Chat with us, powered by LiveChat Identify a contemporary business ethics issue, case, or problem. | paledu.org
  

It is related to Business Ethics.
Module
Learning Outcomes Assessed:

1.
Identify and engage with business
ethics issues as well as recognise the various stakeholders involved in
business ethics.

2.
Understand and apply normative ethical
theories to contemporary business issues.

3.
Independently research a business
ethics issue/case/problem and critically analyse it by applying ethical
theories and models to the business scenario.

Academic Year 2021/22

Module Code: BL3320

Module Name: Business Ethics

Module Leader: Dr Lauren Traczykowski

Coursework Title:

Individual Written Assignment

Task Details/Description:
This module introduces students to the dynamic environment in which businesses operate and the ethical challenges faced. We take an interdisciplinary applied ethics approach to critically analysing business. This requires a robust review of the stakeholders involved (MNCs, employees, customers, INGOs, charities, global civil society, et al) and continuous questioning and debate over what ?should? happen, ethically speaking, in various business scenarios.

Students will identify a contemporary business ethics issue, case, or problem. Using theories, models and relevant literature from the module and your wider reading, critically analyse the issue/case/problem. The topic should be agreed with module tutor before starting your work. It should be suitably narrow so as to allow for critical analysis within the given word count and appropriate to the topics covered in this module.

Analysis should be written from a committed standpoint using one normative ethical theory. The student must show a clear understanding of how the selected normative theory can be applied to the chosen topic and links with themes discussed throughout the module where relevant. The student will be sure to engage in critical analysis.

It is expected that the majority of the students will demonstrate that they have engaged with the core reading for the subject, and thereby have shown evidence of achieving the learning outcomes (stated below). In order to meet the pass mark, the students should demonstrate awareness of shortcomings of the primary theory applied to the issue, case or problem. Students should demonstrate knowledge of key theorists and use correct referencing (in whatever is your chosen style) throughout.
Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:

1.Identify and engage with business ethics issues as well as recognise the various stakeholders involved in business ethics.
2.Understand and apply normative ethical theories to contemporary business issues.
3.Independently research a business ethics issue/case/problem and critically analyse it by applying ethical theories and models to the business scenario.

Presentation Requirements:

Font & Size: Arial 12

Word Count: 1000 words excluding references (NO +/-)

Line Spacing: 1.5

Submission Date & Time:

27 April 2022 (12:00 noon UK time) by electronic submission through Turnitin.

Assessment Weighting for the Module:
This assessment forms 70% of your final mark for the module.

Assessment Criteria
See below matrix.
Ethical Requirements
This is not applicable as students will not collect primary data.
Essential Reading for Coursework Task (if in addition to reading provided in the module outline):
Students should engage with the provided reading list and show evidence of extensive wider reading. There is no set number of sources a student should use ? however, each essay should provide evidence of a strong working knowledge of the theory/model used and an ability to apply that theory to the real-world scenario being analysed. This will necessarily require a bespoke set of readings that the student must decide for him/her/themself.
Assessment Component First
(70%+) 2.2
(60-69%)
2.1
(50 ? 59%) Third
(40 ? 49%) Fail
(0 ? 39%)
1. Evaluation of business ethics problem
Identification, understanding and explanation of the central issue to be utilized 15% A problem presented in an appealing way to inspire interest and potential buy in. Plenty of scope within the idea and context for in depth analysis. A problem presented convincingly and explained clearly. Plenty of scope within the idea and context for analysis. A problem explained reasonably clearly. Scope within the idea and context for analysis. The problem could be explained more clearly. Risking that there may be insufficient scope of idea or context for analysis. A poor choice of problem. Explanation unclear, unsuitable context. Provides for analysis.
2. Theory
Choice, evaluation, and application of appropriate theories. Integration of theory into argument. Evidence of reading.

35% Comprehensive discussion of very appropriate business ethics theory and concepts, and excellent integration of theories and concepts into a sustained argument. Effective application in realistic scenarios. Evidence of extensive reading and preparation. Effective discussion of appropriate business ethics theories and concepts, and overall integrates theories and concepts into an argument, though patchy. Theory application appropriate to context. Some evidence of reading beyond the module main readings. Some discussion of business ethics theories and concepts, and some integration of theories and concepts into an argument. Appropriate theory used but not applied well. Theory and concepts presented as a list of ideas, and could be applied in a more context-sensitive way.
Reading appears limited to the module readings. Limited understanding evidenced in the answer, which contains errors, misrepresentation or irrelevant information about business ethics theories and concepts. Inappropriate theory used. May be too descriptive with limited application to specific context. Limited evidence of reading. Very limited understanding evidenced in the answer, significant errors, misrepresentation or irrelevant information about the business ethics theories and concepts used. Inappropriate theories utilized. Little attempt to apply to specific context. Little or no evidence of reading beyond the module text, slides and presentations.

3. Analysis
Convincing analysis and discussion of the context and situation. Persuasive evidence/theory based argument

40% Critically reflects on analysis and the implications for interpreting the situation identified/case. Excellent evidence-based, argument with theory well-applied.
Appropriately justified argument, focused on discussing in more depth, and emerging from the analysis and discussion. Effective reflection on analysis and the implications for interpreting the situation identified/ case study. Overall, an evidence-based argument with theory well-applied.
Evidence of an appropriately justified argument, but not discussed and justified in enough detail, and some links to the analysis and discussion. Some reflection on analysis and the implications for interpreting the situation identified/case. Some evidence-based discussion with theory well-applied.
Argument is not well justified, recommendations are not practical and are too descriptive with unclear links to the analysis and discussion. Focus is on content, little evidence of critical evaluation or analysis. Little evidence-based discussion or engagement with theory.
Argument is not tied well to context and not well justified. No recommendations or treated with no detail and no link to the analysis and discussion. Focus is on content, little evidence of critical evaluation or analysis. Little evidence-based discussion.
Argument appears unsuitable for context. No recommendations or treated with no detail and no link to the analysis and discussion.
4. Structure, Presentation and Referencing
Organised, easy to navigate, good flow. Professional presentation. Good use of visual elements. Appropriate referencing.
10% Very clearly structured, focussed and cogent arguments.
Well-presented and appropriately referenced. Visually appealing and informative use of figures. Evidence of effective structure and focus in arguments.

Clear presentation and appropriately referenced.
Clear and informative use of figures. Lacks a clear structure, focusing on concepts and theories in a descriptive manner.
Presentation mostly clear but minimal referencing, or some formatting issues.
Figures may not be purposeful, may lack clarity, or are not helpful. Structure is hard to follow. Theory and content is too descriptive. Figures may not be purposeful, may lack clarity, or are not used where they would be helpful. Presentation unclear and confusing. Limited, poorly formatted, or no referencing. Structure is simplistic, hard to follow, confusing and hard to understand. Too descriptive. Figures may lack purpose, may lack clarity, or are not used where they would be helpful. Very limited, poorly formatted, or no referencing.