Aussienment

03 July 2023 06:34 AM | UPDATED 1 year ago

[email protected]

BUS300 BUSINESS ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY

BUS300 BUSINESS ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY :

All information in the Subject Outline is correct at the time of approval. KOI reserves the right to make changes to the Subject Outline if they become necessary. Any changes require the approval of the KOI Academic Board and will be formally advised to those students who may be affected by email and via Moodle.

Information contained within this Subject Outline applies to students enrolled in the trimester as indicated

1. General Information

1.1 Administrative Details

Associated HE Award(s)	Duration	Level	Subject Coordinator
B Bus (Accg); B Bus (Mgt & Finance)	1 trimester	Level 3	Dr Thomas Denigan [email protected] P: +61 (2) 9283 3583 L: Level 1, 545 Kent St. Consultation: via Moodle or by appointment.

Core / Elective

This is a core subject for B Bus (Mgt & Finance). This is an elective subject for B Bus (Accg)

1.3 Subject Weighting

Indicated below is the weighting of this subject and the total course points.

Subject Credit Points	Total Course Credit Points
4	BBus(Accg) 96; BBus (Mgt & Finance) 96

1.4 Student Workload

Indicated below is the expected student workload per week for this subject.

No. timetabled hours/week*	No. personal study hours/week**	Total workload hours/week***
4 hours/week (2 hour Lecture + 2 hour Tutorial)	6 hours/week	10 hours/week

* Total time spent per week at lectures and tutorials

** Total time students are expected to spend per week in studying, completing assignments, etc.

*** Combination of timetable hours and personal study.

Mode of Delivery Classes will be face-to-face or hybrid. Certain classes will be online (e.g., special arrangements).
1. Pre-requisites MGT100 Introduction to Management and

BUS100 Professional Communication Skills (previously named Business Study Skills)

1.7 General Study and Resource Requirements

Students are expected to attend classes with the weekly worksheets and subject support material provided in Moodle. Students should read this material before coming to class to improve their ability to participate in the weekly activities.
Students will require access to the internet and their KOI email and should have basic skills in word processing software such as MS Word, spreadsheet software such as MS Excel and visual presentation software such as MS PowerPoint.
Computers and WIFI facilities are extensively available for student use throughout KOI. Students are encouraged to make use of the campus Library for reference materials.

Resource requirements specific to this subject: There are no specific resources for this subject.

2. Academic Details

2.1 Overview of the Subject

This subject provides an in-depth analysis of issues confronting managers in a rapidly changing world, including climate change, new forms of work, increased diversity in the workplace and corporate social responsibility. Contemporary ethical and environmental issues are examined and best practice managerial techniques are explored to show how these can improve both environmental outcomes of businesses and companies’ financial results and lead to new business opportunities. Students will haveopportunities toapply broad theoretical and technical knowledge in developing and communicating solutions to complex problems. Students will also examine some western moral philosophy and apply it in an organisational context.

2.2 Graduate Attributes for Undergraduate Courses

Graduates of the Bachelor of Business (Accounting), and the Bachelor of Business (Management and Finance) courses from King’s Own Institute will achieve the graduate attributes expected from successful completion of a Bachelor’s degree under the Australian Qualifications Framework (2nd edition, January 2013). Graduates at this level will be able to apply an advanced body of knowledge from their major area of study in a range of contexts for professional practice or scholarship and as a pathway for further learning.

