Module Assignment Brief
Programme: Business & Tourism Management
Level: Level 6 Module Title: Leadership and Change Module code: BTM6LCH Module
Assignment weighting %: 100% Assignment Word Count: (or equivalent) 4000 Words Penalties All penalties that are listed at the end of this document in the Table of Penalties.
Submission Deadlines: (Day: Date & Time) Summative Deadline Monday 26 January 2026 14:00 https://moodle.globalbanking.ac.uk/mod/assign/view.php?id=184874
Late Submission Wednesday 28 January 2026 14:00 https://moodle.globalbanking.ac.uk/mod/assign/view.php?id=184875
Grade & Feedback release Dates All Grade and Feedback release dates are 21 days after the submission date. If an assignment deadline is Monday 1st 2:00pm then the grade release date will be Monday 22nd 2:00pm
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes: Module Learning Outcome 1 Analyse different leadership theories and understand the impact of leadership on followers, organisations and performance. Module Learning Outcome 2 Demonstrate a conceptual and critical understanding of different change management theories, strategies and techniques. Module Learning Outcome 3 Understand and discuss the strategic and operational importance of change in organisations. Module Learning Outcome 4 Analyse the role of the leader in enhancing organisational success through organisational change
Assignment Requirements Overview
This assessment requires students to critically examine the interplay between leadership theories and change management frameworks in organisational contexts. The 4,000-word essay will demonstrate achievement of the module's learning outcomes through analytical evaluation of theoretical constructs and their practical applications.
Assignment task/s to be completed The submission of a written essay from the Tourism industry that discusses two (2) leadership and two (2) change management theories, strategies and techniques and the impact of leadership approaches in managing and leading a change on followers, organisations and performance using a wide variety of research materials from the core reading list (4,000 words +/- 10%).
Essay Requirements
Task 1 Establish the theoretical significance of leadership and organisational change, defining core concepts through authoritative sources. Articulate the essay's analytical objectives and provide a coherent roadmap of the critical examination to follow.
Task 2 Critically examine two distinct leadership theories. Evaluate each theory's conceptual foundations, contextual applicability, and practical limitations. Analysis should address how these frameworks respond to contemporary organisational challenges such as digital transformation, inclusive leadership, or innovation management. Theoretical evaluation must demonstrate original insight into their relative effectiveness across diverse operational environments.
Task 3 Rigorously assess two change management theories, analysing their strategic relevance to modern organisations. Critically appraise each framework's capacity to address specific change typologies across varied organisational contexts. Consider theoretical robustness, implementation challenges, and evidence of practical efficacy in addressing issues like sustainability transitions or crisis recovery in this evaluation.
Task 4 Selecting a prominent tourism industry leader, conduct an integrated analytical examination of theoretical influences on leadership style and decision-making; Application of change management frameworks during significant organisational transitions; and Measurable impact on follower motivation, organisational culture, and performance metrics. Critical evaluation must incorporate specific change initiatives (e.g., post-pandemic recovery, technological innovation) while assessing alignment between theoretical principles and practical outcomes.
Task 5 Synthesise key findings into coherent arguments about leadership-change interdependencies. Propose evidence-based recommendations for enhancing leadership effectiveness in change management contexts, grounded in the preceding analysis. Recommendations must demonstrate original critical thinking about adapting theoretical frameworks to contemporary organisational challenges.
Word count: 4,000 words +/– 10%.
Important: All your work must be based on reliable research and have a minimum of 10 different sources within it. Please ensure you use both direct and indirect citations. You must reference all sources used in your work, using the Harvard Referencing Guide from CCCU.
Additional Information required to support completing the tasks above You are basically required to write an essay of 4,000 words that discusses two (2) leadership and two (2) management theories, strategies and techniques and the impact of leadership approaches in managing and leading a change on followers, organisations and performance using a wide variety of research materials from the core reading list (4,000 words +/- 10%).
