In 750-1,000 words, contrast the simplicity of Theory X Theory Y with the complexity of more contemporary theories such as Self-Determination and Cognitive Evaluation.
- Using the car industry as an example, contrast the assembly line approach of Henry Ford with the team approach of modern manufacturing such as Toyota or Tesla.
- Describe how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks.
Please use three to five scholarly resources in your assessment.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
This benchmark assignment assesses the following programmatic competencies: 5.3: Discuss the nature of complex organizations.
Top of Form
Please Note: Assignment will not be submitted to the faculty member until the “Submit” button under “Final Submission” is clicked.
Bottom of Form
Benchmark – Leadership Theories
Less than Satisfactory
|35.0 % Contrast simplicity of early theories with the complexity of more contemporary theories.||Contrast of simplistic early theories with complex more contemporary theories is missing.||Contrast of simplistic early theories with complex more contemporary theories is vague and inconsistent.||Contrast of simplistic early theories with complex more contemporary theories is present and clear.||Contrast of simplistic early theories with complex more contemporary theories is clear and makes some connection to research.||Contrast of simplistic early theories with complex more contemporary theories is clear, concise, and makes connections to current research.|
|35.0 % Describe how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks. (Comp 5.3)||Description of how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks is missing.||Description of how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks is vague and inconsistent.||Description of how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks is present and clear.||Description of how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks is clear and makes some connection to research.||Description of how changes in industry reflect changes in theoretical frameworks is clear, concise, and makes some connections to current research.|
|20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness|
|7.0 % Thesis Development and Purpose||Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.||Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague. Purpose is not clear.||Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.||Thesis is clear and forecasts the development of the paper. Thesis is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.||Thesis is comprehensive and contains the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.|
|8.0 % Argument Logic and Construction||Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.||Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.||Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.||Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.||Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.|
|5.0 % Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)||Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction is used.||Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied.||Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but they are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed.||Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech.||Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.|
|5.0 % Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)||Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.||Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.||Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.||Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.||All format elements are correct.|
|5.0 % Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)||Sources are not documented.||Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.||Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.||Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.||Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.|
The post Leadership Theories appeared first on Wizard Essays.