7CO02 People management and development strategies for performance

7CO02 People management and development strategies for performance

Student Assessment Brief

Assessment ID / CIPD_7CO02_25_01

 

Level 7 Advanced Diploma in

• Strategic People Management
• Strategic Learning and Development

 

Introduction

Your knowledge and understanding of the material covered in this core unit will be assessed through your answers to four of the questions listed below. Your assessor will let you know which questions you are to answer. You are expected to complete all the learning for the unit, irrespective of which questions you are asked to answer.

 

The four questions will be drawn from different learning outcomes, featuring one assessment criterion in each learning outcome. These questions encompass a wide range of generalist HR, OD & L&D subject areas.

 

You will write four answers of approximately 1000 words to the questions posed and submit them together in a single document. This constitutes your assessment for this unit. The total word count for the assessment will therefore be 4000 words, plus or minus 10%. The bibliography or list of references is not included in the total word count.

 

You must demonstrate within the submitted evidence (through headings and sub-headings) which learning outcomes and assessment criteria you have addressed. We are unable to moderate your work if this is not included.

As this is an Advanced Level Diploma, it is important that you are able to demonstrate not only good knowledge and understanding of the material associated with each learning outcome, but also the ability to develop an original argument and justify it persuasively with reference to wider reading. Examples of approaches taken in a range of organisations are also an effective means by which to justify your arguments.

 

The six main criteria that CIPD requires centres to use when marking your assessment are outlined below, but it may be that not all these criteria are present in every question.

 

• focus
• depth and breadth of understanding
• strategic application and professional advice
• research and wider reading
• persuasiveness and originality
• presentation and language

 

 

 

The CIPD have provided a supporting video for this unit which can be found in Mystudyspace.

 

Case study

Nestify were a renowned family-owned retail business selling home essentials such as cookware, tableware, glassware, kitchen tools, bedding, and a selection of soft furnishings. Founded in 1937, the business earned a solid reputation for quality products and the highest levels of customer service. In many cases their stores became the hub of the regions they were located in, and they built a strong, loyal customer base. At the height of their success Nestify had 12 large stores in different regions as well as a Head Office and distribution hub.

 

The paternalistic family owners offered generous terms and conditions of employment including sector leading salaries, enhanced sickness pay, maternity pay and holiday entitlement; consequently, they earned a good reputation as an ‘employer of choice’ and rarely encountered recruitment or retention issues. They also had an employee committee whereby representatives of the stores, Head Office and the distribution hub met regularly with senior management to consider business improvements. Induction and ongoing training and development was prioritised by the business to help ensure the highest levels of internal and external stakeholder satisfaction. To help manage and develop people practices across the business there was a well-resourced, CIPD-qualified human resources team based at Head Office. The team comprised the Head of People, two senior specialists (resourcing and reward/ learning and development) and a team of five HR Business Partners to support operations at all locations, plus two junior administrative staff. The Head of People sat on the main board of the business and was fully involved in shaping Nestify’s business strategy, mission, and values.

 

Despite strong leadership, a solid trading history and loyal customers and employees, trading started to become challenging following the 2008 recession, causing profits to dip year on year. The business adjusted to ameliorate the difficulties they were facing, however more recently increased operating costs and rising competition due to cheap imports from China and the growth of internet shopping exacerbated the problems Nestify were experiencing. The organisation reached crisis point as the easing of Covid restrictions were announced in mid-2020. With no family members willing to take over the business, the owners took the difficult decision to cease operating and issue redundancy notices to the workforce. The distribution hub and Head Office was subsequently sold as land for housing development and the store sites put up for sale.

 

In April 2021, a large, discount home goods retailer known as Homestead bought all 12 of Nestify’s sites to add to their preexisting 212 stores. The retail chain has ambitious plans for further domestic growth and expansion overseas in the next five to seven years. Following basic refurbishment, former Nestify stores reopened with Homestead branding in September 2021. The customer (and employee) proposition of Homestead is markedly different to Nestify’s. Their mission is to become a leading retailer of ‘budget friendly’, reliable, essential home products. Goods on sale are much cheaper and of much lower quality than those sold by Nestify, and the stock range is much wider. The organisation is intent on providing value for customers and so the priority is low prices and a ‘no

frills’ shopping experience.

