Submission Deadline Marks and Feedback

Before 10am on: 20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7)

15 working days after deadline (L6)
10 working days after deadline (block delivery)

Referral

Unit title & code International and comparative Human resource management & SHR081-6
Assignment number and title Assessment One and Critical Review of a journal article (Essay)
Assignment type Course work-Literature Review (CW-LR)
Weighting of assignment 40%
Size or length of assessment 2,500 words
Unit learning outcomes 1. Demonstrate a critical appreciation of theoretical knowledge in strategic international or
comparative human resource management designed to improve performance in an
organisational context
2. Analyse and evaluate strategic international or comparative HRM strategies and practices in
an organisational context using relevant theoretical frameworks, current research and good
practice to identify solutions to potential problem areas and the likely consequences if these
are not addressed.

What am I required to do in this assignment?

Assessment 1- You have to write a 2500 words critical review of selected journal article regarding a specified strategic
HRM or comparative HRM issue in an international context. The article must current, within the last 5 years.

You must choose ONE article only from any of the following list of journals:

 International Journal of Human Resource Management

 Human Resource Management Journal (UK)
 Human Resource Management (USA)
 Work, Employment and Society
 British Journal of Industrial Relations
 Human Resource Development International
  Human Resource Development Quarterly
 Human Resource Development Review
 International Journal of Training and Development
 European Management Review

PLEASE SEE THE GUIDANCE NOTES (PAGE 3) BELOW FOR DETAIL INFORMATION ON HOW TO CRITICALLY REVIEW A
JOURNAL ARTICLE

What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)

• Critically demonstrate knowledge and critical understanding of your chosen article

• Present a critical review of a range of theories in the article
• Critically analyse the context of the study
• Critically demonstrate a strategic understanding of international HRM or comparative human resource
management with regards to contextual factors, ethics and professionalism.
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
Guidance on writing a critical review:
Selecting your article
The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate what you have learned about the different approaches to research.
Therefore, you will find it much easier to do this assignment if you choose an article that is based on primary research. If you
chose a different kind of article, a literature review, an article proposing a theoretical model or a ‘how to do it’ article you will
find it much harder as you can only really critique articles like this if you know the subject matter in as much depth as the
author – and that is unlikely.

Reading and studying your article

Before you even begin to think about what you might write you should make sure you have a very clear idea in your mind as to
what the article is about and how the author’s argument is constructed. Here are some helpful tips.
Most articles follow a similar structure as mentioned in the lecture. See if this applies to your article. If so, try and find the key
sentences in each section that tell you what the author is trying to do in that section. So, for example:
In the Introduction, the author is making the case for the research, convincing you of its uniqueness. How have they done that?

In the author’s literature review the author will usually show you where they are locating their work within a wider body of
theory on the subject/ how have they done that?

In the methodology, the author is describing the approach they took to the primary research and trying to convince you that
their research design is appropriate to their topic and that therefore, their results will be reliable and valid. How have they
done that?

In the findings section, the author is presenting their most important results and supporting them with evidence. What are
these results and how convincing is the supporting evidence?

In the discussion section, the author is pulling out the significance of their findings and relating them back to the initial
questions or objectives. How convincingly is s/he doing that?

2
In the conclusion, the author is summarising where the research has taken us, how it has added to knowledge, what new
questions or limitations are there for future work. These two final sections should set out the overall significance of the
research.

Once you have highlighted the key sentences in each section, and summarised them (in your own words) in a brief paragraph
you should have a clear idea about the overall argument. Here is a nice quotation about essays and structures:
‘An essay without structure is just a sequence of ideas and arguments with no interconnections and no sense of direction. Even
if the ideas themselves are interesting or provocative, the absence of structure conspires against making sense of them’
(Gabriel 2008:288)

So, bearing this in mind, look at how the different sections are connected. Look for any sentences or phrases that might provide
a bridge from one paragraph to another. Phrases such as ‘in order that...’, ‘now we can see that...’, ‘following on,’ etc indicate
that the ideas immediately before and after are linked in some way. Can you see how they are linked? If you can put down your
ideas about how the different sections / themes are linked then you should, by now, have a clear outline of the overall article.

