8360-602 Assignment Example

Developing critical thinking at Level 6 moves beyond the personal reflection of Level 5 into the territory of research methodology, systematic problem-solving, and the application of critical thinking to decisions that carry genuine organisational consequence. Unit 8360-602 asks you to justify enquiry-based approaches, critically evaluate competing decision-making models, and demonstrate that your management behaviour is informed by rigorous thinking rather than habit or assumption.

This assignment example follows a head of transformation in a 1,500-person housing association, leading a programme to redesign tenant services using data-driven decision-making.

Learning Outcome 1 — Understand Enquiry-Based Approaches to Research

AC 1.1 — Justify Chosen Enquiry-Based Approaches Within Own Operational Environment

The transformation programme required evidence about what tenants actually need versus what the housing association assumes they need — a gap that anecdotal management perception cannot reliably close. Two enquiry-based approaches were selected and justified. Quantitative: tenant contact analysis. Analysis of 14,000 tenant contact records over twelve months, categorised by contact reason, channel, resolution outcome, and repeat contact rate. This approach was chosen because the data already existed in the CRM system — the research cost was analytical time rather than data collection cost. The approach reveals patterns at population scale: which services generate the most contact, which contacts could be resolved through self-service, and which require human intervention. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2023) classify this as secondary data analysis within a positivist research paradigm — seeking objective patterns in existing quantitative data. Qualitative: tenant focus groups. Four focus groups (eight tenants each, recruited to represent demographic diversity) explored tenants’ lived experience of contacting the housing association. This approach was chosen because quantitative data reveals what happens but not why — the focus groups explored motivations, frustrations, and preferences that the CRM data cannot capture. Braun and Clarke (2022) identify focus groups as appropriate when the research question requires understanding experience and meaning rather than measuring frequency.

AC 1.2 — Analyse Ethical Considerations of Enquiry-Based Research

Four ethical considerations were addressed. Informed consent: focus group participants received a written information sheet and signed consent forms. The quantitative data analysis used anonymised records — individual tenants cannot be identified from the contact data. Power dynamics: tenants may feel obligated to participate because the housing association is their landlord. Recruitment was conducted by an independent community engagement officer rather than housing staff, and participants were explicitly told that non-participation would have no effect on their tenancy. Data protection: GDPR-compliant data processing agreements were signed before CRM data was accessed for research purposes. Focus group recordings were stored on encrypted drives and transcripts pseudonymised. Potential harm: focus group discussions about service dissatisfaction could surface strong emotions, particularly from vulnerable tenants. A trained facilitator managed the sessions, and participants were offered access to tenancy support services following the session (BERA, 2022).