20%)

Student communicates their ideas extremely clearly and concisely, respecting word count, grammar and spellcheck

Student communicates their ideas clearly and concisely, respecting word count, grammar and spellcheck

Student communicates their ideas with some clarity and concision. It may be slightly over or under the wordcount limit. Some misspelling errors may be evident.

Student communicates their ideas in a somewhat unclear and unconcise way. Does not reach or does exceed wordcount excessively and misspelling errors are evident.

Human Resources Management Discussion ESSAY

Write my Essay. Premium essay writing services is the ideal place for homework help or essay writing service. if you are looking for affordable, high quality & non-plagiarized papers, click on the button below to place your order. Provide us with the instructions and one of our writers will deliver a unique, no plagiarism, and professional paper.

Get help with your toughest assignments and get them solved by a Reliable Custom Papers Writing Company. Save time, money and get quality papers. Buying an excellent plagiarism-free paper is a piece of cake!

All our papers are written from scratch. We can cover any assignment/essay in your field of study.