Research Essay Board Paper
Assignment 2: Research Essay Board Paper
|
Course code and name: |
BUSM3115 Ethics and Governance |
|
Assessment name: |
Assignment 2: Research Essay Board Paper |
|
Value: |
40% |
|
Assignment due date and submission requirements: |
End of week 10 (04/10/19 @ 9.00pm) AEST Submission: Turnitin eSubmission in Canvas |
|
Length: |
2000 words maximum (+/- 50 words) (exclusive of appendices, references etc.) |
|
Feedback mode: |
Feedback will be provided electronically using speed grader in Canvas |
|
Learning objectives assessed: |
This assignment assesses Learning Objectives 1, 2, 3, and 6 |
|
Assessment declaration: |
I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood and agree to the content and expectations of the Assessment declaration. (Links to an external site.) |
Assessment task details:
You are required to choose one (1) of the following three contemporary ethics issues (Topics 1, 2 or 3) for analysis and produce a board briefing paper for tabling at the next meeting of the company’s board of directors.
Board members gain a great deal of information about the decisions they need to make through the papers they receive prior to a board meeting. Board papers are often prepared by non-board members. Papers cover a variety of functions, from providing general information to a call for action. For example, section 180 of the Australian Corporations Act 2001 outlines that directors have a statutory duty of care to have read the board papers to be able to contribute effectively to board meetings.
In this briefing paper you will argue either in the affirmative (for) or the negative (against), providing a critical argument with evidence to support your argument.
Whilst the tone of this writing is slightly different to an essay, this briefing paper must have essay-like qualities. That is, you are required to formulate an argument, undertake research to locate academic references, and support your argument with theories covered in this course.
You are also required to table recommendations for the board to consider based on your analysis of the issue, including future action and possible barriers (these must be theory driven/evidence based).
To formulate your argument, you are required to undertake research to locate academic references using online databases (e.g. EBSCO, Proquest, Emerald, Science Direct etc). You must to use at least 12 academic references to support your argument.
Literature pointers will be provided on the Ethics & Governance Canvas site. Also, please read the Ethics & Governance - Guide to Assessment 1: Research Essay for details on essay writing, research and referencing requirements for this assessment.
E&G Assessment Guide
See also the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) Directors Tools on Board Papers Meeting Effectiveness (Links to an external site.)
Topic 1: Walmart and Foreign Corruption
Walmart has agreed to pay $US282 million (AUD $407 million) to settle US federal allegations of overseas corruption. Once upon a time it was possible to get away with having differing ethical stances in different jurisdictions. In a globalised world is it ethical and still possible to practice ethical relativism? (Answer with reference to course literature, theory, concepts and research.)
Literature pointers:
· Barakat, M 2019, ‘Walmart to pay $407m over foreign corruption charges’, Australian Financial Review, 21 June, https://www.afr.com/business/retail/walmart-to-pay-407m-over-foreign-corruption-charges-20190621-p51zys (Links to an external site.) [viewed 27 June 2019].
· Hartman, LP & Desjardins, J 2008, Business ethics: Decision making for personal integrity & social responsibility, McGraw-Hill irwin, Boston, pp 63-109. see Chapter 3: Philosophical ethics and business https://equella.rmit.edu.au/rmit/file/0815e3d6-0fcf-3116-63ae-98e378546eae/1/31259007731461.pdf (Links to an external site.)
· (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) Jones, TM & Ryan, LV 1998, 'The effect of organizational forces on individual morality: Judgment, moral approbation, and behavior', Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 431-45.
· Scherer, AG & Palazzo, G 2011, The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy, Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899-931.
· Trevino, LK and Nelson, KA 2011, Managing business ethics : straight talk about how to do it right, Chapter 3: Deciding what's right: a psychological approach, pp. 71-110, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley.
Topic 2: AFL Gambling and Jayden Stephenson
In June 2019 Collingwood footballer Jayden Stephenson was caught betting on games in which he played in, and as a result he was suspended by the league (AFL). On the one hand the AFL have a wagering partner (sponsor) and promote gambling directly and indirectly, but on the other they punish players and club officials for being involved in betting on games. Is the stance taken by the AFL of partnering with the gambling industry an ethical one? (Answer with reference to course literature, theory, concepts and research.)
