Module Code:

BHO0270

Module Title:

The Future of Work
(HKMA)

Assessment Type

(Initial/ Resit)

2000-word Individual Critical Blog

Academic Year

2024/25 Term 1

Assessment Task

2000-word critical blog.
Weighting 60%

“The future of work is changing. Technology is
powering a growth in flexible work across
the economy, whilst
emerging technologies such
as robotics and
AI are set to become common place.
Organisations must consider the implications of digital transformation in the
world of work now, equipping people and businesses across the country with
the skills and conditions needed to take advantage of the opportunities presented
by the 4IR.” (techUK, 2024)

Write a 2000-word individual blog which considers the above
quote and discusses the evolving landscape of the future workplace. The blog should
analyse core trends and challenges considering Artificial Intelligence
adoption and propose strategies for organisations to foster a sense of
connection between employees and the company in an era where AI is projected
to replace millions of jobs globally.

In your blog, you should critically examine:

·       
how to provide
meaningful work for employees when they are increasingly
required to work alongside machinery and technology

·       
the need to treat employees as human beings, not parts of a machine, and explore ways to create an environment where human workers
and machines collaborate effectively

For the academic blog, please find the academic blogs guideline to write.

At least 25 references and 5 pictures, less than 25 references and not
include 5 pictures will deduce the grade.

Level of AI-Use permitted for this Assessment

 Level
2 – Some use Permitted. Some use of AI tools is permitted in the
research/early stages of this assignment but you must
ensure that the work you submit
is your own. If you use AI tools, you should acknowledge or
reference this in your

work. Use the Text reference builder to learn how
to reference AI generated ideas.
The sorts of questions to consider when using AI are:

·       
Is it accurate?

·       
Are the references genuine?

·       
Has it reproduced bias?

Duration: N/A

Word Count: 2000 words

Task specific guidance:

·       
Draw on key evidence (blogs,
statistics, academic writings).

·       
Knowledge and understanding should be demonstrated within the critical blog through an evaluation and application of key theory.

·       
Students are expected to engage with relevant module
resources on Brightspace and through the Library
website.

·       
In-text citations can be presented as hyper-links

·       
Students are expected to reference journal
articles within their
blog. Emphasis should be
placed on ‘up to date’ information where possible.

·       
High-quality
websites may be used.

·       
Your work must
be presented in a blog
format e.g., headings, images. A blog
is an online journal and
therefore has a more informal tone than an academic essay.

·       
Formative feedback on your work
can be sought
through the module
team’s office hours.

·       
Your final reference list does not count towards
your word-count.

General study guidance:

·       
Cite all information used in your
work which is clearly from
a source. Try
to ensure that all sources
in your reference list are seen as citations in your work, and all names
cited in the work appear in your reference list.

·       
Reference and cite your work in accordance
with the APA 7th system – the University’s
chosen referencing style.
For specific advice,
you can talk to your Business librarians or go to the
library help desk, or you can access library guidance via the following link:

o   APA 7th referencing: https://library.hud.ac.uk/pages/apareferencing/

 SHAPE  * MERGEFORMAT

·       
The University has regulations relating to
academic misconduct, including plagiarism. The Academic Skills Team
can advise and
help you with
how to avoid ‘poor scholarship’ and potential
academic misconduct.

·       
If you have
any concerns about
your writing, referencing, research or presentation skills, you
are welcome to consult the
Academic Skills Team,
you can book
tutorial appointments with them via the website How to book a tutorial appointment

·       
Further study resources including the Academic Skills Team overview can be found here: Study resources

·       
Your word count
is +/- 10%

Learning Outcomes

This section is for information only.

The assessment
task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful
to keep in mind that
these are the
things you need to show in this piece of work.

On completion of this
module, students will
need to demonstrate:

ML02: Demonstrate systematic understandings of the changing dynamics and complexity within contemporary
business.

ML04: Produce critical discussions of their
impact upon the future of work.

ML05: Apply
methods and techniques to review, consolidate, extend, and apply
your knowledge to a topic.

Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions.