King’s Own Institute’s generic graduate attributes for a bachelor’s level degree are summarised below:

	KOI Bachelor Degree Graduate Attributes	Detailed Description
	Knowledge	Current, comprehensive and coherent knowledge
	Critical Thinking	Critical thinking and creative skills to analyse and synthesise information and evaluate new problems
	Communication	Communication skills for effective reading, writing, listening and presenting in varied modes and contexts and for transferring knowledge and skills to a variety of audiences
	Information Literacy	Information and technological skills for accessing, evaluating, managing and using information professionally
	Problem Solving Skills	Skills to apply logical and creative thinking to solve problems and evaluate solutions
	Ethical and Cultural Sensitivity	Appreciation of ethical principles, cultural sensitivity and social responsibility, both personally and professionally
	Teamwork	Leadership and teamwork skills to collaborate, inspire colleagues and manage responsibly with positive results
	Professional Skills	Professional skills to exercise judgement in planning, problem solving and decision making

Across the course, these skills are developed progressively at three levels:

Level 1 Foundation – Students learn the basic skills, theories and techniques of the subject and apply them in basic, stand-alone contexts.
Level 2 Intermediate – Students further develop skills, theories and techniques of the subject and apply them in more complex contexts, beginning to integrate the application with other subjects.
Level 3 Advanced – Students have a demonstrated ability to plan, research and apply the skills, theories and techniques of the subject in complex situations, integrating the subject content with a range of other subject disciplines within the context of the course

2.3 Subject Learning Outcomes

This is a Level 3 subject.

Listed below, are key knowledge and skills students are expected to attain by successfully completing this subject:

Subject Learning Outcomes	Contribution to Graduate Attributes
a) Explain the broad context of contemporary governance and management of business ethics in organisations.
b) Evaluate and critique organisational responses to issues of business ethics.
c) Examine some of the major environmental problems facing society today.
d) Justify the importance of ethics and corporate social responsibility in organisations.
e) Produce a written research report which demonstrates skills in research and communicate the findings in a presentation.

2.4 Subject Content and Structure

Below are details of the subject content and how it is structured, including specific topics covered in lectures and tutorials. Reading refers to the text unless otherwise indicated.

Weekly Planner:

Week (beginning)	Topic covered in each week’s lecture	Reading(s)	Expected work as listed in Moodle
1 06 Mar	Introducing business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 1	Tutorial Discussions
2 13 Mar	Framing business Ethics: CSR Stakeholders & Citizenship Global trends: How they impact corporate values, responsibility and strategy	Crane & Matten Ch.2	Tutorial Discussions
3 20 Mar	Framing business ethics: CSR stakeholders and citizenship Evaluating business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 3	Tutorial Discussions
4 27 Mar	Making decisions in business ethics: Descriptive ethical theories	Crane & Matten Ch 4	Tutorial Discussions Formative assessment
5 03 Apr	Corporate citizenship, Social responsibility, responsiveness and performance Managing business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 5	Tutorial Discussions
6 11 Apr (Tue)			Assessment 1 due: Group Presentations Assessment 1 due: Group Report

7 17 Apr	Shareholders and business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 6	Assessment 1 due: Group Presentations
8 24 Apr	Employees and business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 7	Assessment 1 due: Group Presentations Tutorial Discussions
9 01 May	Consumers and business ethics Suppliers, competitors and ethics	Crane & Matten Chs. 8 & 9	Assessment 1 due: Group Presentations Tutorial Discussions
10 08 May	Civil society and business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 10	Assessment 1 due: Group Presentations Assessment 2 due: Individual Report
11 15 May	Government regulation and business ethics	Crane & Matten Ch. 11	Tutorial Discussions
12 22 May	Conclusions and future perspectives	Crane & Matten Ch. 12	Tutorial Discussions
13 29 May	Study Review Week and Final Exam Week
14 05 Jun	Examinations Continuing students – enrolments for T223 open	Examinations Continuing students – enrolments for T223 open
15 12 Jun	Student Vacation begins New students – enrolments for T223 open
16 19 Jun	Results ReleasedReview of Grade Day for T123 – see Sections 2.6 and 3.2 below for relevant information.Certification of Grades NOTE: More information about the dates will be provided at a later date through Moodle/KOI email.
T223 03 July 2023
1 03 Jul	Week 1 of classes for T223

Public Holiday Amendments

Please note: KOI is closed on all scheduled NSW Public Holidays.

T123 has four (4) public holidays that occur during this trimester. Classes scheduled for these public holidays (Calendar Class Dates) will be rescheduled as per the table below.

