HRM 4822 Leadership Assessment Brief 2026 | Middlesex University Dubai

HRM4822 Assessment Brief 

Formative Assessment

Formative assessments help show you and us that you are learning and understanding the material covered in this course and allow us to monitor your progress towards achieving the learning outcomes for the module. Although formative assessments do not directly contribute to the overall module mark, they do provide an important opportunity to receive feedback on your learning.

Summative Assessment

Summative assessment is used to check the level of learning on the course. It is summative because it is based on accumulated learning during the course. The point is to ensure that students have met the learning outcomes for the course and are at the appropriate level. It is the summative assessment that determines the grade that you are awarded for the module.

There are two assessment components in this module. The table below specifies the associated deadlines:

Summative assessment	Weighting	Deadline	Feedback
Strategic Leadership Evaluation and Organizational Analysis Report	70 %	15th March 2026, 11:59 PM (UK Time)	30th March, 2026
Asynchronous Video Reflection	30%	15th March 2026, 11:59 PM (UK Time)	30th March, 2026

In order to pass this module, you need to pass all assessment tasks with a minimum grade of 16 or equivalent.

Before you submit your work for final grading, please ensure that you have accurately referenced the work. It is your responsibility to check spelling and grammar as all written assessments will assess technical proficiency in English.

This means accurate and effective spelling, punctuation and grammar. Details of how it will be assessed will be provided in the marking criteria for each assessment and the University overall approach can be found within the Grade Criteria Guide in the University Regulations https://www.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/policies (scroll to University Regulations)

Reasonable adjustments will be made for those students who have a declared disability/specific learning condition which would affect performance in this area.

If you have submitted a formative or draft assessment, you will receive feedback but no grade. The comments should inform you about how well you have done or tell you about the areas for improvement. All assignments should be submitted online unless specified in the assessment briefs.

Reassessment for this module normally takes place in the following way:

If students fail the module (fail grades are 17, 18, 19, 20 with an overall mark between 0% and 39%) they are eligible for a re-sit. Students will be re-examined in the assessed component(s), which they have failed (please note that this can be a different assessment task). Information on what element to re-sit will be made available on the module’s MyMDX site approximately two weeks after the module results have been published on MyMDX. You will be notified about reassessment dates in a timely manner.

Normally you would be entitled to only one reassessment opportunity if you don’t pass at first attempt.

Middlesex University is committed to being fair in its approach to assessing student learning following the UK Quality Code for Higher Education (Quality Code) (2024) and the UK Quality Code - Advice and Guidance: Assessment (2018) and External Expertise (2018). The Assessment Fairness guidance, policies and procedures put in place by Middlesex University is our commitment to ensure fairness in assessment.

Further information is available at:

https://mymdx.mdx.ac.uk/campusm/home#pgitem/420738/t
If you have any queries or would like to know more on how this approach has been applied to modules you are studying, please contact your Campus Programme Coordinator. [Guidance for staff is available at https://www.intra.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/services/centre-for- academic-practice-enhancement/policy-bank]

We now look at each component of assessment for this module in detail. Each of the following tables provides an overview of the requirements for each component. The support provided for each component along with the feedback arrangements, is also detailed below. Each component will be marked as per the weightages given to each section.

Assessment 1 (Strategic Leadership Evaluation and Organizational Analysis)

Module code	HRM 4822
Module title	Leadership
Submission date, time	15th March 2026, 11:59 PM (UK Time)
Feedback type & date	Refer to Table 1: Summative Assessments Deadlines
Word count	Part A: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
Assignment type	Strategic Leadership Evaluation and Organizational Analysis
Module weighting %	100%
Key reading and learning resources

Assignment Structure and Format

Objective

Critically evaluate the leadership effectiveness of any two organizations from the same sector, one that has been notably successful and another that has faced significant challenges or failure. The focus of the analysis should include, but is not limited to, how leadership played a role in the success or failure of these organizations. Utilize the "Integrative Framework for Understanding Leadership" covered in the module to guide your analysis and offer practical recommendations for improvement or reinforcement.