Writing a brief summary

Now, see if you can write a single sentence (or maybe a couple of sentences) that says exactly what the author has done in the
article. See if this format can help:
In this article the author(s) investigate the topic/problem/question by methodology and conclude that the main / most
significant conclusion.
If you can do that, then you really do have a grip on the article! After that wonderfully concise opening sentence, you can go on
to summarise the whole article in more detail (although don’t go beyond a paragraph or two).

Writing the rest of the review

To write the main review you should go back to your section by section summaries. Use these as a basis for developing your
essay:
Questions you may answer:
 What kind of literature did the author review? What does that tell you about their main interest, focus, research
paradigm? What have they left out?

 What choices did they make about their methodology? What comments can you make about their choices? Don’t just
say they are good – say WHY you have made that judgement (and remember what you learned about research
methods to help you do that!).

 What about the sampling selection? Is it representative of the population?

 Do you think that the questions used in the methodology are valid? Did they test the questions of validity and
reliability?
 How clearly have they set out their findings and their evidence? What audience are they writing for? How well can
you judge the validity of their findings?
 Do they identify some key relevant points in their discussion? Do these follow from their findings?
 And finally, how does that research add to our understanding of the topic? Who is the research aimed at? How useful
is it? How applicable might it be to different situations? What are the limitations of the research?
 And finally, can you write a conclusion of your review that follows the same pattern as the summary above:
 In this paper I have reviewed the author(s) article the subject and by examining the key areas you chose to write

3
 about conclude that ...
How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?

This align with what we have been doing because it draws from your knowledge of relevant theories, concepts and cases.

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.

You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.

Pass – 40-49% Pass – 50-59% Commendation – 60-69% Distinction– 70%+

Limited understanding of Satisfactory understanding of Critically demonstrated Critically demonstrate
contextual issues. tasks. However, only knowledge of the chosen knowledge and critical
1 demonstrated a descriptive article. However, with a few understanding of your chosen
discussion of relatively good evidence of disconnected article.
arguments. arguments.
Key issues not identified or Most of the key issues Presented a critical review of Presented a critical review of a
addressed fully enough. addressed. Presented a a select set of theories in the range of theories in the article
descriptive review of a select article with a good evidence while showing an excellent
set of theories in the article of wider reading. evidence of wider reading.
with a good evidence of wider
2 reading.

3 Some but rather superficial Satisfactory knowledge of the Satisfactory knowledge of the Critically and comprehensively

4
 understanding of the subject matter context. subject matter context. analyse the context of the
subject matter concepts. Fair analysis of some Satisfactory analysis of some study. Demonstrated evidence-
Limited analysis. Lacks appropriate concepts. Scanty appropriate concepts. Some based discoveries as well as the
enough evidence based evidence-based arguments evidence-based argument unique implications of
argument. Limited reference demonstrated which draws demonstrated which draws on conducting the research within
to theory on theory. A descriptive theory. A critical review of the the specific context.
review of the research research context. Comprehensive knowledge of
Weak conclusions not
context. Disconnected subject matter demonstrated.
necessarily aligned to the
conclusions drawn that are Emergent hot topics considered
analysis.
broadly aligned to the when appropriate.
analysis.

Presentation and structure Presentation and structure of Presentation and structure of Presentation and structure of
of assessment evidence assessment evidence does not assessment evidence is assessment evidence meets the
meets the assessment brief effectively meet the appropriate to the assessment brief to an excellent
to a less than satisfactory assessment brief. assessment brief. standard.
standard. Limited expression of Concepts expressed in a clear Critically demonstrated a
Limited expression of concepts clearly, and systematic manner. strategic understanding of
concepts clearly, systematically and/or international HRM or
4 Acceptable referencing.
systematically and/or confidently. comparative human resource
confidently. management with regards to
Inadequate referencing.
contextual factors, ethics and
Inadequate referencing.
professionalism
Extensive and appropriate
referencing.