This applies to ALL subjects taught in T123.

Please see the table below and adjust your class timing as required. Please make sure you have arrangements in place to attend the rescheduled classes if applicable to your T123 enrolment.

Classes will be conducted at the same time and in the same location as your normally scheduled class except these classes will be held on the date shown below.

Calendar Class Date	Rescheduled Class Date
Friday 07 April 2023 Saturday 08 April 2023 Monday 10 April 2023 Tuesday 25 April 2023	Monday 29 May 2023 Tuesday 30 May 2023 Wednesday 31 May 2023

2.6 Review of Grade, Deferred Exams & Supplementary Exams/Assessments

Review of Grade:

There may be instances when you believe that your final grade in a subject does not accurately reflect your performance against the marking criteria. Section 8 of the Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy (www.koi.edu.au) describes the grounds on which you may apply for a Review of Grade.

If you have a concern about your marks and you are unable to resolve it with the Academic staff concerned, then you can apply for a formal Review of Grade as explained in section 3.2(e) Appeals Process below. Please note the time limits for requesting a review. Please ensure you read the Review of Grade information before submitting an application.

Review of Grade Day:

Final exam scripts will not normally be returned to students. Students can obtain feedback on their exam performance and their results for the whole subject at the Review of Grade Day. KOI will hold the Review of Grade Day for all subjects studied in T123. The ROG day will be in week 16, the date will be announced at a later date and the students will be notified through Moodle/KOI email.

Only final exams and whole subject results will be discussed as all other assessments should have been reviewed during the trimester. Further information about Review of Grade Day will be available through Moodle.

If you fail one or more subjects and you wish to consider applying for a Review of Grade you are STRONGLY ADVISED to attend the Review of Grade Day. You will have the chance to discuss your final exam and subject result with your lecturer, and will be advised if you have valid reasons for applying for a Review of Grade (see Section 3.2 below and the Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy).

A formal request for a review of grade may not be considered unless you first contact the subject coordinator to discuss the result.

Deferred Exams:

If you wish to apply for a deferred exam because you are unable to attend the scheduled exam, you should submit the Assignment Extension / Exam Deferment Form available by contacting [email protected] as soon as possible, but no later than three (3) working days of the assessment due date.

If you miss your mid-trimester or final exam there is no guarantee you will be offered a deferred exam.

You must apply within the stated timeframe and satisfy the conditions for approval to be offered a deferred exam (see Section 8.1 of the Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy and the Application for Assignment Extension or Deferred Exam Forms). In assessing your request for a deferred exam, KOI will take into account the information you provide, the severity of the event or circumstance, your performance

on other items of assessment in the subject, class attendance and your history of previous applications for special consideration.

Deferred mid-trimester exams will be held before the end of week 9. Deferred final exams will be held on two days during week 1 or 2 in the next trimester. You will not normally be granted a deferred exam on the grounds that you mistook the time, date or place of an examination, or that you have made arrangements to be elsewhere at that time; for example, have booked plane tickets.

If you are offered a deferred exam, but do not attend you will be awarded 0 marks for the exam. This may mean it becomes difficult for you to pass the subject. If you apply for a deferred exam within the required time frame and satisfy the conditions you will be advised by email (to your KOI student email address) of the time and date for the deferred exam. Please ensure that you are available to take the exam at this time.

Marks awarded for the deferred exam will be the marks awarded for that item of assessment towards your final mark in the subject.

Supplementary Assessments (Exams and Assessments):

A supplementary assessment may be offered to students to provide a final opportunity to demonstrate successful achievement of the learning outcomes of a subject. Supplementary assessments are only offered at the discretion of the Board of Examiners. In considering whether or not to offer a supplementary assessment, KOI will take into account your performance on all the major assessment items in the subject, your attendance, participation and your history of any previous special considerations.