Integrative Framework for Understanding Leadership

The framework suggests that leadership effectiveness is a function of the leader, group members (followers), and situational variables, as expressed by the formula: L = f {l, gm, s}. This indicates that leadership is shaped by the interaction between the leader's characteristics, the group members, and various situational forces.

Assignment Requirements

Part A Strategic Leadership Evaluation and Organizational Analysis Report (70% weightage)

• Word Limit: Up to 2,000 words (+/- 10%), excluding references and appendices.
• Content:
  
  o Introduction: Brief overview of the two organizations selected, including their background and context. Clearly justify why you selected these organizations, referring to your professional interests, personal background and classroom discussions.
  o Analysis:
  
  § Critically analyze the leadership effectiveness in both organizations using the "Integrative Framework for Understanding Leadership."
  
  § Discuss how the leader’s characteristics, group members, and situational variables influenced the outcomes in both organizations.
  
  § Draw comparisons between the two organizations, identifying key differences and similarities in their leadership approaches and outcomes.
  
  § Explicitly connect your analysis with at least two leadership concepts, theories, or case examples discussed in class sessions. Provide evidence of original engagement with lecture material, rather than solely relying on external sources.
  
  o Recommendations: Offer practical recommendations for the less successful organizations on improving leadership. Suggest how their leadership practices can be reinforced or further enhanced for a successful organization.
  
  o Conclusion: Summarize your findings and insights, including at least one personal takeaway on how your own leadership practice may evolve after completing this analysis.
  
  
• References: Include appropriate academic and professional references to support your analysis.

Part B: Video Reflection (30% weightage)

• Duration: 5-7 minutes.
• Content:
  
  o Create a 5–7-minute self-recorded video using PowerPoint slides explaining your thought process and approach in preparing your strategic leadership evaluation and organizational analysis report.
  
  o In this video, discuss how you selected the organizations and applied the integrative leadership framework to evaluate the leadership effectiveness of both organizations critically.
  
  o Reflect on how this assessment has deepened your understanding of leadership in real-world contexts.
  
  o Mention any challenges you encountered while applying leadership theories and how you addressed them.
  
  o Share how your cultural or professional background influenced your interpretation of leadership effectiveness and your final recommendations.

Submission Details

Part A: Submit the leadership analysis report in Word via the Turnitin submission link on MyMDX.

Part B: Submit the video reflection as a video file (e.g., MP4) or via a secure link (e.g., MS Teams, YouTube, Vimeo) to MyMDX.

Assessed Learning Outcome (s)

Knowledge

On successful completion of this module, the student will be able to:

5. Understand the key principles and theories of leadership, including transformational, transactional, and servant leadership, and their relevance to contemporary organisational settings.

6. Recognise the significance of ethical leadership and the role of diversity and inclusion in enhancing organisational culture and performance.

Skills

On successful completion of this module, the student will be able to:

7. Analyse and apply various leadership theories and models to real-world scenarios, demonstrating the ability to adapt leadership styles to meet organisational needs and challenges.

8. Develop effective communication and interpersonal skills to build and maintain relationships, foster team cohesion, and manage conflicts within diverse teams.

Academic Integrity Declaration

All submissions must be the student’s own original work. Any use of generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini, or others) must be explicitly acknowledged in a short note at the end of the report (e.g., “I used [tool name] for idea generation / structuring / proofreading”). Submissions that rely heavily on AI-generated content without critical engagement, personal reflection, or integration with class material will not meet the assessment criteria and may be subject to academic misconduct procedures.