Submission information

Word/Time Limit:

2000 words

Submission Date:

06/01/25

Feedback Date:

27/01/25

Submission Time:

15:00 UK Time (23:00
HK time)

Submission Method:

Electronically via
module site in Brightspace. Paper/hard copy

submissions
are not required. For technical support, please contact lta@hud.ac.uk

90-100

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

10 – 19

0 – 9

Level

Exceptional

(Outstanding+)

Outstanding

(Excellent +)

Excellent

Very good

Good

Pass

Unsatisfactory

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Fulfilment of relevant learning

outcomes

Met

Met

Met

Met

Met

Met

Not met or partially met

Not met or partially met

Not met or minimal

Not met or minimal

Response to the
question

/task

Full command of assessment
task; imaginative approach demonstrating flair
and creativity

Clear command of assessment task; sophisticated approach

Very good response to task; elements of sophistication in response

Well-developed response to assessment task with evident development of ideas

Secure response to assessment task but not developed sufficiently developed to

achieved higher grade

Adequate response that meets minimum threshold, but with limitations
of development

Nearly a sufficient response but lacks key aspects.

Insufficient response

Little response

No response

Knowledge and understanding (F, I and H)

Knowledge requirements are different at F, I and H level. Please
use the relevant level knowledge assessment criteria

Conceptual and critical understandi ng of contemporar y knowledge
in the subject and its limitations

(H) (30%)

Skilfully integrates
conceptual knowledge from other modules or disciplinary areas
to provide original/ creative critical insights into the subject and
its

ambiguities in a

Excellent conceptual
knowledge and
critical appreciation of the key tensions, controversies disagreement s
and disputes

drawing on

Draws on an
extended conceptual knowledge

Shows very strong ability
to apply/ critique ideas and a
well-

developed
consideration

Demonstrates competent
conceptual knowledge drawing on a broader knowledge base.
A good attempt at integrating and critiquing.

Some solid

Demonstrates secure
conceptual knowledge, conventional critical understanding of relevant knowledge.

Some awareness of

Demonstrates adequate basic conceptual
knowledge, some formulaic critical understanding and awareness of limitations of knowledge.

Mentions some
terminology relating to theories, concepts

Demonstrates
insufficient grasp of a basic knowledge.

Very limited critical

Demonstrates little core knowledge. No critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

Major misunderstandi ngs and

Demonstrates virtually no core knowledge or critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

Wholly irrelevant.

90-100

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

10 – 19

0 – 9

Level

Exceptional

(Outstanding+)

Outstanding

(Excellent +)

Excellent

Very good

Good

Pass

Unsatisfactory

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

considered individual voice

ideas from beyond the module
bounds.

Offers
original, compelling, insightful or interesting
additional perspectives.

of the limitations of knowledge.

Performance at this level and above shows intellectual comfort with doubt, ambiguity, controversy, uncertainly and complexity – rather than seeking certainty and a single right

answer.

insights into
the limitations of knowledge.

No major errors or misunderstandi ng.

the limitations of knowledge.

Lacks depth of integrating ideas.

Few inaccuracies.

No integration of ideas.

Some errors and/or gaps in coverage
and relevance

understanding and awareness of the limitations of knowledge.

Many errors in understanding and omissions.

significant omissions.

Many errors in understanding and extensive omissions.

Cognitive / Intellectual skills

A range of means of framing cognitive and intellectual skills
are provided to reflect the variety of assessment tasks across the School. Module leaders should consider the
following criteria and select the one(s)
that best reflect
the assessment tasks.
Assessment task briefs
should be designed with sufficient information to provide students with a clear
understanding of the core intellectual skills expected within the
bounds of the module– corresponding with the appropriate level of study

Module leaders should be clear about
the nature of information / data to be analysed, as well as the ‘tools’
of analysis expected. Analytical tools can be based
on logic (comparison, connection, categorisation, evaluation, justification) and/or
numerical (e.g. statistics, financial) or other.

Application of knowledge / skills
to practice / a solution(s) /
proposal / conclusion (20%)

Creative & original
application of knowledge

/skills to produce new insights and offers a novel
and comprehensive solution / proposal / conclusion which extends beyond the boundary of the

brief.

Applies knowledge / skills to
develop a comprehensi ve solution /
proposal / conclusion which extends beyond
the original boundary of the brief.