If you are offered a supplementary assessment, you will be advised by email to your KOI student email address of the time and due date for the supplementary assessment – supplementary exams will normally be held at the same time as deferred final exams during week 1 or week 2 of the next trimester.

You must pass the supplementary assessment to pass the subject. The maximum grade you can achieve in a subject based on a supplementary assessment is a PASS grade.

If you:

are offered a supplementary assessment, but fail it;
are offered a supplementary exam, but do not attend; or
are offered a supplementary assessment but do not submit by the due date; you will receive a FAIL grade for the subject.

Students are also eligible for a supplementary assessment for their final subject in a course where they fail the subject but have successfully completed all other subjects in the course. You must have completed all major assessment tasks for the subject and obtained a passing mark on at least one of the major assessment tasks to be eligible for a supplementary assessment.

If you believe you meet the criteria for a supplementary assessment for the final subject in your course, but have not received an offer, complete the Complaint, Grievance, Appeal Form and send your form to [email protected]. The deadline for applying for supplementary assessment is the Friday of the first week of classes in the next trimester.

2.7 Teaching Methods/Strategies

Briefly described below are the teaching methods/strategies used in this subject:

2.8 Student Assessment

Provided below is a schedule of formal assessment tasks and major examinations for the subject.

Assessment Type	When assessed	Weighting	Learning Outcomes Assessed
Formative assessment: 100 word written response to the Case Study.	Week 4	0%	a, b
Assessment 1: Group Presentations and Group Report	Weeks 6-10	Presentations 10% Report 20% Total: 30%	a, b, c, d, e
Assessment 2: Individual Report (2,500 words)	Week 10	30%	a, b, c, d
Assessment 3: Final examination On-campus: 2 hours + 10 mins reading time Online: 2 hours + 30 mins technology allowance	Final exam period	40%	a, b, c, d

Requirements to Pass the Subject:

To gain a pass or better in this subject, students must gain a minimum of 50% of the total available subject marks.

2.9 Prescribed and Recommended Readings

Provided below, in formal reference format, is a list of the prescribed and recommended readings.

Prescribed Text:

Crane, A., Matten, D., Glozer, S., & Spence, L., 2019. Business ethics: managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization, 5th edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Recommended Reference text books:

Becker, C. U. Business Ethics Methods and Application. 2019. Exeter Devon UK. Routlege.

Carroll, A.B. and Buchholtz, A.K., 2018. Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder

management. [e – book] 10th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central.

Daft, R. 2018. The leadership experience (7th Ed.). Canada. Cengage Learning. DesJardins, J. 2020. An Introduction to Business Ethics 6th Ed. N. Y. McGraw Hill

Shaw, W.H., Barry, V., Issa, T., Catley, B. & Muntean, D. 2017. Moral Issues in Business. 3rd Asia Pacific Ed. China Cengage Learning.

Spinello, R. 2020 Business Ethics contemporary Issues and Cases. USA. Sage Publishing.

Travino, L. K. & Nelson, K. A. 2019 Managing Business Ethics: Straight Talk about How to Do It Right, 7th Ed USA. Wiley.

Zeyen, A. & Beckmann, M. 2019. Social Entrepreneurship and Business Ethics understanding the contribution and normative ambivalence of purpose-driven venturing. U.K. Routledge

References available from EBSCOhost research databases:

Chan, K.W. and Liu, Y., 2016. Voice more and stay longer: How ethical leaders influence employee voice and exit intentions. Business Ethics Quarterly, [e – journal] 26(3).

Chell, E., Spence, L.J. Perrini, F. and Harris, J.D., 2016. Social entrepreneurship and business ethics: Does social equal ethical? Journal of Business Ethics, [e – journal] 133(4).

Engert, S., Rauter, R. and Baumgartner, R.J., 2016. Exploring the integration of corporate sustainability into strategic management: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, [e – journal] 112.

Garcia-Meca, E., Uribe-Bhorquez, M. and Cuadrado-Ballesteros, B., 2018. Culture, board composition and corporate social reporting in the banking sector. Administrative Sciences, [e – journal] 8(3), pp.1-23.