 

The retail workforce is mostly made up of casual and part-time employees with extra temporary workers (usually college and university students) hired in peak trading periods to fill shelves and work on the tills. Workforce planning is weak however (too little, too late) and often the stores are sparsely staffed making them an easy target for shoplifters. Recruitment and selection processes are basic and there is little time to make them more robust since time is of the essence – generally store managers engage in a brief telephone interview with shortlisted applicants and then invite people in for a two hour (unpaid) trial in store, during which a decision is made to hire or reject. Store managers often grumble that recruitment is an ongoing chore since new starters often quit within the first month, and there are constant resourcing gaps due to high levels of staff lateness and absence. The average age of the permanent workforce in store is 34; most have poor qualifications and little or no customer service experience. Despite this workforce profile, training is cursory, with provision for on-the-job training only. There is also a manual file in each staff room which all employees are supposed to read in their breaktime to cover essential policies and practices. Pay and terms and conditions meet the minimum legal requirement but do not go beyond. Employee voice is non-existent, in fact the culture might be described as somewhat aggressive, with little attention paid to staff welfare or concerns.

 

At Homestead’s Head Office there is an HR and payroll function. Under the leadership of Leon Haddad, who has been in post for 20+ years, the team has focussed predominantly on recruitment advertising, issuing contracts, pay matters and general administrative tasks. Store managers can call a helpline should they require advice from a member of the central HR team but there is no HR presence or visibility in stores or regions. In practice, even though most of the store managers have risen through the ranks and have had no formal training in people management, they rarely call on support from central HR, preferring the speed and convenience of handling matters themselves; this approach has resulted in employment disputes on several occasions.

 

Leon Haddad has recently retired. His successor, Rebecca Sharma, took up post in January 2025. Although this is her first senior post in HR, Rebecca is a Chartered Fellow of the CIPD, she has an MSc in International HRM and has worked for leading store chains in various HR and L&D roles.

 

Questions

 

1. Briefly explain the major objectives of people management practice in contemporary organisations. Comment on whether the people management practices at Homestead are likely to meet these objectives and highlight two people practices that could be improved to create better value for stakeholders (e.g., current employees, prospective employees, customers, suppliers). (AC 1.1)

 

2. Homestead has set out an ambitious store growth plan for the next five to seven years, accompanied by a mission to become a leading retailer of ‘budget friendly’ reliable, essential homeware products. Evaluate how well current people management practices appear to be vertically aligned to support these organisational objectives, and comment on the potential risks to organisational performance of pursuing this approach to people management longer (AC 1.2)

 

3. In contrast to Nestify, where best practice models of people practice were adopted, Homestead follow a low cost/low road approach to people practice which arguably reflects ‘best fit’ with their low price/budget brand. Examine the relative merits of the different models of people practice management adopted by Nestify and Homestead. (AC 1.3)

 

4. In her first few months in post, the new Head of HR at Homestead, Rebecca Sharma, is concerned that Homestead’s current approach to people management practice is leading to poor people management outcomes such as excessive staff turnover, poor employee engagement and high absence levels. She feels that this in turn may risk harming the customer experience and threatening the organisation’s financial success. Imagine you are Rebecca. Draft a paper for the executive board of Homestead which critically evaluates the link between people management practice in organisations and improved employer outcomes. Your paper should highlight three people management practices that may currently be detracting from Homestead optimising their outcomes. (AC 1.4)

 

5. Assess Homestead’s approach to workforce planning considering to what extent it is ‘fit for purpose’ and robust particularly given seasonal trading peaks and the organisation’s strategic plan for growth. What techniques can be used to improve workforce planning? (AC 2.1)

 

6. Evaluate current developments in recruitment and selection. Reflecting on Homestead’s approach to hiring new employees, put forward three recommendations aimed at improving the efficiency, reliability and validity of their processes. (AC 2.2)

 

7. Evaluate the benefits and challenges of asynchronous e-learning as a way of fulfilling basic store training needs at Homestead such as customer service, check-out work, health and safety, manual handling etc. (AC 2.3)

 

8. Evaluate the case for introducing channels and processes to enhance employee voice at Homestead. (AC 2.4)

 

9. Examine the merits of the way in which people practice activities are organised and structured at Homestead. As part of your response consider ways in which Homestead might mitigate the risks associated with devolving most HR responsibilities to store managers.

(AC 3.1)

 

10. As a People Practice practitioner, based at Homestead Head Office, the new Head of HR has asked you to prepare a guide to ethical and professional people management practices, aimed at the Store Managers. Critically assess the nature of ethics and professionalism in people practice to reinforce the key themes and points you intend to cover in the guide.