Literature pointers:
· Baum, G 2019, ‘AFL’s betting problem is black and white’, The Age, 19 June, https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-s-betting-problem-is-black-and-white-20190619-p51zcq.html (Links to an external site.) [viewed 27 June 2019].
· Farrell, P, Ting, I & Donaldson, A 2019, ‘Sportsbet’s big punt, ABC News, 13 May, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-05/sportsbet-documents-reveal-millions-spent-on-marketing/10833196 (Links to an external site.) [viewed 27 June 2019].
· Hartman, LP & Desjardins, J 2008, Business ethics: Decision making for personal integrity & social responsibility, McGraw-Hill irwin, Boston, pp. 63-109. see Chapter 3: Philosophical ethics and business https://equella.rmit.edu.au/rmit/file/0815e3d6-0fcf-3116-63ae-98e378546eae/1/31259007731461.pdf (Links to an external site.)
· Trevino, LK and Nelson, KA 2011, Managing business ethics: straight talk about how to do it right, Chapter 3: Deciding what's right: a psychological approach, pp. 71-110, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley.
Topic 3: Folau's Religious Freedom or Breach of Conduct
Australian Rugby League player Israel Folau was sacked by the Rugby Australia for breaching their code of conduct. Until December 2017 same-sex marriage was illegal in Australia. Whilst Folau’s views may not correspond with public sentiment, is it nonetheless important that he has the right to express himself, or was Rugby Australia right to dismiss Folau for breaching his contract? (Answer with reference to course literature, theory, concepts and research.)
Literature pointers:
· Mark, D 2019, ‘Israel Folau to take Rugby Australian to Fair Work Commission over contract termination’, ABC News, 6 June, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-06/israel-folau-sues-rugby-australia-for-breach-of-contract/11185064 (Links to an external site.) [viewed 27 June 2019].
· Tunny, G 2019, ‘Israel Folau, Rugby Australia and the price of equality in Australian sport’, ABC News, 31 May, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-31/israel-folau-rugby-australia-and-the-price-of-equality/11162990 (Links to an external site.) [viewed 27 June 2019].
· Hartman, LP & Desjardins, J 2008, Business ethics: Decision making for personal integrity & social responsibility, McGraw-Hill Irwin, Boston, pp. 63-109. see Chapter 3: Philosophical ethics and business. https://equella.rmit.edu.au/rmit/file/0815e3d6-0fcf-3116-63ae-98e378546eae/1/31259007731461.pdf (Links to an external site.)
· Trevino, LK and Nelson, KA 2011, Managing business ethics: straight talk about how to do it right, Chapter 3: Deciding what's right: a psychological approach, pp. 71-110, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ : John Wiley.
Assessment criteria:
|
Criteria |
Weight |
High Distinction |
Distinction |
Credit |
Pass |
Unsatisfactory |
|
Key issues relating to the question have been developed |
30% |
Responds originally, clearly and directly to the question. Good evidence of original insight. Evidence of selection of high quality information/ references. The work demonstrates a high level of understanding and curiosity in analysing the question and task requirements have been clearly and effectively addressed.
|
Responds clearly and directly to the question. Some evidence of original insight. Evidence of selection of relevant information/ references appropriate to the task. The work demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the question and has clearly addressed the task requirements.
|
Responds directly to the question. The work shows some evidence of insight. Evidence of selection of information for the task, but it is not always relevant or fully discussed. The work demonstrates an understanding of the question and addresses the task requirements. |
Attempts to respond to the question directly. Limited in expression and response to the task. Some limitations in expression of ideas and selection of information/references. The work shows some understanding of the question but has not addressed all task requirements.
|
Does not respond, or only partially or indirectly responds to the question. Limited in expression of ideas and selection of information/ references. Shows inadequate understanding of the task and has answered the question, hence has not have addressed all task requirements. Neglects to follow submission processes, or neglects to submit literature review. |
|
Original and clear argument - Logical and convincing discussion |
20% |
Material is deployed in a disciplined way and demonstrates a sophisticated comprehension of key issues of debate. Advanced ability to critically review, analyse, synthesise and apply theoretical and technical body knowledge in a broad and creative way to a range of areas and diverse contexts.
|
Competent interpretation of several sources of information/data & synthesis to integrate knowledge into standard formats. Demonstrates a high level of critical analysis and synthesis through the selection, interpretation and integration of multiple sources of information/data.
