Business sustainability

200101 Summer 2014 - 2015 Individual Assignment Guidelines © Copyright The University of Western Sydney, 2014 No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written permission from the Dean, School of Business. Copyright for acknowledged materials reproduced herein is retained by the copyright holder. All readings in this publication are copied under license in accordance with Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968. The Case Study concerning X Pty Ltd , as set out on page 2, comes from a case used by The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (ICAA) in its PY Ethics (2) Module Workbook 2000 . 1 | Page Individual assignment guidelines The following is a hypothetical case study where you are given an ethical problem and asked to work through the issues presented by the case study. You may like to refer to aspects of one of the ethical decision-making methods (models) referred to in Chapter 2 ‘Business sustainability’ of the textbook, such as, Langenderfer and Rockness, St. James Ethics Centre or the American Accounting Association to assist you address Requirement 1. The case study: Sue, who is a Chartered Accountant (CA), is the Financial Controller of X Pty Ltd (X). The company imports and distributes one product only and employs 21 people including the owner, Joseph. This product is imported from Spain. X has a history of profitability and stable growth. However, in the past 6 months Sue has been frustrated with Joseph’s apparent lack of interest in the business. Customer complaints are increasing and service levels are declining. As a result, sales have started to fall for the first time since the company commenced operations. Joseph places a great deal of reliance on Sue, both for her financial expertise and her ability to keep things on track when Joseph is on one of his many overseas trips. One day Sue receives a phone call from a friend, Jackie. Jackie is also in the import and distribution business, although with a completely different product. Jackie advises Sue that she has recently had several meetings with the manufacturers of the product imported and distributed by X. The manufacturers are of the opinion that X can no longer provide the required levels of service and have decided to cancel X’s contract and award the distribution rights to Jackie’s company. Jackie then invites Sue to come and work for her when X inevitably collapses. She offers Sue a substantially higher salary than the one she currently earns. In addition, she would like Sue to recruit X’s best operations staff to come to Jackie’s company with her. Jackie says to Sue ‘. . . obviously, this is confidential so don’t mention it to anyone just yet, especially Joseph’. 2 | Page Required: 1. Answer the following questions, i.e. (a) to (d) inclusive, based on the Case Study presented above on page 2 and assume that you are Sue, the financial controller of X Pty Ltd. (a) Identify the relevant facts of the above case study to your role as financial controller of X Pty Ltd. (b) List the four key stakeholders affected by the above case study. (c) With reference to the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (CPC), identify the relevant ethical principles that Sue should consider in dealing with this situation. Discuss how each ethical principle you identify applies to the facts of the case study. Set your answer out to part (c) as follows: Ethical principle Discuss how the principle applies to the case study (d) Explain the consequences of each of the following actions that Sue (i.e. you) could choose: o say nothing; or o tell Joseph. 2 Reference List: Includes any references you have used and cited in your report. You must use the Harvard referencing system as per the guide available from the UWS library website. (Note: the reference list is not included in the word count). 3 | Page Resources list to assist you 1. The ‘Individual Assignment Marking Guide’ on pages 6 and 7 below. It is imperative you follow this marking guide in order to have the opportunity to optimise the marks you may receive for this assignment. The marking guide shows what the marker will be looking for and what mark you will get if you reach certain levels of attainment. Print off a copy and use this to help you in your preparation. 2. Chapter 2 Business Sustainability of the textbook. Birt, J 2014, Accounting: business reporting for decision making, 5th ed, John Wiley and Sons Australia, Milton, Qld, pp. 40-75. 3. Websites of the professional accounting bodies, such as: CPA Australia (http://www.cpaaustralia.com.au/), and The ICAA Australia (http://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/). 4. The library resources link on vUWS and academic articles accessed via the library database. From library website >> e-Resources >> (scroll down to) Accounting >> select either ABI/INFORM or ACCOUNT. You can search using suitable keywords. 5. The library website at http://library.uws.edu.au/uws_library/sites/default/files/cite_Harvard.pdf. This will ensure you use the correct referencing approach. 