BSB151 Business Law and Governance
Semester 1, 2024
ETHICS CASE STUDY INDIVIDUAL REPORT
(Weighting Total – 30%)
Due: 27 March 2024
Time: 11:59 pm (23:59)
Submission: via Canvas by 11:59 PM on Wednesday 27 March 2024.
1. It is each student’s responsibility to check online submissions have been uploaded correctly Files are best uploaded as Pdf documents to avoid formatting errors.
2. Should Canvas be unavailable directly before submission (i.e. on the day of submission) keep checking back periodically AND check your QUT email as instructions will likely be issued from QUT if there are systems outages.
Type: Individual Assessment
Length: Maximum of 1,650 words (+ 10% maximum)
This assessment item assesses the following unit objectives and learning outcomes:
Professional Communication (PC)
3.1 Use information literacy skills, and communicate effectively and professionally in written forms and using media appropriate for diverse purposes and
contexts.
Social, Ethical and Global Understanding (SE)
5.1 Demonstrate and apply knowledge of ethical and legal principles and practices in analysing and responding to business issues
The purpose of this assignment is to encourage you to explore some of the fundamental concepts and theories in business ethics, consider how these can be applied to real world business issues and communicate this knowledge effectively. The word limit reflects writing in a business context – be direct and to the point.
Your task is to:
Analyse a business-related ethical dilemma based on a real-world situation or event. You are to prepare a paper on an ethical dilemma – either your own or one that we have prepared. This requires you to:
· Identify and describe an ethical dilemma in business (you can include relevant facts in an appendix if necessary). Please select either one of the scenarios provided; or a real-life ethical dilemma that has received media attention during the past couple of years. Make sure you clearly explain why it is about (i) ethics; (ii) why it is a dilemma and (iii) how being in a business context influences the decision-maker’s perspective and ethical choices (for instance, how organizational forces might influence the decision – see slides 35 - 39 from week 1).
· Analyse the dilemma using three (3) ethical frameworks from week 2 of the unit – (i) Utilitarianism, (ii) Kantian ethics and (iii) Aristotle’s virtue ethics. To do this well, you will need to ensure your analysis clearly communicates your understanding of the tool/framework. Make sure you read the CRA as it will point to what you need to do to meet your grade aspirations.
· Propose a recommendation or “course of action” that addresses the ethical dilemma. Based on your analysis, you then need to provide a clear conclusion on what is the ethical thing to do. This should include a solution or recommendations for the decision maker (i.e. the manager/actor) to consider. The conclusion (and recommendation(s)) needs to be justified and linked to your dilemma and its analysis.
Note that there is no one “correct” or “model” answer – it is about justifying your arguments, working through the dilemma and forming a view on the most ethical outcome or action.
You are to limit the paper to a maximum of 1,650 words (+ 10%). This word limit includes headings, sub-headings, in-text citations and in-text references. It does not include appendices, your reference list, tables, figures and captions. It is expected to conform. to standard QUT plagiarism requirements.
To meet the standard in the CRA, you need make sure your assessment piece satisfies ALL the dot points below the relevant criterion/grade combination. Marking does not work by “adding” across subpoints in any single criterion. Your grade is most often determined by the lowest subpoint in any single criterion because if you do not meet a sub-point, you do not meet the grade for the criterion in question.
For clarity, we have listed each criterion on a separate page (there are 5 criteria). There is also a more detailed CRA sheet that outlines examples of the differences for each grade/criteria combination.
|
Criterion 1 - Ethical dilemma (SE5.1) – maximum of 7 marks
· Demonstrate you can identify and describe an ethical dilemma focusing on the ethical values/principles/concepts from the BSB151 unit learning resources. This means you need to explain why the situation is an ‘ethical’ dilemma and what differentiates an ‘ethical’ dilemma from other types of dilemma (i.e. why is the dilemma not just about feelings, opinions or other kinds of standards in society).