Assessment Rubric

Criteria	1-4	5-8	9-12	13-16	17-20
Depth of Analysis	Thorough and insightful analysis with strong evidence and logical reasoning.	Good analysis with relevant evidence and clear reasoning.	Adequate analysis with some relevant evidence and reasoning.	Limited analysis with minimal evidence and weak reasoning.	Inadequate analysis with little to no evidence or reasoning.
Application of the Integrative Framework	Comprehensive application of the framework with accurate and detailed connections.	Solid application of the framework with good connections.	Adequate application of the framework with some connections.	Limited application of the framework with weak connections.	Inadequate application of the framework with incorrect or missing connections.
Recommendations	Highly practical and actionable recommendations supported by analysis.	Practical recommendations with clear links to analysis.	Reasonable recommendations, somewhat linked to analysis.	Weak recommendations, poorly linked to analysis.	Infeasible or irrelevant recommendations with no link to analysis.
Use of References	Extensive and appropriate use of academic and professional references.	Good use of references, though it could be more comprehensive.	Sufficient use of references but limited in scope.	Limited use of references, lacking depth.	Inadequate use of references or no references used.
Reflection on Leadership	Insightful, critical, and highly reflective.	Detailed and thoughtful reflection.	Adequate reflection on leadership.	Limited reflection on leadership.	No reflection on leadership is evident.
Transparency & Critical Engagement	Transparent acknowledgment with strong adaptation and originality.	Acknowledged with good adaptation and contextualization.	Some acknowledgment; limited adaptation or originality.	Minimal acknowledgment; over-reliance on generic AI output.	No acknowledgment; heavy reliance on AI, lacks originality.

Late Submission

Students must submit each component of assessment by the deadline set by the Module Leader. Non-submission of work by the deadline will result in failure in the component concerned (grade 20), unless students make an application and subsequently permission has been    granted   under   the   Extenuating   Circumstances    Policy (https://www.mdx.ac.uk/media/middlesex-university/about-us-pdfs/academic-quality/final_-
_policy_and_procedures_for_extenuating_circumstance_24-25.pdf) for an approved deferral of assessment to the next available opportunity.

For individual written coursework only, late submission of up to 24 hours from the deadline is permissible, however, the grade for the component is reduced by 10% or equivalent (or less where this would reduce a pass grade below 40%). Students should take into consideration

the impact this will have on their deadline schedule and their final grades before selecting this option.

Assessment support for students of determination

Students who have declared special needs or learning differences or an ongoing medical condition may contact the Inclusion Counsellor in the Centre for Academic Success. This will set out the reasonable additional support that will be put in place by the University to assist that student’s learning and assessment. It is the student’s responsibility to make arrangements and follow the procedures set by the Centre of Academic Success in order for reasonable adjustments to be put in place. This may include the option to take up to 5 calendar days late submission on individual written coursework without having a grade reduction. Check the Middlesex University’s Policy and Procedures for Extenuating Circumstances Claims 2024- 2025:https://www.mdx.ac.uk/media/middlesex-university/about-us-pdfs/academic- quality/final_-_policy_and_procedures_for_extenuating_circumstance_24-25.pdf

Feedback on your assignments

You will be provided with feedback on all coursework that is helpful and informative, consistent with aiding the learning and development process. The nature of the feedback shall be determined at programme level but may take a variety of forms including: written comments, individual and group tutorial feedback, peer feedback or other forms of effective and efficient feedback.

If you have been asked to and have submitted a formative or draft assessment, you will receive feedback but no grade. The comments should inform you about how well you have done or tell you about the areas for improvement. All assignments should be submitted online unless specified in assessment briefs. Feedback on summative assessments will normally be provided within 15 working days of the published submission date.

How is your assignment mark agreed?

External Examiners (external academic experts) review what we deliver at a programme level. The University reviews a sample of your work to quality assure the grades and feedback you received from the person who marked your work. Our External Examiners will sample a selection of modules from a programme, with more focus of outcomes between modules within a programme.

The following diagram provides an overview of the marking process for your module assessment. Further information on the role of external examiners can be found at. https://www.mdx.ac.uk/about-us/policies/academic-quality/handbook (section 4).

Results Confirmation

First Semester | Provisional Grades: At the end of your first semester, you can see your module grades in the ‘Grades and Progress’ tile within MyMDX. These grades are provisional and not yet confirmed.
Second Semester | Final Grades and Progression: After your second semester, the Programme Assessment Board will confirm your grades. Then, your final module results, progression status, or finalist classification will be posted in the ‘Grades and Progress’ tile within MyMDX.

For help or more information:

• University Guide: Find detailed information in the Grades and Progress tile within MyMDX.
• Support Team: Ask your Programme team or reach out to CampusCentral for advice.
• Regulations: Check the University regulations for more details.