*FOR KIM WOODS ONLY*

Purpose: 

Business stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers, and the general public, receive positive benefits from businesses that follow ethical principles and practices.  In the workplace, employees may find themselves in situations in which they have to choose the appropriate behavior.  It is possible to encounter situations that give rise to conflicts of interest, conflicts of loyalty or issues of honesty and integrity.  When they do, difficult decisions have to be made.  

Outcomes Met With This Assignment:

• describe the ethical and social responsibilities that confront a business

Instructions:

This assignment is the first of two assignments.  You will read a case scenario related to business ethics.  In completing the assignment, you will analyze a case study scenario and apply the concepts learned in week 1 by answering a series of required elements.  You will complete the assignment by not asking questions but by responding to each required element thoroughly answering in paragraph and sentence format without bulleting.  

NOTE:  1) There are four classifications of ethical dilemmas: 1) conflict of interest; 2) conflict of loyalty; 3) issues of honesty and integrity; 4) bribes; and 5) whistleblowing.

            2)  An ethical dilemma is when someone struggles with deciding between two or more alternatives so the ethical dilemma is an either/or statement.    

Step 1:  Preparation for Writing the Assignment

Before you begin writing the paper, you will read the following requirements that will help you meet the writing and APA requirements.  Not reading this information will lead to a lower grade:

Review “How to Analyze a Case Study” under Week 4 Content.  You are expected to use the facts from the case scenario focusing on using this information to determine opportunities and solve problems.

Read the grading rubric for the assignment.  Use the grading rubric while writing the paper to ensure all requirements are met that will lead to the highest possible grade.

In writing this assignment, you will read and following these tasks:

Task 1:  Third person writing is required.  Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing).  If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link:  http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person.

Task 2:  Contractions are not used in business writing, so you are expected NOT to use contraction in writing this assignment. 

Task 3:  You are expected to paraphrase and are NOT to use direct quotes.  You are expected to paraphrase, which can be learned by reviewing this link:   https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html.

Task 4:  You are responsible for APA only for in-text citations and a reference list.

Task 5:  You are expected to use the facts from the case scenario paired with the weekly courses readings to develop the analysis and support the reasoning.  No more than two (2) external resources can be used in completing the assignment.  The expectation is that you provide a robust use of the course readings.  If any material is used from a source document, it must be cited and referenced.  A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa.   View the sample APA paper and the How to Cite and Reference file located under Week 4 content.

Please see Week 1 Content area – “How to Cite the Saylor eBook” to learn how to cite and reference the course eBook.

Step 2:  How to Set Up the Paper

Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font.  The final product will be between 4-5 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page.  You may not exceed five (5) pages so it is important to write clearly and concisely.

Follow this format.  Consider making an outline to ensure the correct headings are in place and to keep you organize the paper.

• Title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name; date
• Introduction;
• Part One, in paragraph form using the following section headings:
  • Jordan’s Ethical Dilemma
• Part Two, in paragraph form using the following section headings:
  • Employees’ Roles/Responsibilities in Ethical Situations
  • The Organization’s Role/Responsibility in Ensuring Ethical Practices
• Summary paragraph

Step 3:  Read the Case Scenario provided under Week 4

Step 4:  Write the Introduction

Create the introductory paragraph.  The introductory paragraph is the first paragraph of the paper and tells a reader the main points covered in the paper.  To help you know how to write an introduction, view this website to learn how to write an introductory paragraph:  http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.html

Step 5:  Part One

1. Review the meaning of the different ethical dilemma categories and identify the correct category depicted in the case scenario?  Using the case scenario facts and the course readings, explain in detail why this this category was selected?
2. Identify the ethical dilemma Jordan is faced with now.  Using the case scenario facts and the course readings, explain the ethical dilemma.  Note that an ethical dilemma should be phrases as an either/or statement. 
3. Explain in one paragraph (about 4 -5 sentences) what Jordan should do now.

Step 6:  Part Two

1. Identify and discuss a minimum of three factors that contribute to employees not operating ethically in business?  Please refer to the grading rubric.
2. Identify and completely explain a minimum of two steps employees can take to making the most appropriate decisions when faced with an ethical situation.  Be sure to describe in detail.  Please refer to the grading rubric.
3. Discuss a minimum of three ways an organization can help employees make appropriate decisions when faced with making a mistake in judgment.  Please refer to the grading rubric.
4. Identify and discuss a minimum of two ways an organization can ensure that all parts of the organization operate ethically.  Please refer to the grading rubric.