Extended insights.

Applies knowledge / skill in a sophisticated manner to develop a well
conceptualise d and
solution

/ proposal / conclusion.

Alternative approaches might be considered.

Applies knowledge/skill
in a logical and developed
manner to provide a considered solution
/ proposal / conclusion.

Some good insights

/creativity

No logical errors.

Applies knowledge/ski ll in a logical manner to
provide a more developed solution / proposal / conclusion.

Some but limited insights/creati vity.

Applies knowledge/skills in a basic manner to
develop a simple but limited solution/
proposal/conclus ion.

No insights / creativity
Logical errors evident.

Use of some knowledge to provide a solution /
proposal / conclusion, but limited solution/ proposal / conclusion

Some use of knowledge, but mostly insufficient.

Weak use of knowledge / skills evident. Very limited solution / proposal
/ conclusion.

No evidence of attempt to analyse or interpret information or provide a solution/propo sal/ conclusion.

90-100

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

10 – 19

0 – 9

Level

Exceptional

(Outstanding+)

Outstanding

(Excellent +)

Excellent

Very good

Good

Pass

Unsatisfactory

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Thoughtful and developed
insights/

creativity.

Few logical errors

Argument, reasoning (20%)

Intellectually coherent and comprehensive argument that articulates authentic, considered stance
in own voice

Compelling argument that shows intellectual agility
and captures ambiguity. Wholly relevant.

Sharply focused and complex
argument.

All points
wholly relevant

Convincing
and coherent reasoning.

Clearly articulated argument with consideration
of different perspectives.

Mostly relevant points.

Logically coherent reasoning.

Satisfactory argument but limited in complexity.

Broadly
relevant points.

Some limitations in terms of reasoning

Adequate basic
level of argument provided.

Some relevant points but also a number of irrelevant points Errors in reasoning.

Weak argument
with substantial errors in reasoning.

Descriptive or
largely incoherent

Largely incoherent

No argument
is offered

Use of referenced* evidence and sources
to support task

*Normally APA 7^th or OSCOLA
(20%)

Systematic and rigorous use of evidence/ sources beyond the normal bounds of the module to robustly support purpose of the work. Evidence of
independent reading and research.

Referencing
fully competent and accurate

Comprehensi ve use of high-quality evidence and sources
beyond the normal bounds of the
module and shows evidence of independent reading and research.

Referencing
fully competent and accurate

Task is very well supported by
very extensive use of evidence / sources.

All points
fully substantiated.

No
unsubstantiat ed
points.

Referencing fully competent
and accurate

Task is well supported by more developed use of sources/eviden ce

Most points are substantiated and no major unsubstantiate d points

Referencing largely competent and accurate.

Some minor errors in citations or

references.

Task is supported by several sources

/evidence.

Some points are unsubstantiat ed.

Referenced appropriately

Referencing
largely competent and accurate but may include errors

Task supported
by basic evidence and sources but is over-reliant on very few sources.

Significant
number of points
are unsubstantiated. Some effort to reference, but frequent errors
and omissions

One or two apparent
references to concepts introduced
in the assessment task

Very few points are substantiated using evidence

/ sources.

Significant errors and omissions in referencing

Little or no evidence

Significant
errors and
omissions in citation and application of
referencing

Unsupported

Very little attempt to cite
or reference

No evidence No citations

Language and style (10%)

Lucid, fluent, elegant, and compelling, using a distinctive and
individual voice

Clear and fluent with a breadth of vocabulary. Discernible author voice.

Clear functional writing with
a discernible author voice.

Clear
and straightforward use language.

Largely error free

Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and
syntax.

Limited flaws.

Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and syntax that conveys the meaning of the

text.

Many vocabulary,
grammar and syntax errors that obscure meaning

Extensive flaws
in vocabulary, grammar and syntax that prevent the text from being

Unacceptable

Insufficient evidence

90-100

80-89

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

10 – 19

0 – 9

Level

Exceptional

(Outstanding+)

Outstanding

(Excellent +)

Excellent

Very good

Good

Pass

Unsatisfactory

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

Unacceptable

understandable

.