Policies Must Be Selected and Analyzed. These

¶ … policies must be selected and analyzed. These should ideally be aligned with organisational values. Such values are achievement, balance, cooperation, creativity, integrity, loyalty, personal development and results. Loyalty in this context refers to mutual respect. The first policy to be analyzed is the assessment policy, which "outlines the framework in which learning is assessed within TAFE NSW." The policy outlines the objectives of the policy, the audience for the policy, the context including legislative requirements, and the responsibilities and delegations. In general, these policies are congruent with the organisational values.

For example, mutual respect is found in policy 4.1.2, which outlines "explaining the relevant Student Assessment Guides and supporting information to students," so that there is transparency and respect between the instructors and the students.

The values of achievement and results are met with policies like 4.1.7, which states "monitoring and improving the quality of assessment." There is TAFE Quality Services, which as outlined in 5.1.1 will "monitor, evaluate and report on the implementation of the Assessment Policy." This means that not only is there a policy developed that seeks to improve results and is founded on the principle of mutual respect, but that this policy will be continually evaluated and improved on, which fosters further achievement.

One of the primary objectives of education is personal development, and this organisational value is fostered by policies like 1.3, which states "meeting the diverse and varying needs of students" and 1.2, which states that "this policy and related procedures ensure that assessment conducted in fair, flexible, valid and reliable." Which such policies in place, the organisation is seeking to meet its values that emphasize a high quality of education, consistently-applied standards and a flexible learning environment capable of meeting the needs of all students.

The second policy that will be evaluated is the Higher Education Academic Integrity and Honesty Policy. The focus here is on the value of integrity. For example, 1.3 states that "academic misconduct will not be tolerated and any detected instances will incur penalties." The rest of the policy outlines the roles and responsibilities that the academic staff members have with respect to the monitoring and enforcement of the policy. The strict definitions of things like "academic misconduct" are not defined, which leaves the policy open to interpretation.

This is probably not desirable, and would not fit with the "mutual respect" aspect of the organisational values, because students need to have a good sense of what the rules are. If students do not know the rules, they cannot be expected to follow them. So there is a lack of respect there, because this policy does not contain a clause equivalent to 4.1.2 above where the faculty would clearly explain the policy to the students. In general, however, these two policies are aligned with the organisation's values.

Where there are shortfalls, they are relatively minor. There are no outright contradictions between the policies and the values, nor should there be. So on balance, the policies have good alignment with the values and only minor changes should be made to improve this alignment with all values.

An example of a change would be to incorporate the values of achievement and results in the Academic Integrity and Honesty Policy, to highlight the importance of this policy to these values -- academic honesty is important to student performance, because students do not learn when they do not do the work themselves without infringing on the intellectual property of others. Part II. With incident 1, interviewing both Bill and the team leader is essential to gathering the facts.

The decision-making process should also involve human resources, since Bill is going to face disciplinary action. The best course of action, if Bill has no prior record, is probably a written warning, but the national and state laws regarding such things must be adhered to. The only real challenge in implementing this solution are that Bill will be upset, but Bill is already disgruntled, so there may not be any change in the situation.

Management at this point should not engage Bill about his issues with the pay, since that would reward his acting out for attention. Car Company needs to ensure that its workers follow procedure at all times, and that they use proper channels to address issues that may arise. Bill did not conduct himself in accordance with the company's policies, and therefore will also require remedial training with respect to those policies, in addition to the written warning. With incident 2, this is again a clear violation of company policy.

The policies are in place to ensure that the company earns profit on the cars it sells. Anybody can sell cars by selling them (or the add-ons) at prices far below profit level. The key to doing one's job as a salesperson is to sell the car within the framework of company policy. The decision about action with respect to Kosta is again going to be made with the assistance of human resources, and the employee's supervisor. Specific action will be dependent on prior record, of course.

In this case, a larger investigation will be probably be warranted. Kosta may have a track record of bad dealing, and such a pattern of multiple offenses is something that should be addressed. Further, as a salesperson, Kosta is likely on a performance-based employment system, quite different to Bill. Kosta can be removed from the company based on a pattern of violations and insufficient sales. Again, this is why human resources needs to be involved, because they will be aware of the national and state statutes on such things.

If Kosta cannot be removed, the maximum action will need to be taken, but then the company will have him join Bill in receiving remedial training about the appropriate standards of conduct and organisational values. Communication of.