UMUC BMGT365 Project Two: Assessing Self and Potential Candidates

Project Two: Assessing Self and Potential CandidatesPurpose:In the second assignment, students continue working with Global Delivery Direct (GDD). Students learn about their own personality type and based on what is learned, rank several candidates who have applied for the position of CEO and develop interview questions based on leadership quality and personality types.Outcome Met by Completing This Assignmentuse leadership theories, assessment tools, and an understanding of the role of ethics, values, and attitudes to evaluate and enhance personal leadership skillsIn this assignment, students will take the Myers-Briggs Personality Assessment, learn about candidates for the position of CEO for Mail on Wheels and develop interview questions that will be used by Alex Cheng. InstructionsStep 1: Review “How to Analyze a Case Study” under Week 6 Content.Step 2: Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 5-7 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page.Step 3: Review the grading rubric for the assignment.Step 4: In addition to providing an introduction, students will use headings following this format:Title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name;Results of Myers-Briggs Personality TestRanking of CEO CandidatesTop CandidatesInterview QuestionsStep 5: In writing a case study, the writing is in the third person. What this means is that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: .quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person”>https://essays.homeworkacetutors.com/write-my-essay/quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person. Also note that students are not to provide personal commentary.Step 6: In writing this assignment, students are expected to support the reasoning using in-text citations and a reference list. If any material is used from a source document, it must be cited and referenced. A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa. View the sample APA paper under Week 1 content.Step 7: In writing this assignment, students will use resources from the course material and no more than 3 external source documents. NOTE: The expectation is that students provide a robust use of the course material including the material presented in this assignment.Step 8: In completing the assignment, students are expected to use the facts from the case study paired with the weekly courses readings to develop the analysis. The case study is not cited or referenced.Step 9: In writing this assignment, students are expected to paraphrase and not use direct quotes. Students are expected to paraphrase, which can be learned by reviewing this link: .wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html”>https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.htmlStep 11: Read and use the Company Profile.Step 12: Read critically and analyze the following scenario:Scenario: Having bought the business from Alex Cheng, owner and CEO of Mail on Wheels, who decided not to stay on in a leadership capacity, Rockfish now has to hire a replacement for Alex Cheng. Rockfish is looking for a candidate who knows the business, can present a good corporate image (i.e., to the bigger clients who are more likely to pay for the custom service), is well-educated, and will lead the existing group with a balance of firmness and give enough freedom to creatively personalize fulfillment of each client’s needs. Since you are the manager with whom Cheng’s replacement will have the most contact, Rockfish has decided that you should participate in the call back interview. Further he has given you his interview notes on each candidate and wants you to rank them on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit, so that he has some idea going into the interview what your “on paper” reaction is to each candidate.Here are his notes on each candidate:Candidate One- Henrietta RaynardHenrietta was the assistant to Alex Cheng. She is 28 years old with 3 years of college. She currently is finishing her degree online at UMUC. Henrietta is a Business Administration major. She is friendly and has a quiet demeanor. Her Myers-Briggs personality test ranked her as an ISTJ. She has received high marks from Cheng who says she is detailed oriented, had a good understanding of the business organization and seemed to work well with the younger staff. She did not tolerate much nonsense from people, hated surprises, and wanted people to be brief in talking with her. These personality traits meant she could at times be cold to customers whose demands she believed were unfounded or unrealistic. Cheng did not see this as bad per se because he thought he was too pleasing sometimes. After all, he was in the business to make money. Overall, Cheng felt that she could handle the job. Rockfish’s personal impressions were that she was hesitant in joining a bigger company. She liked the smallness of a business and felt in control. She did like the collaborative environment of GDD and responded well to the idea that her opinions and suggestions were welcome at all times. Her reasons for wanting the job centered mainly on the idea that she felt she could run the business well and had some good ideas about making the mobile units better using the advanced technology that Cheng wanted. The technology would allow for better connections to GDD allowing deadlines to be met faster. When asked how the staff perceived her, she laughed and said they called her “Type A”. but then to some of the people I work with, anyone who shows up for a meeting early is a “Type A.” Rockfish noted that during this statement, it was only one of two times during the interview that she held my gaze for any length of time.” When asked what characteristics she thought a leader needed to succeed in the 21st century she replied, “…objective, practical, controlled and fair”. Her knowledge of the business was sound. She seemed to not know a lot about how GDD was operating.Candidate Two- Orson HernandezHernandez currently manages the local Kinko’s store. He has remained loyal to the company even after the merger. However, he feels that the store’s image, culture, and mission have changed dramatically since the merger. He enjoys working with a customer until they were satisfied and regrets having to short change the time he spends with customers today. He also feels that the company culture has become more rigid. Hernandez’s Myers-Briggs personality test showed him as an ENFP. He could be very ebullient. At times, he was not sure of the facts. When asked what characteristics he thought a leader needed to succeed in the 21st century, he replied, “…flexible, compassionate, insightful and honest”. Hernandez seemed to understand the idea of a mobile packaging store and was aware that Cheng’s company was becoming a strong competitor for his small