Step 7:  Write the summary paragraph

Write the summary paragraph. A summary paragraph restates the main topics of the paper.  Make sure to leave a reader with a sense that the paper is complete.  The summary paragraph is the last paragraph of a paper and does not need a heading.

Step 8:  Review the Paper

Read the paper to ensure all required elements are present.  Use the grading rubric to ensure that you gain the most points possible for this assignment.

Proofread the paper for spelling and grammatical issues, and third person writing. 

• Read the paper aloud as a first measure;
• Use the spell and grammar check in Word as a second measure;
• Have someone who has excellent English skills to proof the paper;
• Consider submitting the paper to the Effective Writing Center (EWC).  The EWC will provide 4-6 areas that may need improvement.

Step 9:  Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.

Due Date Feb 5, 2017 11:59 PM

Hide Rubrics

Rubric Name: Assignment #1 - 15%

       Criteria 1Outstanding0.375 pointsSuperior0.31875 pointsGood0.28125 pointsSubstandard0.24375 pointsFailure0 pointsIntroduction

Explicitly explained the thesis, established the significance of the thesis, and provided concisely and comprehensively tells the reader the main points covered in the paper. 

(0.3375 - .375)

Explained the thesis, established the significance of the thesis, and tells the reader the main points covered in the paper but could be more concise or comprehensive.

(0.3-.3374)

Attempted to explain the thesis, established the significance of the thesis, and tells reader a general idea of the main points.

(.2625 - .029)

Failed to explain the thesis, established the significance of the thesis; did not explain the main points.

(.225 - .2624)

No attempt at presenting an introduction.

(0 - 0.2249)

Criteria 2Outstanding0.75 pointsSuperior0.6375 pointsGood0.5625 pointsSubstandard0.4875 pointsFailure0 pointsContent: Category of Ethical Dilemma

The category of the ethical dilemma is correctly identified.  Explanation of why the classification was selected demonstrates an exceptional, thorough, and insightful 

understanding of the key concepts and ideas related to the classification of ethical dilemmas.

(.675 - .75)

The category of the ethical dilemma is correctly identified.  Explanation of why the classification was selected demonstrates an excellent understanding of the key concepts and ideas related to the classification of ethical dilemmas.

(.60 - .674)

The category of the ethical dilemma is correctly identified but the explanation of why the classification was selected is not explained or incorrect.

(.525 - .59)

The category of the ethical dilemma is incorrect and the explanation of why the classification was selected is not explained or incorrect; may discuss the correct category but also includes other categories that are incorrect.

(.45 - .524)

The category of the ethical dilemma and why it was selected are not discussed.

(0 - .44)

Content: Ethical Dilemma

Ethical dilemma and what should be done is explained demonstrating an exceptional ability to use specific case study information and provide detailed explanations for ethical dilemma.

(.675 - .75)

Ethical dilemma and what should be done is explained accurately demonstrating excellent ability to use specific case study information and provide detailed explanation for ethical dilemma.

(.60 - .674)

Either the ethical dilemma or what should be done is incorrect or not identified.

(.525 - .59)

An ethical dilemma and what April should do are presented but are both incorrect.

(.45 - .524)

Ethical dilemma and what should be done were not discussed.

(0 - .44)

Content: Contributing Factors

Identified and completely explained five contributing factors.

(.675 - .75)

Identified and completely explained four contributing factors.

(.60 - .674)

Identified and completely explained three contributing factors.

(.525 - .59)

Identified one to five contributing factors but listed rather than explain in detail.

(.45 - .524)

No contributing factors identified.

(0 - .44)

Content: Steps For an Individual to Make Appropriate Ethical Decisions

Identified and completely explained four steps.

(.675 - .75)

Identified and completely explained three steps.

(.60 - .674)

Identified and completely explained two steps.

(.525 - .59)

Identified one to four steps for an individual to make appropriate ethical decisions but listed rather than explain in detail.

(.45 - .524)

No steps identified.

(0 - .44)

Content: How Organization Helps Employees Make Appropriate Decisions

Identified and completely explained five ways an organization can help employees make the most appropriate decisions.

(.675 - .75)

Identified and completely explained four ways an organization can help employees make the most appropriate decisions.

(.60 - .674)

Identified and completely explained three ways an organization can help employees make the most appropriate decisions.

(.525 - .59)

Identified one to five ways an organization can help employees make the most appropriate decisions but listed rather than explain in detail.

(.45 - .524)

Ways an organization can help employees make appropriate decisions are not identified.

(0 - .44)

Content: Ways an Organization Takes to Ensure It Operates Ethically

Identified and completely explained four ways an organization can operate ethically.

(.675 - .75)

Identified and completely explained three ways an organization can operate ethically.