|
Demonstrates critical analysis and synthesis through the selection and integration of a range of information/data. Competent use of theory and generally credible evidence to support arguments and demonstrate understanding. Use of conceptual skills to express ideas and offer some perspectives.
|
Adequate response to the task. Attempted analysis and limited synthesis through the selection sources of information/data. Able to use given theory and evidence to demonstrate understanding. Able to use some conceptual skills to express ideas and offer limited perspectives.
|
Inadequate response to the task. Unsatisfactory attempt at analysis and limited synthesis through the selection sources of information/data. Unable to use given theory and evidence to demonstrate understanding. Unsatisfactory attempt to use some conceptual skills to express ideas and offer limited perspectives. Inability to demonstrate original justification of solution. |
|
Ideas and assertions substantiated through use of high quality reference material and key academic perspectives/views used to develop arguments |
20% |
A strong connection between and use of literature to build an argument. |
Strong use of the literature/ course readings to build an argument. |
Evidence of the use of literature/ course readings to build an argument. |
Limited evidence of the use of literature/course readings to build an argument.
|
Inability to connect the literature/course readings to build an argument. Over-reliance on quotes. |
|
Appropriate Harvard style referencing (in text and list of references), Number and quality of references |
15% |
Excellent reference list in terms of quantity and quality. Highly effective citation in text, both in terms of style and content. |
Very good reference list in terms of quantity and/or quality. Appropriate citation in text, both in terms of style and content. |
Good reference list in terms of quantity and/or quality. Adequate citation in text, both in terms of style and content. |
Adequate reference list in terms of quantity and/or quality. Adequate citation in text, in terms of style and/or content, with scope for improvement. |
Inadequate reference list in terms of quantity and/or quality. Inadequate and/or incorrect citation in text in terms of style and/or content. |
|
Clear and comprehensive written style (spelling, grammar, syntax etc.) and formatting. |
15% |
Highly developed and appropriate structure. References consistently conform to the appropriate conventions. Meaning is communicated clearly and effectively through consistent and sophisticated use of academic style, unambiguous language and correct and appropriate grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and spelling.
|
Very clear and appropriate structure. Mostly clear, well-integrated evidence from appropriate sources using accurate paraphrase and summary. References mostly conform to the appropriate conventions. Meaning is communicated clearly through consistent use of academic style, unambiguous language and correct and appropriate grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and spelling.
|
Features a clear structure. Relevant theory generally integrated from a number of mostly appropriate sources using adequate paraphrasing. References generally conform to the appropriate conventions. Meaning is generally made clear through mostly correct and appropriate formal academic style, grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and spelling.
|
Features a discernible structure. May include some irrelevant information. Integrates relevant theory from a limited number of sources using adequate paraphrasing but with occasional irrelevant information or inadequate integration. References generally conform to the appropriate conventions. Meaning is generally made clear through adequate and appropriate formal academic style, grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and spelling; some lapses causing lack of clarity.
|
Lack of clear structure. Sentences are inadequately developed with poor coherence of ideas and irrelevant information. Use and integration of sources is inadequate with frequently incorrect paraphrasing. References do not conform to the appropriate conventions. Meaning is impeded through frequent use of informal language and errors in grammar, vocabulary, punctuation and spelling. |
Further advice:
Information on and examples of Harvard style referencing:
RMIT Library referencing guides (Links to an external site.)
Information about the assessment policy and procedures at RMIT, including information on applying for special consideration and an extension for submitting an assessment task:
RMIT Assessment Policies and Guidelines (Links to an external site.)
RMIT policy outlining the minimum procedural standards for academic integrity and procedures for the management of plagiarism:
Academic integrity and plagiarism procedure (Links to an external site.)
The copyright service provides support to RMIT in improving copyright compliance. The focus of the services is the provision of advice and permission seeking in the use of copyright works within RMIT:
Copyright Management Services - Student Resources (Links to an external site.)
(Links to an external site.) The following document is intended for RMIT Business TAFE and undergraduate students, it details how to format your written work and demonstrates:
· The differences between academic essays and business reports
· Guidelines for their preparation
· How to ensure you meet the technical requirements
· How to cite references
· How to avoid plagiarism.
Turnitin is text-matching software that helps students to demonstrate academic integrity in their work. Access this guide for step-by-step instructions for uploading your written assignments to Turnitin.
Viewing an Originality Report in Turnitin - Student Guide
Viewing an Originality Report in Turnitin (Links to an external site.)