business customers. He liked the clan culture at GDD and showed signs of having done his homework on the company. When asked how he created followers among his employees, Hernandez replied that he liked to use incentive motivational techniques and would sometimes empower workers if they showed the ability to manage others well. He was not aware of how his workers perceived his leadership style, which he characterized as being diplomatic. He liked to be in agreement with people and to be flexible. He enjoyed surprises. Hernandez has a B.A. in art history. Overall impression: able to do the job well.Candidate Three- Jonathan LivingstonGraduated from UMUC’s MBA program two years ago! Currently works for the IT department at UPS. This is a job he obtained right out of the military. Livingston entered the interview room all smiles and with a firm handshake. I was impressed by the firm handshake and the eye contact throughout the interview. Livingston was very prepared to discuss both companies having visited them both prior to the interview. Livingston had also read about GDD online and spoke with current employees. He also mentioned looking at Glass Doors as well. Livingston’s knowledge of the delivery/cargo business was extensive having worked with UPS for 6 years in IT. His Myers-Briggs personality test gave him an ETP with a split SN. Livingston indicated that he was the team leader in his current job and was content with the organization. However, his current job could not lead him to a career position in management. He felt confident that he could handle the new job as leader of the mobile division. Livingston said his leadership style was situational with a little transformational thrown in. General impression: great candidate but maybe more qualified than the job entailed. Too good to be true???!Candidate Four-Adrianna CoyoteGraduate of Blackfeet Community College in Browning, Montana with an AA in business studies. Coyote went to work with GDD part-time straight out of college. She took time off to have a family and is now managing the GDD airport station of the Ontario Hub. Having read about the opportunity through the GDD’s HR division website, Coyote was excited to have the opportunity to move forward in her career. She is quite familiar with GDD shipping methods, deadlines, and policy. Coyote has many innovative ideas besides the mobile vans that would encourage the business boutique market. The Myers-Briggs test scored her primarily as an Extrovert with some Introvert influence, N intuition Thinking, Perceiving. Coyote’s evaluations are superior and she works well with her team. Her colleagues suggest that she is flexible and a people-first person. She does not always make decisions with data; sometimes her decisions are based more on feelings.Coyote is an attractive woman but does not present herself as well as she could. Her eye contact is good and she comes off very authentic. However, her use of English is not always good. She describes her leadership style as transformational. Her team seems to concur. She has little knowledge of the mobile business but has researched Mail on Wheels and looked at the business. General impression of candidate: could do the job but worried about the impression she may make on the bigger customers who were more likely to spend the money on boutique service. Overall impression: strong candidate.Required Elements for Project TwoAs was noted earlier Rockfish has decided that you should participate in the call back interview because he realizes that you will be working with the new CEO the most and is anxious to get your input in the decision. Prior to participating in the interview, Rockfish wants you to:Rank each candidate based on his interview notes so that you can give him some idea going into the interview as to what your “fresh eyes” reaction is to each candidate.He has also given you two articles that he wants you to read because they will help explain the Myers-Briggs personality types that he referenced. They are:Read: Effects of Each Preference in Work Situations.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:o8DCcCnzS24J:www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/dfs/fiu/interview-work-preferences.doc+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us”>http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:o8DCcCnzS24J:www.mass.gov/eopss/docs/dfs/fiu/interview-work-preferences.doc+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=usandRead: Preferred Methods of Communication.csun.edu/~hcpsy002/Type_Methods_Communication.pdf”>https://essays.homeworkacetutors.com/write-my-essay/csun.edu/~hcpsy002/Type_Methods_Communication.pdfUsing Rockfish’s notes rank each candidate using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company. Explain you’re the reasoning for the ranking. Select the top two people whom you will work the best; As you are the manager who will be working with the newly hired candidate, you also want to get a person in the position that will work well with you and will fit the organization.Take the Free Personality Test at:.16personalities.com/intj-personality”>https://www.16personalities.com/intj-personalityIdentify your personality type, the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication;Now that you have completed a pre-interview evaluation of the candidates, both for yourself and for Rockfish, create at least three interview questions for each candidate. These questions should address points about individual leadership “people skills” that the candidates need and that have not been addressed by Rockfish’s notes, and that are important to you working with the new person. Refrain from typical HR questions like where do you see yourself in five years? Focus on those themes found in weeks 4-6 to create the questions.Step 13: Create the introductory paragraph. Within this paragraph, provide a brief overview of the scenario. Then, provide a thesis statement and tell the reader the main topics covered in the paper. The introductory paragraph is the first paragraph of the paper but is typically written after writing the body of the paper (Questions students responded to above). View this website to learn how to write an introductory paragraph: .writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.html”>https://essays.homeworkacetutors.com/write-my-essay/writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.htmlStep 14: Respond to the questions in Part One and Part Two following the format provided. Be clear and concise in the writing and make sure the questions are comprehensively answered.Step 15: Using the grading rubric as a comparison, read through the paper to ensure all required elements are presented.Step 16: Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing.Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a first measure;Have someone who has excellent English skills to proof the paper;Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC). The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement.Step 17: Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.Due DateOct 2, 2016: 2024 – Do my homework – Help write my assignment online 11:59 PM.googleusercontent.com/proxy/nYg385SBmH54Ae4z-NFSv3pARfFIXkGO8xW1bRnmrwyTexjgyXFVe6mOluTIZfIgkz3KY_fjYiek-VxtqFNCwI2y7LXO4JBGwGh9cH8Do1qR8biGbcJ261k7m09I2vhB=s0-d-e1-ft#https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/img/0/Shared.Main.actHide.png?v=10.6.5.3892-164″ alt=””>Hide RubricsRubric Name: Assignment #2CriteriaOutstandingSuperiorGoodSubstandardFailureContent: Ranking of Candidates2 pointsDemonstrates an exceptional ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing thorough and insightful reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.(1.8 – 2.0)1.7 pointsDemonstrates an excellent ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing thorough and insightful reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.(1.6 – 1.79)1.5 pointsDemonstrates a satisfactory ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing good reasoning for ranking candidates using a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.(1.4 – 1.59)1.3 pointsDemonstrates a limited ability to use Rockfish’s notes to rank each candidate providing little to no reasoning for ranking candidatesusing a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.(1.2 – 1.49)0 pointsFailed torank candidatesusing a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the best fit and 1 being the worst fit for the company.(0)Content: Take Personality Test2 pointsTakes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides an exceptional,thorough and insightful discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.(1.8 – 2.0)1.7 pointsTakes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides an excellent,thorough and insightful discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.(1.6 – 1.79 )1.5 pointsTakes free personality test. Clearly identifies personality type and provides a satisfactory discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type.(1.4 – 1.59)1.3 pointsTakes free personality test and identifies personality type and provides a discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type but there are missing elements; or takes free personality test but dies not discuss effects of the type preferences in a workplace or preferred methods of communication for type.(1.2 – 1.39)0 pointsFails to takes free personality test or provide a discussion of the effects of the type preferences in a workplace situation and preferred methods of communication for type but there are missing elements(0)Content: Interview Questions2 pointsCreates five (5) interview questions that address leadership “people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish’s notes and are important to you.(1.8 – 2.0)1.7 pointsCreates four (4) interview questions that address leadership “people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish’s notes and are important to you.(1.6 – 1.79)1.5 pointsCreates three (3) interview questions that address leadership “people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish’s notes and are important to you.(1.4 – 1.59)1.3 pointsCreates one or two interview questions that address leadership “people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish’s notes and are important to you.(1.2 – 1.39)0 pointsFails to create interview questions that address leadership “people-skills that candidate needs that are not addressed in Rockfish’s notes and are important to you.(0)Critical Thinking/Reasoning4 pointsComments reflect a highly accomplished level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned conclusions.(3.6 – 4.0)3.4 pointsComments reflect an excellent level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurately reasoned conclusions.(3.2 – 3.59 )3 pointsComments reflect a satisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in partially correct conclusions that lack development or detail that demonstrates insight into reasoning.(2.8 – 3.19)2.6 pointsComments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in conclusions that are underdeveloped or lack soundly reasoned conclusions. (2.4 – 2.79)0 pointsComments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in failure to draw little to no conclusions.(0 – 2.39)Application of Resources4 pointsPresents exceptionally well-supported arguments or positions with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.(3.6 – 4)3.4 pointsPresents excellent arguments or positions that are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.(3.2 – 3.59)3 pointsSatisfactory arguments or positions are presented but there is a mix of opinion or unclear view with supported arguments using course readings. Case study facts are occasionally used but arguments would be much stronger with use of facts.(2.8 – 3.19)2.6 pointsArguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in course readings.(2.4 – 2.79)0 pointsArguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas. Does not provide facts presented in case study.(0 – 1.79)Attention to Instructions3 pointsDemonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of course readings, and assignment format.(2.7 – 3.0)2.55 pointsDemonstrates excellent understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment.(2.4 – 2.69)2.25 pointsDemonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment.(2.1 – 2.39)1.95 pointsFails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment.(1.8 – 2.09)0 pointsFails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements.(0 – 1.79)Writing Mechanics2 pointsStrictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used. (1.8 – 2.0)1.7 pointsExcellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One to three errors found.(1.6 – 1.79)1.5 pointsSatisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four to 10 errors found.(1.4 – 1.59)1.3 pointsMinimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.(1.2 – 1.39)0 pointsDoes not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.(0 – 1.19)APA Style (6th ed.)1 pointNo APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.(0.9 – 1.0)0.85 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.(0.8 – 0.89)0.75 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 times in document.(0.7 – 0.79)0.65 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 4-5 times;or presents only 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper that requires APA citations throughout the document.(0.6 – 0.69)0 pointsNo attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.(0 – 0.59)Overall ScoreOutstanding18 or moreSuperior16 or moreGood14 or moreSubstandard12 or moreFailure0 or more

Published by

Ace Tutors

View all posts