AIM University Group

Learning Outcome 1: Referred
"AC 1.1 – HRM Functions and Responsibilities
Grade Decision: REFERRED

AC 1.2 – Impact of HRM on Organisational Performance
Grade Decision: REFERRED


AC 1.3 – HR Solutions to Operational Challenges
Grade Decision: REFERRED

Learning Outcome 2: Referred
"Assessment Criterion 2.1 — Developing a Recruitment Plan
Grade: Referred

You correctly identified the front desk agent as the most urgent role and gave a reasonable justification around the high volume of weekend guests including families and individuals seeking a getaway, and the time-consuming nature of managing check-ins and room readiness. For Question 2, your three qualities of good communication skills, familiarity with tasks relating to check-in and check-out, and the ability to greet guests properly with the welcome greeting are relevant, though the connections to each of SeaGlass's three specific seasonal targets are not clearly explained as the question requires. For Question 3, your SeaGlass positives of encouraging feedback sessions to help staff grow and a rewards system for high scorers are genuine ideas, but neither is grounded in the story. The case does not mention a rewards programme or feedback sessions as existing offerings, so these cannot be presented as current SeaGlass positives. Your job advertisement is brief and mentions the seaside setting and the need to handle high volumes of customers, but it does not include the first-week coaching plan, the weekend pace, or the warm SeaGlass voice the question calls for. Because the skill-to-target links are missing and the positives and advertisement are not drawn from the story, this criterion is referred.

Assessment Criterion 2.2 — Critically Evaluating Selection Methods and Tools
Grade: Referred

Your work tryout description begins on page two and describes candidates checking in and checking out guests, being assigned to the cleaning department after checkout, providing the food and beverage team with guest preferences, and creating daily schedules and checklists for departments. While some of these activities touch on front desk responsibilities, assigning candidates to a cleaning department is not appropriate for a front desk agent tryout and is not drawn from the case. Your three scoring points of timely and efficient manner, volume of customers handled, and manner towards guests and communication skills are reasonable starting points, but they are not clearly structured as distinct and fair scoring criteria. Questions 6 and 7 are not present in your submission, meaning the note-taking process and tiebreaker step are both missing. Because the tryout scenario contains elements outside the role, the scoring points need more clarity, and two questions are absent, this criterion is referred.

Assessment Criterion 2.3 — Presenting a Complete Recruitment and Selection Strategy
Grade: No Attempt

Questions 8, 9, 10, and 11 are not present in your submission. The complete recruitment and selection strategy, onboarding plan, legal and ethical requirements, and backup contingency step all need to be addressed in full in your resubmission."

Learning Outcome 3: Referred
"Assessment Criterion 3.1 — Training Needs Analysis
Grade: Referred

You identified four skill gaps and linked each to evidence in the story, which is a good start. However, your ranking does not clearly order all four gaps from highest to lowest priority with a short reason linked to the hotel's goals at each position. Your five-step plan introduces focus groups, which are not mentioned in the story — the question asks you to use only resources the hotel already has. Your second huddle question asks agents to suggest their own solutions rather than identify where they struggle most, which does not fully meet the question's purpose. For Question 5, your answer describes focus groups and feedback sessions rather than the two story-based baseline measures of guest satisfaction score and average check-in time. Because the ranking, five-step plan, and baseline measures do not fully meet the requirements, this criterion is referred.

Assessment Criterion 3.2 — Front Desk Agent Training Program
Grade: Pass

Your three learning objectives are relevant and observable. Both training methods are justified using the story's resources, with role-play building confidence and peer shadowing with a checklist addressing the uneven onboarding problem. Your greeting script is warm but does not include asking for the guest's name or confirmation, which would be needed in a real check-in. Your diversity and inclusion step of asking all staff to share opinions on training methods is genuine, though a more specific and practical step would have been stronger. This criterion is a pass.

Assessment Criterion 3.3 — Evaluating the Training and Improving It
Grade: Referred

Your three evaluation methods of daily feedback sessions, monthly performance appraisals, and weekly role-play sessions are not drawn from the story's available resources. The question asks you to use only what is described in the case, such as guest comment cards, mystery guest notes, and daily arrival reports. Questions 2, 3, and 4 of this criterion are also not present in your submission, covering the Week 2 comment card review, the reasons why check-in improved but satisfaction did not, and the Week 2 and Week 6 follow-ups for new agents. Because the evaluation methods fall outside the story and three questions are missing, this criterion is referred."

Learning Outcome 4: Incomplete
No Attempt.