(.60 - .674)

Identified and completely explained two ways an organization can operate ethically.

(.525 - .59)

Identified one to four ways but listed rather than explain in detail.

(.45 - .524)

No ways identified.

(0 - .44)

Criteria 3Outstanding0.375 pointsSuperior0.31875 pointsGood0.28125 pointsSubstandard0.24375 pointsFailure0 pointsSummary

The concluding paragraph summarizes the paper and refers back to the thesis statement.  No new information is presented and masterfully concludes with a statement bringing the paper full circle.

(.3375 - .375)

The concluding paragraph summarizes the paper and refers back to the thesis statement but there is no single clear statement.  No new information is presented.  Attempts to bring the paper full circle. 

(.03 - .3375)

The concluding paragraph somewhat summarizes the paper.  There is an attempt to bring the paper full circle but there are inconsistencies. New information is introduced that is not in the body of the paper.       

(.2625 - .029)

Summary paragraph exists but failed to tie to the thesis or bring the paper full circle or is a restatement of introduction. New information may be introduced. 

(.225 - .2624)

No attempt to provide a summary paragraph.

(0 - 0.2249)

Criteria 4Outstanding3 pointsSuperior2.55 pointsGood2.25 pointsSubstandard1.95 pointsFailure0 pointsCritical Thinking/Reasoning

Comments reflect a highly accomplished level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurate, thorough, and soundly reasoned conclusions.

(2.7 - 3)

Comments reflect an excellent level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in accurately reasoned conclusions.

(2.4 - 2.69)

Comments reflect a satisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts resulting in partially correct conclusions that lack development or detail that demonstrates insight into reasoning.

(2.1 - 2.39)

Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in conclusions that are underdeveloped or lack soundly reasoned conclusions.

(1.8 - 2.09)

Comments reflect an unsatisfactory level of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and reasoning of the case material and case study facts, resulting in failure to draw little to no conclusions.

(0 - 1.79)

Application of Resources

Presents exceptionally well-supported arguments or positions with evidence from the readings/experience; ideas go beyond the course material and recognize implications and extensions of the material and concepts.

(2.7 - 3)

Presents excellent arguments or positions that are mostly supported by evidence from the readings and course content; ideas presented demonstrate understanding of the material and concepts.

(2.4 - 2.69)

Satisfactory arguments or positions are presented but there is a mix of opinion or unclear view with supported arguments using course readings.  Case study facts are occasionally used but arguments would be much stronger with use of facts.

(2.1 - 2.39)

Arguments are frequently illogical and unsubstantiated; Limited use of facts in case study and essential information presented in course readings.

(1.8 - 2.09)  

Arguments lack meaningful explanation or support of ideas.  Does not provide facts presented in case study.

(0 – 1.79)

Criteria 5Outstanding1.5 pointsSuperior1.275 pointsGood1.125 pointsSubstandard0.975 pointsFailure0 pointsAttention to Instructions

Demonstrates exceptional understanding of requirements responding completely to each aspect of assignment including minor aspects of the assignment such as using third person writing, required use of course readings, and assignment format.

(1.35 - 1.5)

Demonstrates excellent understanding of requirements; missed one minor aspect of assignment.

(1.2 - 1.349)

Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of requirements; missed a key element or two minor aspects of assignment.

(1.05 - 1.19)

Fails to show a firm understanding of requirements; missed two key elements or several minor aspects of assignment.

(0.9 - 1.049)

Fails to demonstrate understanding of assignment requirements.

(0 - 0.89)

Criteria 6Outstanding1.5 pointsSuperior1.275 pointsGood1.125 pointsSubstandard0.975 pointsFailure0 pointsWriting Mechanics

Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No errors found. No contractions or jargon used.

(1.35 - 1.5)

Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. One to three errors found.

(1.2 - 1.349)

Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Four to 10 errors found.

(1.05 - 1.19)

Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.

(0.9 - 1.049)

Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.

(0 - 0.89)

Criteria 7Outstanding0.75 pointsSuperior0.6375 pointsGood0.5625 pointsSubstandard0.4825 pointsFailing0 pointsAPA Style (6th ed.)

No APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.

(0.675 – 0.75)

Attempts in-text citations and reference list but one or two APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.

(0.6 – 0.674)

Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 times in document.

(0.525 – 0.59)

Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 4-5 times; or presents only 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper that requires APA citations throughout the document.

(0.45 – 0.51)

No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.

(0 – .44)

Overall ScoreOutstanding13.5 or moreSuperior12 or moreGood10.5 or moreSubstandard9 or moreFailure0 or more