The task requirement is an essay not a report or reflective journal. • You must therefore ensure that your structure, outline, content, style and presentation match academic writing conventions for an essay. • Headers, bullet points, pictures and graphs, bold or italics fonts should NOT be used in the essay. The essay must be broken down into cohesive paragraphs to guide the ideas. • Table of contents is not required. • You must use a minimum of 10 sources including textbooks, journals and other academic/credible published and web sources. • Make sure you adhere to the required word count of the case study report (4,000) +/- 10%, as 10 marks will be deducted from your total grade, if you exceed the required word count (i.e., if you exceed 4400 words) and your grade will be capped at 40%, if you write below the required wordcount (i.e., if you write below 3600 words) the marker cannot identify if the learning outcomes have been met.
Referencing and Research Requirements Referencing Style CCCU Harvard Referencing Style. Sources to be used in the Assignment Reading List: Core Books: • Schedlitzki, D. and Edwards, G. (2022) Studying leadership: traditional and critical approaches, 3rd Edition. London: Sage.
Recommended Resources: • Burnes, B. (2017) Managing Change. 7th edn. London: Pearson • Hayes, J. (2018) The Theory and Practice of Change Management. 5th edn. London: Palgrave. • Northouse, P.G. (2018) Leadership: Theory and Practice. 8th edn. Sage Publications. • Kotter, J.P. (1996) Leading Change Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Journals • Journal of Change Management • Academy of Management Journal • Academy of Management Review • Journal of Sustainable Tourism • Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change • Journal of Tourism Futures • Harvard Business Review Websites Centre for Creative Leadership – (www.ccl.org) Avoiding Plagiarism – http://sja.ucdavis.edu/avoid.htm BBC News Business – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business / The Best Search Engines – www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/SearchEngines.html Business and economic resources – www.bized.ac.uk
Other Learning Resources • Academic Search Index • Aphasiology Archive • British Library EThOS • Business Source Complete
• eBook Business Collection (EBSCOhost) • eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) • Economist • Entrepreneurial Studies Source • FT.com • GOBI E-books
• Industry Studies Working Papers • JSTOR Journals • Library Catalogue • Milne Open Textbooks Format of your submission and how your assignment will be assessed This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time). You must submit your work in Word document format of an essay. You can submit your work as many times as you like before the submission date. If you do submit your work more than once, your earlier submission will be replaced by the most recent version. Please ensure that you have submitted your work in the correct link on the assessment tab. Also note that students may be penalised for submitting their assessments in the wrong link. Once you have submitted your work, you will receive a digital receipt as proof of submission, which will be sent to your forwarded e-mail address (provided you have set this up). Please keep this receipt for future reference, along with the original electronic copy of your assignment. You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website: Academic Misconduct Policy. In submitting your assignment, you acknowledge that you have read and understood these regulations. It is the complete and sole responsibility of the student to upload their assessment to Turnitin for Marking prior to the specified deadline. Students should not request lecturers to submit assessments on their behalf as they are unable to do so. To avoid uploading issues, students should aim to upload their assessment several hours prior to the deadline to avoid Turnitin issues around the deadline time or accidentally submitting to the wrong submission link. It is recommended to check that the assessment that has been uploaded is able to be read after you have uploaded it and if not, to re-upload it. Contact the SST on your campus if you have any issues. Any assessment submitted after the specified deadline will incur a late penalty as specified in CCCU Academic regulations unless prior approval has been granted for Exceptional Circumstances.
Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend on your use of academic referencing conventions.
If you fail this assessment, you will have to resubmit an Individual assignment.
This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 6. No Front Sheet is to be submitted or student name or student ID is to appear anywhere in your assignment submission as it will be anonymously marked.
Marking Scheme / Rubric – The Marking Scheme (otherwise known as a rubric) is available on the Module Assessment Tab on Moodle.
Submission Requirements Submission Platform This assignment should be submitted electronically using Moodle to the Module Submission link Submission Date &Time All submission & resubmission dates and time are as stated at the beginning of this Assignment brief.