(AC 3.2)

 

11. Examine the major ways in which technology is changing the people management function in organisations. Suggest three areas in which Homestead could embrace technology to elevate the quality of people management processes, practices and outcomes/decisions. (AC 3.3)

 

12. Rebecca Sharma, the new Head of HR, is keen to organise some cross-sectional employee focus groups and an annual formal employee survey to evaluate people management practices at Homestead. Critically assess these methods including how the utility of each of the evaluation tools could be optimised. (AC 3.4)

 

13. Analyse the advantages to Homestead of building relationships with major suppliers or customer groups to understand their current and future needs from a people practice (AC 4.1)

 

14. Examine the different issues and people management challenges facing people management practitioners at Homestead and Nestify. (AC 4.2)

 

15. Assess how global cultural differences stand to affect people management practices if Homestead realises its ambition to expand overseas. (AC 4.3)

 

16. In December 2024, the CIPD published a report on the changing face of the youth labour Demonstrate your knowledge of the most significant changes within this labour market over the past two decades by assessing how these changes have (or are likely to) affect Homestead. (AC 4.4)

 

Marking Grid

Students will receive a Pass, Merit, Distinction or Refer/Fail result at unit level.

You should mark in line with the generic grade descriptors provided on the last page of this brief.

You must provide a mark from 1 to 4 for each Learning Outcome in the unit. You must provide constructive, developmental feedback for each Learning Outcome where you award a mark of one, so refer/fail. If it is your Study Centre’s policy, you can also provide constructive, developmental feedback for learning outcomes where you award a mark of two or above. In both cases, you must provide rich summary feedback at the end of the feedback form, following the instructions provided there.

To pass the unit assessment Students must achieve a 2 (Pass) or above for each of the learning outcomes.

The overall mark achieved will dictate the grade the student receives for the Unit, provided NONE of the learning outcomes have been failed or referred.

 

Overall mark	Unit result
0 to 7	Refer / Fail
8 or 9	Pass
10 to 13	Merit
14 to 16	Distinction

 

Level 7 Advanced Diploma

 

 

Generic grade descriptors	REFER/FAIL / 1	PASS / 2	MERIT / 3	DISTINCTION / 4
Focus	Fails to address all the questions either sufficiently fully or directly.	An adequate attempt to address all the questions fully and directly.	A good attempt to address all the questions relatively well and directly.	An excellent attempt to address all the questions very well and directly.
Depth & breadth of understanding	Inadequate knowledge and understanding in respect of one or more of the questions. Limited depth and breadth of analysis.	Adequate knowledge and understanding across the questions. Satisfactory breadth and depth of analysis.	Full and solid knowledge and understanding across all the questions. Good breadth and depth of analysis.	Very full knowledge and understanding across all the questions. Excellent breadth and depth of analysis.
Strategic application & professional advice	Fails to provide appropriate or well-justified advice and/or recommendations. Lacks a strategic approach.	Provides adequately justified advice and informed recommendations Some strategic application.	Provides solid and thoughtful advice and well-informed recommendations. Clearly strategic in orientation.	Provides excellent advice and very well-informed recommendations. Strategically oriented in all respects.
Research & wider reading	Limited original research and/or appropriate wider reading for the assignment. Limited or no referencing.	Evidence of sufficient research and appropriate wider reading for the assignment. Satisfactory in-text referencing.	Evidence of significant research and thoughtful, appropriate wider reading for the assignment. A good standard of in-text referencing.	Evidence of considerable research and excellent, appropriate wider reading for the assignment. An excellent standard of in-text referencing
Persuasiveness & originality	Limited development of persuasive and original arguments. Inadequate use of examples.	An adequate attempt to develop original arguments and to justify these persuasively. Includes appropriate examples.	Some strong original arguments are presented which are mainly justified persuasively. Good use of examples.	Mostly strong original arguments are presented and justified very persuasively. Excellent use of examples.
Presentation & language	An inadequate standard of presentation or language. The assignment is poorly written and/or poorly structured. It is not at the level required for a management presentation.	A solid standard of presentation and use of language. The structure and ideas are satisfactory for a management presentation.	A strong and professional standard of presentation and use of language. The structure and ideas are well crafted for a management presentation.	An outstanding standard of presentation and use of language. The structure and ideas are very well crafted for a management presentation.

 

Check also: 7CO01 Work and working lives in a changing business environment