6. The following ethical decision making models will help you in answering what is Required above. * Langenderfer, HQ & Rockness, J 1990, Ethics in the accounting curriculum: cases and readings, American Accounting Association, Sarasota, as cited in S Henderson & G Pierson, chapter 31, Issues in financial accounting, Prentice Hall, Frenchs Forest. NSW. * St James Ethics Centre 2012, St. James Ethics Centre, http://www.ethics.org.au/ * The American Accounting Association (AAA) - May, WW 1990, Ethics in the Accounting Curriculum – Cases and Readings, American Accounting Association, Sarasota, Fla. * The Spiral Model - Thompson, IE, Melia, KM, Boyd, KM & Horsburgh, D 2006, ‘Ethical decision-making and moral theory’, in Nursing ethics, Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp. 295-359. * The Laura Nash model - Nash, LL 1981, ‘Ethics without the sermon’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 78-90. * The Mary Guy Model – Guy, ME 1990, ‘The Mary Guy Model ‘, in Ethical decision making in everyday work situations, Quorum Books, New York, pp. 14-9. 4 | Page Submission information Assignment Submission This assessment task is to be submitted online via the Turnitin link within the ‘Individual Assignment’ folder in vUWS. This is an online only submission. The only acceptable file types are word files .doc or .docx. There is no need to attach a cover sheet or to hand a hardcopy of your assignment to your tutor. The Turnitin link will be open from 10am Friday 2 January, 2015 and close 10am Friday 9 January, 2015 which is the last day your assignment can be submitted. That is, the closing time and date to submit your attempt at the ‘Individual Assignment’ is 10am Friday 9 January, 2015. When your assignment is successfully submitted your will receive a copy of the digital receipt in your UWS email account. Keep the digital receipt for your records as it is your proof of successful submission. On first submission to the assignment link an originality report will be generated within two minutes. Subsequent submissions will take up to 24 hours to receive a response. For links to videos outlining this process please see the Help and Further information section below. Remember, the closing time and date for you to submit your attempt at the ‘Individual Assignment’ is 10am Friday 9 January, 2015. Student Submission guide http://library.uws.edu.au/FILES/turnitin/Turnitin_Student_Instructions.p df Note: You must use a desk-top or laptop computer to access grades and feedback (not an iPad or mobile phone device). Disclaimer All online submissions via Turnitin are presented with a declaration to students at each upload via the Turnitin interface. The declaration is: By submitting your work using this link you are certifying that: • You hold a copy of this assignment if the original is lost or damaged • No part of this assignment or product has been copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made in the assignment • No part of the assignment/product has been written/produced for you by any other person except where collaboration has been authorised by the subject lecturer/tutor concerned • You are aware that this work may be reproduced and submitted to plagiarism detection software programs for the purpose of detecting possible plagiarism (which may retain a copy on its database for future plagiarism checking) 5 | Page Marks and feedback Your assignment will be marked online with feedback and commentaries available from your Turnitin link via GradeMark. Please see videos from the link in Help and Further information listed below. You are encouraged to download a copy of your Grademark report with feedback for your records. Help and further information Information for students on how to submit an assignment into Turnitin, how to view and interpret their originality report and information on accessing assignment feedback via Turnitin/Grademark is available here: http://library.uws.edu.au/uws_library/guides/turnitin/resources-forstudents Frequently asked Questions Turnitin: http://uws.au.libanswers.com/browse.php?tid=9979 Grademark: http://uws.au.libanswers.com/browse.php?tid=25830 Format A submission of no less than 500 words and no more than 750 words is expected excluding the reference list. Submissions must be word processed in either Times New Roman or Arial font, 12 point and 1.5 spaced with a footer on each page including your name, student ID and page number. Late Submissions Late submissions will be penalised as per the UWS policy document ‘Assessment Policy – Criteria and Standards – Based Assessment’. In particular please see Clause (51) which states as regards ‘Late Submission of Assessments‘: (51) Except where an extension has been approved for the submission of an assessment task by the unit coordinator, or in line with the University’s Special Consideration Policy, the following penalties will apply to the late submission of an assessment task: 1. a student who submits an assessment task after the due date for submission will be penalised by 10% per calendar day up to 10 days, i.e. marks equal to 10% of the assignment’s worth will be deducted as a ‘flat rate’ from the mark awarded for each calendar day the assignment is late up to 10 calendar days. Saturday and Sunday each count as one calendar day; and 2. the assessment will not be accepted after the marked assessment task has been returned to students who submitted the assessment task by the due date 6 | Page Frequently Asked Questions What is being asked for? Are we on the right track? Making sure you understand what is being asked for is the first step! A good answer to a question that has not been asked is actually a bad answer! Reading Chapter 2 of the textbook would be a good starting point! In particular look at; the role of ethics in business, comparing ethical philosophies and approaches relevant to business decision making; the use of codes of ethical conduct and the fundamental principles of APES 110; the application of ethical