Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility
faizan.syed
ComparativeBusinessEthicsSocialResponsibility.pdf
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester T1 2020
Unit Code HC2121
Unit Title Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility
Assessment Type Individual Assessment
Assessment Title Individual Case Study Report on ‘The Volkswagen Scandal: An Admission to Emission
Fraud’
Purpose of the
assessment (with ULO
Mapping)
Students able to:
1. Compare and contrast diverse approaches to ethical decision making
2. Evaluate the implications of the legal pressure for ethical behaviour in
organisations
3. Examine ethical issues as they relate to basic values and the challenge of
determining an ethical issues in business
4. Understand how moral philosophies and values influence individual and group
ethical decision making in business
5. Apply and enhance problem-solving skills in solving and managing ethical
dilemmas within an organisation.
Weight 30 % of the total assessments
Total Marks 30%
Word limit Not more than 2,000 words
Due Date Regular Mode Students:
a. Report: Sunday, 7 June 2020, 5PM (week 10)
Submission
Guidelines
• All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
• The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm
margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page
numbers.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately
at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Assignment 2 Specifications
Task: Individual case study analysis (Report)
Topic: Case Study on “The Volkswagen Scandal: An Admission to Emission Fraud”
You are require to complete a detailed analysis and present your case assessment, analysis, and outside
research to the class based on the case study on ‘The Volkswagen Scandal: An Admission to Emission Fraud’.
The case study is available on your prescribed textbook:
Ferrell, O., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L (2018), Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases, 12th ed,
Southwestern, Cengage Learning
You are required to answer the questions located at the end of the case study and the questions are as
follows:
1. Explain how the culture of Volkwagen created this ethical scandal
2. While Volkswagen claimed to support ethics and sustainability, how can they recover from this
ethical disaster?
3. Do you believe this scandal will lead to tougher scrutiny of companies environmental claims in
the future? Why or why not?
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
• The scandal explained: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
• VW executive pleads guilty:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/07/25/jailed-volkswagen-exec-plead-
guilty-u-s-diesel-scandal/508525001/
• How a West Virginia lab detected the VW scandal:
http://www.npr.org/2015/09/24/443053672/how-a-little-lab-in-west-virginia-caught-
volkswagens-big-cheat
• The scandal’s impact on VW’s long-term future: https://www.wired.com/story/vw-diesel-
scandal-future-automakers/
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Assignment Structure
Ideally, your report needs to consist at least the following structure:
1. Executive Summary: ideally one page, but no more than two
2. Section 1: Introduction
3. Section 2: Main body of the report consists of the questions at the end of the case study (or as
above)
4. Section 3: Conclusions
5. Reference List: In between 15-20 references
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Marking Criteria
HC2121 Indvidual Assignment Marking Rubric (Rubric)
Content Categories Substantially Exceeds Expectations Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Does Not Meet
Expectations Unacceptable
Scope (15%)
1. Applies unit material with logical order of ideas, with no
gaps in information.
2. Completely addresses the concepts, theories and material
issues covered in unit and called for in the assignment
instructions, and is supported by text and/or other literature.
3. Best and most applicable points are presented while
unnecessary content is left out.
4. Points are logical and well- supported by evidence and
research.
1. Applies unit material with some logical
order of ideas, with minimal gaps in
information.
2. Substantially addresses issues covered in
unit and called for in the assignment
instructions, and is supported by text and/or
other literature.
3. Important points are presented while
unnecessary content is left out.
4. You make your point, but could present
more logically. Points are supported by
evidence and research.
1. Applies unit material
with gaps in information.
2. Addresses some of the
issues covered in unit and
called for in the
assignment instructions,
3. Some important points
are addressed, but not
fully covered.
4. You made some points,
but they were not
logically related to the
case itself.
1. Does not apply the unit
principles and material as
called for in the case
study.
2. Does not address the
relevant issues posed by
the case study.
3. You fail to make any
important points and
analyze the material
presented in the unit and
case study.
4. You fail to make your
point, and do not use the
concepts, theories and
material presented in the
unit.
1. Paper lacks flow from
point to point, order of
ideas is not clear, and
gaps in information are
present. Structure lacks
organization.
2. Major themes
mentioned in the
assignment instructions
have not been met and
are not supported by
literature.
3. Applicable points are
not presented and paper
is full of unnecessary
content.
4. Points are not logical
and are not supported by
evidence and research.
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Originality (5%)
Demonstrates critical thinking about the topic and the
student’s own impressions and interpretations of research.
The research is not merely presented, but is interpreted and
applied to overall themes.
1. Demonstrates critical thinking about the
topic and the student’s own impressions and
interpretations of research.
The research is presented, could be better
interpreted and applied to overall themes.
Case study lacks some
critical thinking about the
topic and the student’s
own impressions and
interpretations of
research.
The research presented
could be better
interpreted and applied
to overall themes.
1. Case study lacks critical
thinking about the topic
and the student’s own
impressions and
interpretations of
research.
The research is not
interpreted and applied to
overall themes.
1. No critical thinking
about the topic and the
student’s own
impressions and
interpretations of
research.
The research is not
interpreted and applied
to overall themes.
Presentation (5%)
Professional, no editing or revision required.
1. Proper citing of references and HARVARD REFERENCE
GUIDELINE Style, no editing or revision required.
2. Proper sentence structure, punctuation, and spelling, no
editing or revision required.
Professional, some light editing may be
useful.
1. Follows HARVARD REFERENCE GUIDELINE
format with few errors.
2. Few or no errors but sentence structure
could be improved.
Revision Suggested.
1. Follows HARVARD
REFERENCE GUIDELINE
format about 50% of the
time.
2. Overlooked errors in
sentence structure,
punctuation, and spelling.
Revision Required.
1. Follows HARVARD
REFERENCE GUIDELINE
format less than 50% of
the time.
2. Overlooked several
errors in spelling,
punctuation, and/or
sentence structure
showing carelessness.
Revision Required. 1.
Does not follow
HARVARD REFERENCE
GUIDELINE format.
2. Many errors in both
mechanics and sentence
structure; extremely
poorly written.
Integration (5%)
1. Various themes and concepts throughout the paper are
integrated and incorporated to form even stronger support for
the thesis.
Concepts are not presented independently of one another,
but as part of a whole.
1. Various themes and concepts throughout
the paper are integrated and incorporated to
form strong support for the thesis.
Concepts, overall, are presented as a whole.
1. 50% of the themes and
concepts throughout the
paper are integrated and
incorporated to support
the thesis.
50% of concepts are
presented as a whole.
1.Themes and concepts
are not integrated and
incorporated to support
the thesis.
Concepts are not
presented as a whole.
Themes and concepts do
not support the thesis.
Concepts are poorly
presented.
HOLMES INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION
HC2121 – Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignment V01
Comments:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