You should submit your Assignment for all deadlines earlier than 2:00pm on the date stated.
Late submissions can be accepted for Summative Submissions only up to a maximum of 2 working days after the submission deadline. This does not apply to resubmission deadlines. A 10-mark deduction will be made by CCCU for all late submissions.
Work submitted more than two working days after the deadline will not be accepted and will be recorded as non-submission.
Assignments submitted to the Resubmissions deadlines will be capped at 40 by CCCU.
If you are affected by events which are unexpected, outside your control and short-term in nature (i.e. lasting one to two weeks), under the exceptional circumstances procedure you may be eligible for:
• A seven-day extension to your coursework (via self-certification request). • A 14-day extension to your coursework (via evidence-based request). • To defer your exam or time-constrained assessment if you have not yet submitted/attempted it (via self-certification or evidence-based request). • To re-take an exam/time-constrained assessment, if you feel your performance on your first attempt was negatively impacted (via impaired performance request).
Please note students are only eligible to have a maximum of 2 self-certification requests per academic year.
You can make a self-certification request up to 14 calendar days before your deadline: • for coursework it must be no later than 2pm on the deadline date • for exams and time-constrained assessments, the request must be submitted no later than the start time of the assessment.
Assessment Infractions Issue with the Assignment Process to implement Suspected Academic Misconduct or Breach of Academic integrity Insert the following text with your rationale for the AMC referral. As part of your reasoning, please ensure to include the type of academic misconduct suspected from the table on page 7 of CCCU’s Student Academic Integrity Policy alongside an explanation.
This assessment has been identified as having potential Academic Misconduct because [insert reasoning for AMC referral with an explanation on top of any % scores that may be part of the referral]. The assessment will be analysed by the AMC review team, and you will receive further communication from them as to the next step in the AMC process. Until the AMC investigation into your assessment is concluded your assessment will remain at grade 0.
Marker’s Name: Date: dd/mm/year Similarity Score at the time of marking: AI Score (if relevant to the referral)
The assignment is more than 10% over the prescribed word count i.e. for 3,000 words, if 3,400 is submitted excluding the cover page, table of contents, references and appendices. A 10% deduction applied to the overall maximum grade that is manually entered by the Lecturer. This deduction means an assessment can fail if the resulting grade is below 40/100.
For example, if the mark for the assignment was 68 out of a possible maximum of 100 before deductions, the lecturer would deduct 10 marks, and the mark will be 58. If the mark for the assignment was 30 out of a possible maximum of 50 before deductions, the lecturer would deduct 5 marks, and the mark will be 25.
Written feedback must also state ‘This assignment is 10% over the word count and has a penalty equal to 10% of the maximum available marks applied to it’.
Students not working in their groups as agreed by the lecturer. This assignment will be graded a Fail.
The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This submission was not completed in the designated group’.
Please note: This does not apply in either of the following circumstances: • There has been a reasonable adjustment to a student’s assignment based on a Learning Support Plan. • Where a student has asked the lecturer to move from their original group and the lecturer has agreed. For a presentation assignment that requires oral delivery, and the student does not present in person. This assignment will be graded a Fail.
The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘As you did not present in class, this assignment is a Fail.’
Please note: This does not apply if there has been a reasonable adjustment to a student’s assignment based on a Learning Support Plan. If the student has uploaded their submission in an incorrect file type (a file type that is not authorised in the Assessment Brief). This assignment will be graded a Fail.
The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This is an incorrect submission as it does not follow the assignment brief instructions. If the summative assignment is group work and the resubmission is not changed to individual work.
This assignment will be graded a Fail.
The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This resubmission should be individual assessment’. If the summative assignment is individual presentation and the resubmission does not follow the resubmission assignment brief. This assignment will be graded a Fail.
The lecturer will grade as 1 and the written feedback will state ‘This assessment should follow the resubmission brief’.
