HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T1 2021 Unit Code HC2121 Unit Title Comparative Business Ethics and Social Responsibility Assessment...

1 answer below »
HOLMES INSTITUTE

FACULTY OF
HIGHER EDUCATION


Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines

Trimester T1 2021
Unit Code HC2121
Unit Title Comparative Business Ethics and Social Responsibility
Assessment Type Group Assignment
(Group Report)

Note: Groups of 4 students only. Once a group is formed and entered into
Blackboard, no changes are allowed.

This is strictly required to be your own original work. Plagiarism will be
penalised. Students must use correct in-text citation conventions in accordance
with the ‘Referencing Requirements’ on pp. 7-8.
Assessment Title Group Report (Reflection on individual and organisational problems and
challenges).
Purpose of
assessment and
linkage to Unit
Learning
Outcomes (ULO)
the
This assignment aimed to draw on the concepts and models used in this unit
to evaluate diverse approaches to ethical decision-making and to apply
problem-solving skills in solving and managing ethical dilemmas within an
organisation. This assignment will help you develop skills in applying the
course contents in an organisational analysis.
Assessment
Weight
Group Report
Total = 30%

Total Marks 30 Marks
Word limit Report not more than 2,500 words excluding references.
Due Date Week 10 at 5pm (Melbourne/Sydney time)
[Late submission penalties accrue at the rate of - 5% per day]
Page 2 of 8
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, 1.5 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, all using Harvard referencing style.
References provided must follow ‘Reference Requirements’ detailed on page
7 & 8.
• Students must show adequate evidence of additional research with a
minimum of 10 academic references.
• Each group must include a statement of “who did what part” of the report in the
cover sheet.

Consult your lecturer if you are unsure or you require clarification on plagiarism.

Note: You may not get the assignment submission links unless you are
registered/enrolled in a group on Blackboard.

Note: All students must contribute equally to the assessment. You must
acknowledge your group members’ names in the cover sheet. If your name is not
included in the cover sheet, you might not receive marks. If you choose to
complete the assessment individually, you should self-enrol in a solo group and
submit your group assessment individually.
Assignment Specifications
Purpose
This assignment aims at providing students with an opportunity to reflect on ethical dilemmas and
challenges in contemporary organisations and apply concepts and frameworks covered within the
subject to solving such problems.
In groups of 4, students must:
Search local newspapers/reports for an ethical issue that is topical. It might be the politics
surrounding a minority group, or the latest corporate scandal, or some other issue of interest to
you. In 2500 words, briefly describe the case and then evaluate it using the key
terminologies/theories that have been discussed in the lecture slides and support your
claims/arguments with key research findings/peer-reviewed academic articles. If you can’t locate
Page 3 of 8
an ethical issue in local newspapers/reports, you may wish to investigate One of the following
corporate scandals:
United Airlines
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/11/travel/united-customer-dragged-off-overbooked-
flight/index.html
Equifax
https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/10/equifax-breach-preventable-house-oversight-report/
Enron
https://www.britannica.com/event/Enron-scandal
Google
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/20/ XXXXXXXXXX/google-eu-antitrust-fine-adsense-advertising
Assignment report structure should be, as follows:
• The report must include a cover page with who did what section in the report.
• Table of Contents
• Executive Summary
• An Introduction and background information of the selected organisation: Briefly introduce
the purpose of the report. Within the introductory paragraph, you need to address the key
topics you will address in the body paragraphs.
• Overview of the current organisational ethical problem or challenge.
• Detailed analysis of the current organisational ethical problem supported with relevant
concepts and theories that have been covered in the lectures and tutorials.
• Recommendations and Conclusion: Outline some recommendations and the conclusion
must briefly summarise the key points in the body paragraphs.
• Reference List: Please include all in-text references in the list of references formatted in
Harvard style. A minimum of 10 references is required.
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/11/travel/united-customer-dragged-off-overbooked-flight/index.html
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/11/travel/united-customer-dragged-off-overbooked-flight/index.html
https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/10/equifax-breach-preventable-house-oversight-report/
https://www.britannica.com/event/Enron-scandal
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/20/ XXXXXXXXXX/google-eu-antitrust-fine-adsense-advertising
Page 4 of 8
Marking Criteria Weighting
Group Report Total 30 marks
Overall Structure, format and presentation of report 3 marks
Application of knowledge and course concepts 8 marks
Critical analysis and research demonstrated in organisational problem or
challenge
8 marks
Conclusion, recommendation and strength of overall arguments 6 marks
Evidence of quality research and referencing 5 marks
Marking Rubric for the Written Report
Criteria XXXXXXXXXXRatings
Overall
structure, format
and presentation
(3 marks)
Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Report is
exceptionally
structured,
with sub-
sections and
correct use of
paragraphs.
Correct layout
including font,
font size,
spacing and
the right
length.
Report is very
well-structured,
with sub-sections
and correct use of
paragraphs.
Correct layout
including font,
font size, spacing
and the right
length.
Report is
somewhat
structured, with
sub-sections and
correct use of
paragraphs.
Correct layout
including font,
font size, spacing
and about the
right length.
Report is
structured,
with sub-
sections and
correct use of
paragraphs.
Some
elements of
layout or
length
incorrect.
Report is poorly
structured. No
sub-section
and/or
paragraphs.
Some elements
of layout or
length incorrect.
Application of
knowledge and
course concepts
(8 marks)
Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Gives a very
detailed
background of
the ethical
problem and
demonstrated
sound
knowledge of
course
concepts.
There is
excellent
proof of
research on
the topic.
Gives a detailed
background of
the ethical
problem and
demonstrated
sound knowledge
of course
concepts. There is
very good proof
of research on
the topic.
Gives some
general
background of
the ethical
problem and
demonstrated
good knowledge
of course
concepts. There is
adequate proof
of research on
the topic.
Gives a
general
background
of the ethical
problem.
Demonstrate
d fair
knowledge of
course
concepts.
There is
satisfactory
proof of
research on
the topic.
Omits a general
background of
the topic and/or
demonstrated
poor knowledge
of course
concepts. There
is little or no
proof of
research on the
topic.
Critical analysis
and research
demonstrated in
organisational
Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Exceptionally
logical,
Very logical,
insightful,
Detailed, original
discussion
Adequate
discussion
Inadequate
discussion of
Page 5 of 8
problem or
challenge
(8 marks)
insightful,
original
discussion
develops.
Evidence of
full
engagement
with the
literature
found, with
relevant and
very detailed
critical
analysis of
organisational
problem or
challenge.
original
discussion
develops.
Evidence of full
engagement with
the literature
found, with
relevant and
detailed critical
analysis of
organisational
problem or
challenge.
develops
logically.
Understanding of
reading shown.
Some relevant
critical analysis of
organisational
problem or
challenge.
develops
logically.
Understandin
g of reading
shown. Few
relevant
analysis
provided on
organisational
problem or
challenge.
issues and/or
lacking in logical
flow. Little/no
demonstrated
understanding
of reading. Poor
or no critical
analysis of
organisational
problem or
challenge.
Conclusion,
recommendation
s and strength of
overall
arguments
(6 marks)


Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

An
interesting,
well written
summary of
the main
points. An
excellent final
comment on
the topic,
based on the
information
provided.
A very good
summary of the
main points. A
good final
comment on the
topic, based on
the information
provided.
Good summary of
the main points.
A final comment
on the topic
based on the
information
provided.
Satisfactory
summary of
the main
points. A final
comment on
the topic, but
introduced
new material.
Poor/no
summary of the
main points. A
poor final
comment on the
topic and/or
new material
introduced.




Evidence of
quality research
and Referencing
(5 marks)
Excellent

Very Good

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Correct
referencing
style (10
references).
All quoted
material in
quotes and
acknowledged
. Correctly set
out reference
list and
bibliography
included. All
articles cited
are current
and peer-
reviewed.
Correct
referencing style
(8 references). All
quoted material
in quotes and
acknowledged.
Correctly set out
reference list and
bibliography
included. All
articles cited are
current and
mostly peer-
reviewed.
Mostly correct
referencing style
(6 references). All
quoted material
in quotes and
acknowledged.
Mostly correct
set out of
reference list and
bibliography
included. A good
number of
current and peer-
reviewed articles
cited.
Somewhat
correct
referencing
style (5
references).
Some
problems
with quoted
material.
Some
problems
with the
reference list
or
bibliography.
Few of the
articles cited
were
outdated and
not peer-
reviewed.
Not all material
correctly
acknowledged.
Some problems
with the
reference list or
bibliography.
Most articles
cited were
outdated and
not peer-
reviewed.
Note: Please note that the lecture slides may contain the basic key concepts only and students are
expected to have read a wide range of scholarly literature to complete all assessments. In addition,
Page 6 of 8
for many subjects, students are expected to have undertaken additional research using ProQuest
research database and/or Google Scholar.
Submission Guideline
To be eligible to pass this unit, you should complete all forms of assessment and demonstrate
achievement of the learning outcomes. All assignments must be submitted electronically
ONLY, uploaded to Blackboard via the Final Check and Submission of SafeAssign.
Submission deadlines are strictly enforced and a late submission incurs penalties. For full
details, please refer to your Student Handbook. Students can access the Assessment and
Marking Policy online (h ttps://www.holmes.edu.au/pages/about/policies).
Academic Integrity
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic Integrity
is integral to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all
assessment tasks need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six
categories of Academic Integrity breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues
related to your assessment tasks, please consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing
guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources can also be found through the Study Sills
link on Blackboard.
Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from
deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course
enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.

Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches
Plagiarism Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When
a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is
known as self-plagiarism.
Collusion Working with one or more other individuals to complete an
assignment, in a way that is not authorised.
Copying Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or
without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable
precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied,
this may also be considered an offence.
Impersonation Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as
oneself, in an in-person examination.
http://www.holmes.edu.au/pages/about/policies)
Page 7 of 8
Contract cheating Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task,
generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment.
Data fabrication and
falsification
Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false
conclusions, including manipulating images.
Source: INQAAHE, 2020
Reference requirements
Assessment Design – Adapted Harvard Referencing
Holmes will be implementing as a pilot program a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following
guidelines apply:
1. Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources which provide full text access to the
source’s content for lecturers and markers.
2. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled:
References.
3. It should include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged alphabetically A-Z by author
surname. In addition, it MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source.
For example;
P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems
Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
4. All assignments will require additional in-text reference details which will consist of the surname of
the author/authors or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of content,
paragraph where the content can be found.
For example;
“The company decided to implement a enterprise wide data warehouse business intelligence
strategies (Hawking et al, 2004, p3(4)).”
Non-Adherence to Referencing Guidelines
Where students do not follow the above guidelines:
1. Students who submit assignments which do not comply with the guidelines will be asked to resubmit
their assignments.
http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
Page 8 of 8
2. Late penalties will apply, as per the Student Handbook each day, after the student/s have been
notified of the resubmission requirements.
3. Students who comply with guidelines and the citations are “fake” will be reported for academic
misconduct.
Answered 5 days AfterMay 17, 2021HC2121

Solution

Harshit Agarwal answered on May 22 2021
22 Votes

Table of Contents
S.N.
Topic
Page No
1.
Executive Summary

2.
Introduction of Company

3.
Overview of Ethical...

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here