· Explain the challenges (i.e. potential organisational forces) influencing ethical decision-making in a business context that might affect the decision maker in this dilemma.
|
|
7
|
6
|
5
|
4
|
3 - 1
|
|
· Demonstrates an insightful understanding of how conflicting principles or values contribute to a challenging ethical dilemma; and
· Identifies and explains (with nuance and/or deep insight) the trade-off between ethical standards; and
|
· Explains clearly and correctly why the chosen scenario is an ethical dilemma; and
· The explanation is complete; and
· Clearly and logically explains why it is an ethical issue; and
· Clearly and logically explains why it is a dilemma; and
|
· Explains to some extent why the chosen scenario is an ‘ethical’ problem (dilemma); and/or
· Identifies the key ethical principles or values involved – why it is a problem of ethics; and/or
|
· Identifies an ethical dilemma; and
· Describes the dilemma with reference to ethical concepts.
|
· (3) Identifies an ethical issue; or
· (2) Identifies a dilemma or problem but not an ethical dilemma.
|
|
· Clearly, logically, and correctly outlines, with nuance and/or novelty, how the decision-maker’s context may influence their perspective, analysis and decisions.
|
· Clearly and logically explains the influence of the decision-maker’s business context on the ethical decision-making process.
|
· Recognises the influence of the business context on the choices made.
|
|
|
|
Must satisfy all these points
|
Must satisfy all these points
|
Must satisfy minimum of 2 of these points
|
Must satisfy both points
|
|
This marking rubric applies only to submissions made in accordance with the assignment instructions.
10% above the word limit is acceptable. Grading will be based upon the text that is within the word limit (or 10% above)
|
Criterion 2 – Application of Utilitarian ethics (SE5.1) – maximum of 5 marks
· Demonstrate you can identify and apply Utilitarian ethics to analyze an ethical dilemma and determine how to respond to that ethical dilemma.
|
|
7
|
6
|
5
|
4
|
3 - 1
|
|
· Demonstrates a nuanced understanding of Utilitarian ethics; and
· the challenges associated with applying Utilitarian ethics to the ethical dilemma; and
|
· Demonstrates a complete and correct understanding of the key concepts and principles applicable to Utilitarian ethics; and
· Demonstrates a complete and correct understanding of the process or procedure for applying the framework to the ethical dilemma; and
|
· Identifies and explains the key concepts and principles applicable to Utilitarian ethics; and
· Explains how Utilitarian ethics’ process and procedures can be applied to an ethical dilemma; and
|
· Identifies and describes Utilitarian ethics; and
· May include an explanation of Utilitarian ethics’ process or procedures; and
|
· (3) Describes Utilitarian ethics; or
· (2) Identifies (names) an ethical framework from the unit learning resources;
and
|
|
· Present a systematic, thorough, coherent, and correct application of Utilitarian ethics to the ethical dilemma with no errors; and
|
· Presents a correct application of Utilitarian ethics that conforms to the framework’s process and procedures; and
|
· Presents a generally correct application of Utilitarian ethics that is systematic in its approach; and
|
· Presents a generally coherent application of Utilitarian ethics to the case; and
|
· (3) Utilitarian ethics has been applied to the dilemma; or
· (2) An ethical framework has been applied to the dilemma;
and
|
|
· Includes an insightful course of action arising from the analysis that captures the nuances of Utilitarian ethics and/or analysis and/or dilemma; and
|
· Includes a clear, coherent and justified course of action arising from the analysis; and
|
· Incudes a reasonable course of action arising from the analysis; and
|
· Includes a plausible course of action arising from the analysis; and
|
· (3) Includes a proposed course of action/recommendation; or
· (2) May include a proposed course of action/recommendation;
and
|
|
· The analysis and proposed course of action are compelling and free of errors and omissions.
|
· The course of action is clearly supported by, consistent with, and connected to the preceding analysis.
|
· The course of action is supported by and consistent with the preceding analysis.
|
· The course of action is weakly supported by the preceding analysis.
|
(3) and (2) The course of action is may be supported by the preceding analysis.
|
This marking rubric applies only to submissions made in accordance with the assignment instructions.
10% above the word limit is acceptable. Grading will be based upon the text that is within the word limit (or 10% above)
Note: You must satisfy each dot point under the relevant CRA grade level. If you do not, you are awarded the lowest CRA according to the rubric. For instance, if demonstrate a nuanced understanding of Utilitarian ethics and challenges (say, in a sentence or two explaining it) that fits with a “7” in the CRA. BUT you do not have a good analysis of the dilemma (there are significant errors, but parts are correct) that fits with a “4” in the CRA. In this case, you would be awarded a “4” – i.e. you are awarded the lowest CRA subpoint earned by your answer.
Note: This marking rubric applies only to submissions made in accordance with the assignment instructions.
10% above the word limit is acceptable. Grading will be based upon the text that is within the word limit (or 10% above)