decision- making methods to business situations; and combining issues relevant to ethics, regulation, sustainability and politics. What sort of language does this assignment require? Specialised terms, or “jargon”, should be defined but everyday terms should not. Do not assume that your reader is an expert in the area being discussed, nor assume that they are entirely uneducated. How many references do we need? The reference list should contain only those resources that have actually been referred to (or “cited”) in your answer. The quantity of references is not as important as the quality of your references, the relevance of your references and how the references are used in your assignment. Can we ask people we know and use their views and include it in the assignment? No. Use published sources only. Will our tutor (or other staff) read our drafts before we submit? No. We will give guidance but will not actually read (or proof-read) any reports in advance. Who should I ask if I have more questions? You should ask the Unit coordinator Graeme J. Mitchell as there may be other students who have the same questions and there is a need for consistency in advice. How does the assignment contribute to my assessment mark? This assignment is worth 15% of your total marks in the unit. You will be given a score out of 30 which will then be converted to a mark out of 15 for this assessment task. 7 | Page INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT MARKING GUIDE CRITERIA UNSATISFACTORY NEEDS IMPROVEMENT MEETS EXPECTATIONS EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS Addresses the specific questions under Requirement 1: Identify the relevant facts from the case study Does not identify any, or only identifies 1, relevant fact from the case study Identifies 2 or 3 of the relevant facts from the case study Identifies 4 or 5 of the relevant facts from the case study Identifies 6 of the relevant facts from the case study † 0 - 1mks † † 2 - 3mks † † 4 - 5mks † † 6mks List four key stakeholders affected by the case study No relevant key stakeholder listed, or 1 relevant stakeholder listed affected by the case study. Lists 2 relevant key stakeholders affected by the case study Lists 3 relevant key stakeholders affected by the case study Lists 4 relevant key stakeholders that are affected by the case study † 0 – 1/2 mks † † 1 mks † 1.5 mks † 2 mks With reference to the CPCs identify the ethical principles from the case study and apply them to the facts of the case study None, or 1, of the ethical principles are identified Issues are not related back to the case study 2 or 3 ethical principles are identified No issues are related back to the case study At least 2 ethical principles are identified and each is related back to the case study At least 3 ethical principles are identified and each is related back to the case study † 0 - 1mks † † 2 – 3 mks † † 4 mks max [1 mk each to max 4 mks] † 6 mks max [1 mk each to max 6 mks] Explain the consequences: *do nothing No consequences of action are given or the consequences given do not make sense 1 to 2 consequences are given and are clearly explained 3 logical consequences arising from the course of action are given and are clearly explained 4 logical consequences arising from the course of action are given and are clearly explained † 0 mks † 1 – 2 mks † † 3 mks [½ mk for each consequence & ½ mk for each clear explanation] † 4 mks [½ mk for each consequence ½ mk for each clear explanation] Explain the consequences: *tell Joseph about the situation No consequences of action are given or the consequences given do not make sense 1 to 2 consequences are given, but they are not clearly explained 3 logical consequences arising from the course of action are given and are clearly explained 4 logical consequences arising from the course of action are given and clearly explained † 0 mks † 1 – 2 mks † † 3 mks [½ mk for each consequence & ½ mk for each clear explanation] † 4 mks [½ mk for each consequence & ½ mk for each clear explanation] 8 | Page Addresses the clarity of the students attempt at Requirements 1 and 2: CRITERIA UNSATISFACTORY NEEDS IMPROVEMENT MEETS EXPECTATIONS EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS Referencing and paraphrasing using the “Harvard system”. Refer to the UWS Library website for details. In-text citation and/or paraphrasing and/or reference list missing or substantially incomplete In-text citation and/or paraphrasing and/or reference list have a number of errors Satisfactory in-text citation, paraphrasing and reference list, possibly with a few minor errors Excellent in-text citation, paraphrasing and reference list † 0mks † 1mk † 2mks † 3mks Sources are used to support the students claim/statement References are absent or are used but irrelevant to discussion References are used but some are relevant and some are not relevant All references used are relevant to discussion † 0mks † 1mk † 2mks Uses clear prose style: sentence structure, grammar, and spelling Writing style is difficult to follow and/or contains many grammatical and/or spelling errors Writing style is unclear at times. Contains a number of grammatical and/or spelling errors Writing style is coherent, with possibly a few grammatical and/or spelling errors Writing is clear and error-free † 0 mk † 1 mks † 2 mks † 3 mks Not appropriate length/not within the word limit Outside the word limit i.e. more than 750 words OR less than 500 words Length is within the set word limit i.e. between 500 – 750 words † Minus 4mks No penalty