BSBS6009 Cross Cultural Management - Assessment item 4 individual reflective journal (30%)
Individual Negotiation Reflective journal (30%) Due date is on Tuesday week 13
The objectives of this assignment are to:
 Assess student’s ability to apply the knowledge and understanding of cross cultural management and negotiation learnt in this course by critically reflecting on negotiation simulations.
 Assess student’s ability to identify and analyses issues that were critical to the processes and outcomes of the negotiation simulations.
 Assess student’s ability to plan for a negotiation.
Specific Tasks: This assessment item include four sections each approximately 500 words in length.
In Part 1 of your journal, you are required to critically reflect on negotiation simulations from Week 9 to 11 and apply appropriate cultural, communication and negotiation theory/ies to identify and evaluate your own strengths and weaknesses.
In part 2 of your journal, you are required to critically reflect your final negation simulation on week 12 and identify your improvements and evaluate processes and application while including effective and ineffective strategies and tactics compare with week 9 to 11.
In Part 3 of your journal, you are required to identify the most significant ethical issues surrounding the negotiation simulations from week 9 to 12 and provide recommendations on how could you avoid the issues.
Your individual negotiation plan for the Final Group Negotiation Simulation in Week 12 forms Part 4 of your reflective journal. Please record and reflect on your negotiation planning process and specify your negotiation roles, responsibility, strategy and tactics. Each group member will be given different roles and responsibilities, so each member’s negotiation plan will be different.
Advice: Students should communicate with team members effectively, divide task and roles and work out a negotiation plan and strategy together. Please prepare, interact and participate fully in each negotiation and record each of the negotiation simulation.
Length of Assignment: The assignment should be 2000 words in length (excluding Reference List and
Appendix). 10% over or under the word count is permissible without penalty. Correct referencing according to
NGSB Student Manual must be used.
Resources: Students must support their findings by using refereed scholarly journals. An extensive reading list is provided for this course and students are encouraged to use these as well as a minimum of 7 scholarly journals for the assignment.
Marking Criteria include an assessment of your ability to apply your knowledge and understanding of cross cultural management and negotiation learnt in this course by critically reflecting on negotiation simulation and your ability to identify and analyses issues that were critical to the processes and outcomes of the negotiation simulations. Please see attachment on the next page.
Please be aware: To achieve the learning objectives of this assessment, students have to attend the negotiation simulations from week 9 to week 12 and reflect critically on the negotiations. Students who absent for negotiations might lead to a zero grade of this assessment.

BSBS6009 Cross Cultural Management - Assessment item 4 individual reflective journal (30%)
Marking criteria for individual reflective journal (30%)

Assessment criteria Unacceptable
(Fail)

Acceptable
(Pass)

Good
(Credit)

Very Good
(Distinction)

Excellent
(High Distinction)

Reflective practice review and analysis

Poor –you demonstrate very limited ability to reflect on actions and strategies and evaluate impact. Little to no understanding of own strengths and weakness or their impact on the team.
No interpretation of process or impact offered. Satisfactory – you demonstrate a basic capacity to recognise your own strengths and weaknesses with some limited application to impact. Your journal provides basic identification of strategies and tactics, interpretation of impact is basic and/or inconsistent.

Good – you demonstrate a capacity to recognise your own strengths and weaknesses and interpret impact on processes.
Your journal identifies and evaluates strategies employed within the simulations and major negotiation exercise, draws insights and interprets impact on outcomes. Very good –you demonstrate a strong ability to identify and evaluate your own strengths and weaknesses; as well as identify and evaluate processes and application including effective and ineffective strategies and tactics. Your journal highlights a conscious and effective effort to reflect on practice and process to improve own performance and development. Critical analysis and application of communication and negotiation theory and strategies Poor – Little evidence of the use of negotiation theory to explain the negotiation or negotiation outcomes.
Critical analysis not developed.

Satisfactory – Using appropriate negotiation theory, the journal develops a satisfactory assessment of the strategies and methods applied in the negotiation and their impact on the negotiation outcomes. Critical analysis is not sufficiently developed.

Good – Using appropriate negotiation theory, the journal develops a good assessment of the strategies and methods applied in the negotiation and their impact on the negotiation outcomes. Some critical analysis evident. Very good – Using appropriate negotiation theory, the journal develops a very good critical assessment of the strategies and methods applied in the negotiation and their impact on the negotiation outcomes.

Excellent - You evaluate and interpret communication and negotiation processes and application including effective and ineffective strategies and tactics, as well as personal strengths and weakness. You demonstrate high level, innovative and conscious thinking about, and genuine reflection on, your own practice, its impact on others, and identify adjustments in order to develop further.
Excellent – Using appropriate cultural, communication and negotiation theories, the journal develops an excellent critical assessment of the methods and strategies used in the simulations and final negotiation exercise and their impact on the outcomes of these simulations. BSBS6009 Cross Cultural Management - Assessment item 4 individual reflective journal (30%)
Negotiation plan

Inconsistencies evident between your research and your plan. The plan was not fully justified in terms of your research. Limited consideration given to the relative negotiating power of the teams. A satisfactory negotiation plan that was adequately thought-out and justified. The plan shows adequate consideration of your own team’s general strategy and the potential strategy of your opponents. Sufficient analysis evident in regard to the relative negotiating power of the negotiating parties and your plan is fairly consistent with the analysis.

A good negotiation plan that was adequately thought-out and justified. The plan shows sound consideration of your own team’s general strategy and the potential strategy of your opponents. Sound level of analysis evident in regard to the relative negotiating power of the negotiating parties and your plan is fairly consistent with the analysis. A very good negotiation plan that was well thought-out and justified. The plan shows very sound consideration of your own team’s general strategy and the potential strategy of your opponents. There is good analysis evident in regard to the relative negotiating power of the negotiating parties and your plan is usually consistent with the analysis. Writing General language and grammar and referencing. Sentence structures and grammar inadequate for clarity and/or incomplete referencing of sourced material.

Sentence structures and very grammar is good and correct referencing of all sourced material.

Sentence structures and grammar adequate, with minor errors that do not distract reader from the main message.

Sentence structures and grammar adequate, but errors cause distraction and/or errors in referencing. An excellent negotiation plan that was comprehensively thoughtout and justified. The plan realistically considers and justifies your own team’s general strategy as well as the potential strategy of your opponents. There is strong analysis regarding the relative negotiating power of the negotiating parties and your plan is fully consistent with this analysis.
Employs words with fluency for ease of reading. Writing and references are essentially error free.