Proposes one or more good, informed solutions indicating proficient comprehension of the issue. Solutions are reasonably sensitive to contextual factors. Solutions indicate a sound level of judgement of the strengths and weaknesses of the solutions and adequate reference to current theory. Proposes one or more very good, highly informed solutions indicating a deep comprehension of the issue. Solutions are very sensitive to contextual factors. Solutions indicate an accurate and high level of judgement of the strengths and weaknesses of the solutions and considerable reference to current theory. Proposes one or more exemplary, highly informed solutions indicating a deep comprehension of the issue. Solutions are extremely sensitive to contextual factors. Solutions indicate a consistently high level of judgement of the strengths aknedswseesa of the solutions and extensive reference to, and integration of current theory (3 - 3.4) (3.5 - 3.9) (4 - 5)

Proposal of HRM Solutions Proposes no or inadequate solutions; indicates a lack of comprehension of the issue and contextual factors. Proposes few solutions indicating very little comprehension of the issue. Solutions are rather insensitive to contextual factors. Solutions not thoroughly considered. Proposes acceptable solutions indicating satisfactory comprehension of the issue. Solutionsiatered lim in their sensitivity to contextual factors. Solutions indicate a satisfactory level of judgement of the strengths and weaknesses of some of the solutions and adequate reference to current theory. ( /5 marks) (0 - 1.4) (1.5 - 2.4) (2.5 - 2.9)

Provides a very good account of current HRM practices in the case that is consistent with, and synthesises and integrates HRM theory. Provides a competent account of existing HRM theory; synthesised and well- integrated. Consistently oanfidciepnr tly organises and synthesises information /evidence to identify strengths and weaknesses of current practice; critical analysis and reflection are thorough and significant. Consistently provides a very good, in-depth analysis of the HRM practices in the case. Provides an expert account of current HRM practices in the case. Provides an account of HRM theory that is accurate, critical, synthesised and well- integrated. Consistently demonstrates an expert understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the case. Systematically and expertly organises and synthesises information /evidence to comprehensively identify strengths and weaknesses of current practice; critical analysis and reflection are extensive and perceptive. Evixdpeesrtly pro a comprehensive, in-depth and perceptive analysis of the HRM practices in the case. (2.1 - 2.3) (2.4 - 3)

Provides a satisfactory account of current HRM practices in the case that is mostly correct, yet some inconsistencies with HRM theory remain. Demonstrates some level of understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the case. Mostly discriminates between theory, facts and personal opinion. Demonstrates a basic capacity to organise information /evidence to identify strengths and weaknesses of current practice; still tends towards description. Provides a basic analysis of the HRM practices in the case. Provides a good account of current HRM practices in the case that is consistent with HRM theory. Demonstrates a good level of understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the case. Discriminates between theory, fact and personal opinion. Demonstrates a good capacity to organise information /evidence to identify obvious strengths and weaknesses of current practice; reasonable level of analysis evident. Provides a competent analysis of the HRM practices in the case.

Critical Analysis of current HRM practice in the case No attempt is made to identify or describe current HRM practices in the case. Demonstrates no understanding of HRM knowledge relevant to the case. Always confuses theory and facts with personal opinion. Provides no analysis of the HRM practices in the case. Provides a limited, incomplete or incorrect account of current HRM practices in the case that is inconsistent with HRM theory. Demonstrates a poor understanding of the HRM knowledge relevant to the case. Often confuses theory and facts with personal opinion. Paraphrases or summarises information /evidence with very little analysis of strengths and weaknesses of current practice; largely descriptive. Provides inadequate, partial and /or incorrect analysis of the HRM practices in the case. (0.9 - 1.4)

Credit (C)/60-69% Good Distinction (D)/ 70-79% Very good High Distinction (HD)/80-100% Excellent Generally demonstrates a good level of understanding of the issue with evidence of most relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a good knowledge of SHRM concepts and theories; provides a clear, accurate description. Consistently demonstrates a very good understanding of the issue with evidence of almost all relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a very good knowledge of SHRM concepts and theories; provides a detailed, well-integrated and accurate description. Consistently demonstrates an expert understanding of the issue and its complexities with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a sophisticated knowledge of SHRM concepts and theories; provides a comprehensive well- integrated, accurate and critical discussion. (1.2 - 1.3) (1.4 - 1.5) (1.6 - 2)

Hey Can i get this assignment ASAP and please do this according to the in Performance Indicators Performance Levels YET TO ACHIEVE MINIMUM STANDARD MEETS STANDARD Fail (N) /0-49% Poor Pass (P)/ 50-59% Acceptable Identification & explanation of the HR issue Demonstrates no understanding of the issue or related contextual factors. No attempt is made to identify, explain or apply SHRM concepts or theories. Demonstrates a very limited, incomplete or incorrect understanding of the issue or related contextual factors. Demonstrates limited or incomplete knowledge of SHRM concepts or theories. Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the issue with evidence of some relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates a developing knowledge of SHRM concepts and theories; provides a basic description that is mostly correct. ( /2 marks) (0 - 0.5) (0.6 - 0.9) (1 - 1.1)