Read the case study about David Jones and address the following questions/issues based on the case and further research: Mahar, K. L. (2017). David Jones. In D. M. Waddell, A. Creed, T. G. Cummings, & C. G. Worley,

Notes:

1.     Please number and put
sub-headings for each question and each key point in the question clearly.
Support your key points with relevant concepts/models/theories and company
examples.

2.     Study the questions, marking
sheet and marking rubrics provided carefully.

3.     Address all the questions and
issues raised.

4.     Make sure that you write
according to the allocated marks.

Cover page

      N/A

 Table of content

N/A

1

An
overview of this report:

·       
company background (1 mark)

·       
the purpose of this report (1 mark)

·       
the key sections covered in this report (1 mark)

3

2

Research and
discuss David Jones’ current financial and operational situation.

(Research and discuss 2 aspects

X 3 marks each = 6 marks)

6

3

Based on
your evaluation of the ‘three-pronged approach’ suggested by Paul
Zahra, do you agree or disagree with the suggestions? Why? What would you do
differently and why?

  (Evaluate the ‘three-pronged approach’ for
6 marks) +

  (Agree/disagree with reason(s) for 2 mark)
+

  (Justify different idea/s for 4 marks) = 12
marks

12

4

Evaluate THREE popular planned change models and suggest the
best planned change model that can be applied to the David Jones

case study. Justify your choice.

(Evaluate 3 planned change models X 4 marks
each = 12 marks) +

(Justify the best model for 4 marks) = 16
marks

16

5

Which one of
the four ‘scale of change’ models best fit the changes made by David
Jones? Explain and justify your choice.

(Justify the
best model for 5 marks)

5

6

David Jones desires a strong online presence to
compete with other retailers. If you were responsible for this project,
suggest and justify the activities required to gain an online
presence. 

(Suggest and justify 3 aspects of the activities X 4 marks each = 12
marks)

12

7

Suggest and justify how you would apply John Kotter’s 8-step model to
implement the activities you suggested in Q5, above.

(Suggest and justify application of the 8 steps of the model X 2 marks
each = 16 marks) 

16

8

Assume you are responsible to implement a particular change project in
David Jones in next 6 months. How would you apply a motivation theory/
model to gain support from the staff and motivate them to implement this
change project? Justify your answer.  

(Briefly
discuss the change project for 3 marks) +

(Briefly
discuss the selected motivation model for 3 marks) +

(Suggest
and justify 3 applications of the selected motivation theory/model X 3 marks
each = 9 marks) =  15 marks

15

9

In order to implement any change programme, one must first conduct
proper research. Good research is the foundation for good                    decisions.

Evaluate
ONE (1) major qualitative method and ONE (1) major quantitative method
of data collection that you will use to decide

how to
apply the motivation theory/model in implementing the change project
discussed in Q8, above. 

(Evaluate 2 research methods X 5 marks each = 10 marks)

10

10

Conclude your key findings in each section of this report.

                                                                    
TOTAL

100

‘A’ Grade Description

‘B’ Grade Description

‘C’ Grade Description

‘D’ Grade Description

Question with 2 marks

2 marks

1.5 marks

1.0 mark

0-0.5 marks

Question with 3 marks

3 marks

2.0-2.5 marks

1.0-1.5 marks

0-0.5 marks

Question with 4 marks

3.5-4.0 marks

2.5-3.0 marks

1.5-2.0 marks

0-1.0 mark

Question with 5 marks

4.5-5.0 marks

3.0-4.0 marks

1.5-2.5 marks

0-1.0 mark

Criterion 
One:

Ideas and understanding

·   
Excels in responding to assessment tasks

·   
Interesting; demonstrates development of
complex ideas

·   
Appropriately limits and defines terms.
Central ideas are clearly and succinctly communicated

·   
Understands and critically evaluates supporting
evidence /reference material

·   
A sound course, responding to assessment
tasks

·   
Attempts to define terms, not always
successful

·   
Clearly states central ideas, but may have
minor lapses in development

·   
Begins to acknowledge the complexity of
central ideas and the possibility of other points of view

·   
Shows careful reading of supporting
evidence/ reference material but may not evaluate them critically

·   
Adequate, but less effective response to
assessment tasks

·   
Presents central ideas in general terms,
occasionally depending on generalisations and/or dictionary definitions

·   
Limited exploration of other points of
views

·   
Shows basic comprehension of supporting
evidence /reference material with occasional lapses in understanding

·   
Does not respond appropriately to the
assessment task

·   
Lacks central ideas

·   
Supporting evidence /reference material
misunderstood or inadequate

·   
Ineffective development of ideas

·   
Assessment too brief

Criterion  Two:

Supporting
Evidence

·   
Uses citations appropriately and
effectively, providing sufficient evidence

·   
Explanations supported and justified
convincingly

·   
Support points using a range of relevant
citations

·   
Begins to interpret and justify the
evidence, explaining connections between evidence and main ideas

·   
Generalizations sometimes used to support
points

·   
Sometimes depends on unsupported evidence
or personal experience

·   
Occasionally assumes that evidence speaks
for itself and needs no application to the point being discussed

·   
Occasional lapses in logic

·   
Uses irrelevant or inadequate supporting
evidence /reference material throughout

·   
Supporting evidence /reference material
consistently not acknowledged

Criterion Three:

Organisation and coherence

·   
Uses logical structure appropriate to
assessment tasks

·   
Transitional sentences often develop and
link ideas and identify their logical relations

·   
Paragraphs have topic sentences guiding the
reader through the chain of reasoning or progression of ideas

·   
Shows a logical progression of ideas and
uses transitional sentences

·   
Some logical links may be faulty but each
paragraph clearly relates to central ideas

·   
Occasionally lists ideas arranged randomly
(rather than using any evident logical structure)

·   
While each paragraph may relate to central
idea, logic is not always clear

·   
Arrangement of sentences within paragraphs
may occasionally lack coherence

·   
Lacks organisation, paragraph coherence and
uses few or inappropriate transitional sentences

·   
Paragraphs lack topic main ideas and may
not all relate to assessment tasks

Criterion Four:

Style

·   
Chooses words for their precise meaning and
uses discipline appropriate language

·   
Writing style fits assessment task

·   
Sentences are varied, yet clearly
structured, focused and succinct

·   
Generally uses words and discipline
appropriate language accurately and effectively

·   
Sentences generally clear, well-structured
and focused, though some sentences may be awkward or ineffective

·   
Occasionally uses relatively vague and
simple words

·   
May use some non-academic language
occasionally 

·   
Sentence structure generally correct, but
sentences may occasionally be wordy, unfocused, repeatitive or confusing

·   
Too vague and abstract

·   
Overall, contains awkward or grammatically
incorrect sentences

·   
Majority of sentence structure is too
simple with use of non-academic language

Criterion Five:

Mechanics

(Spelling, punctuation, grammar,
referencing and formatting)

·   
Almost entirely free of mechanical errors

·   
May contain mechanical errors, which may
distract the reader but not impede understanding

·   
Contains several mechanical errors, which
may temporarily confuse the reader but not impede the overall understanding

·   
Contains many mechanical errors that block
the reader’s understanding and ability to see connections between ideas