Where a written assignment has text that is unable to be read by Turnitin because it is either a graphical image (excluding Presentations & Posters); for example, a screenshot or the assignment is written within text boxes on each page. This assignment will be graded 0 and the written feedback should state ‘This assignment is unreadable by Turnitin and cannot be checked for Academic Misconduct. It has been referred for an AMC meeting.
The assignment will then be referred for Academic Misconduct investigation. For assessments where Referencing is one of the grading criteria:
An assignment has a reference list, but no citations. Or citations, but no Reference List The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero.
Written feedback should state ’The reference criteria has been graded Zero as no citations have been used/no Reference List has been provided. Please include citations in your assignment to support the academic points being made/a Reference List of your citations’. For assessments where Referencing is one of the grading criteria:
An assignment has no citations and no reference list. Foundation & Level 4 – The reference rubric criteria is not moved and that criteria will remain at zero. The written feedback will state ‘Please ensure that you use citations with a corresponding Reference List to support your assignment submission’.
At Level 5 and Level 6 this would be graded as Fail. The lecturer will grade as 1 and written feedback will also show ‘This assignment has no citations and no reference list’. Where False references are included in an assignment and cited from
Inflated Reference List
This will be referred for Academic Misconduct as per the first box.
Uncited Reference List entries on their own do not merit an AMC referral, but feedback should highlight them and ask the student to refrain from doing this.
Student Integrity and Academic Misconduct The values of student integrity expected by CCCU are: • Honesty – being clear about what is your work and where your ideas come from other sources. • Trust – others can have faith in you being open about your work and acknowledging others’ work. • Fairness – you do not try to gain an unfair advantage in using others’ work. • Responsibility – you take an active role in applying the principle of Academic Integrity to your work. • Respect – you show respect for the work of others. Peer-support: Students might choose to get support from their peers when preparing assessments, such as discussing the subject of the assessment, exchanging ideas, and receiving suggestions for improving the work. This is peer-support, and the University accepts this as a reasonable expectation when completing assessments. However, peers must not make any changes to anyone’s assessments as such actions could lead to allegations of academic misconduct.
Use of English as the medium of assessment: Students cannot write an assessment in another language and subsequently translate their work into English or have it translated by any form of third-party. Use of translation software or third-party translators is a form of academic misconduct.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Students must write the entire assessment without using AI software such as ChatGPT. Submitting an assessment that contains any form of AI is a form of academic misconduct.
Proofreading: Students can make use of Microsoft Word’s grammar and spell-checking functions but the use of Grammarly is not allowed as it uses AI text generation. If students use third-party proofreaders, these cannot make any changes that alter the assessment in any way including correcting language or citation format errors. Third-party alterations to the assessment are a form of academic misconduct.
Plagiarism Plagiarism can be defined as incorporating another person’s material from books, journals, the internet, another student’s work, or any other source into assessment material without acknowledgement. It includes: • Using exactly the same words (sentences, phrases or even expressions not in everyday use, invented or created by an author to explain an idea) as used originally • Rephrasing by making slight adjustments • Paraphrasing in a way which may deceive the reader as to the source. • Plagiarism in whatever form it takes is form of academic misconduct. Collusion: If students submit work for assessment that is falsely presented as the student’s own work but was jointly written with somebody else; this is a form of academic misconduct.
Duplication/Self-Plagiarism: The inclusion in assessments of a significant amount of identical or substantially similar material to that already submitted for assessment by the student and graded for the same course or any other course or module at this University or elsewhere is classed as self-plagiarism. It does not include a resubmission of the same piece of work allowed by the examiners in an improved or revised form for reassessment purposes. Self-plagiarism is a form of academic misconduct.
Further clarification of the above can be found in CCCU’s Academic Misconduct documents below
CCCU Student Academic Misconduct Procedures can found below: Please click the link to Open. https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Misconduct-Procedures-staff-students.pdf CCCU Student Academic Integrity Policy can be found below: Please click the link to Open. https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/asset-library/policy-zone/Student-Academic-Integrity-Policy.pdf