Isa, S.M., Kiong, L.L. and Kiumarsi, S., 2017. Consumers responses towards corporate social responsibility: Electronic brands in Malaysia. Global Business and Management Research, [e – journal] 9 (Special Issue).

Lam, L.W., Loi, R., Chan, K.W. and Liu, Y., 2016. Voice more and stay longer: How ethical leaders influence employee voice and exit intentions. Business Ethics Quarterly, [e – journal] 26(3).

Pirson, M., Martin, K. and Parmar, B., 2017. Formation of stakeholder trust in business and the role of personal values. Journal of Business Ethics, [e – journal] 145(1).

Steyl, S. 2020. Aristotelian Practical Wisdom in Business Ethics: Two Neglected Components.

Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 163, Issue 3

Rao, K. and Tilt, C., 2016. Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, [e – journal] 138(2).

To access academic peer reviewed journal articles as sources, you need to access such sources

3. Assessment Details

3.1 Details of Each Assessment Item

The assessments for this subject are described below. The description includes the type of assessment, its purpose, weighting, due date and submission requirements, the topic of the assessment, details of the task and detailed marking criteria, including a marking rubric for essays, reports and presentations.

Supplementary assessment information and assistance can be found in Moodle.

KOI expects students to submit their own original work in both assignments and exams, or the original work of their group in the case of group assignments.

Formative assessment

Formative assessment consists of a 100-word written response to the Case Study what will be undertaken in Week four. Students will be required to answer one question from the case study in writing and lodge it in the chat box during the tutorial. Attendance will only be taken for those students who undertake this task.

Assessment 1

Assessment type: Group presentation and group report

Assessment purpose: To review the first 4-5 weeks of the subject. This assessment relates to learning outcomes a, b, c, d and e.

Value: 30% (Group presentation: Part A: 10% value) Variable Due Week 6-Week10 (Group Report: Part B: 20% value) Due Week 6 Friday 11.30pm

Assessment topic: Assessment of a company’s practices and procedures which highlight a lack of ethical business practices in relation to a code of conduct (internal) or a regulatory environment (external) and potential mitigation strategies that could be put in place to avoid this in future.

Task Details:

Question:

Part A. Analyse the relevance of two ethical theories discussed in our subject (weeks 1-4) to the business community and discuss whether some countries or industries are perceived to be more or less ethical (1100 words)

Part B. Reflect on who was affected (stakeholders) by the unethical actions identified in one of the scandals mentioned below, what could be done to prevent the scandal and discuss the notion that corporate scandals provide a competitive advantage to virtuous firms. (1200 words)

These scandals include but are not limited to the Parmalat Fraud,

4 Corners ABC has many notable scandals i.e.look at some of the 2021 Scandals, Obied Inc or the Pandora Papers. If you find another report and wish to use it (i.e. Lex Greensill) check with me first. https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2103H039S00

https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2103H034S00 https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2103H029S00

Here are some more, Bernie Madoff, Melissa Caddick, Nortel, Foxconn suicides 2010, 2019 shell Nigerian scandal, Turing Pharmaceuticals, Luckin Coffee, Libor rate manipulation 2015, Phone hacking in the UK, FIFA 2015 scandal, BP Deepwater Horizon, VW

Dieselgate, Mossack Fonseca Panama papers, Boeing 737Max, Wells Fargo, Facebook- Cambridge Analytica scandal Wirecard scandal and many more.

The Report should be written in formal academic narrative style. Referencing should be appropriately done. The Harvard Anglia type is preferred and bullet points or casual language should not be used.

The report should follow the following format:

Cover page
Table of contents
Introduction
Sections and sub-sections
Sections and sub-sections
Conclusion
List of references
Appendices (if any)

The following specifics should be applied to the essay format:

Paper size – A4
Font – Arial, 12 point
Line spacing – 1.5
Margins – 2.5 cm top, bottom, left and right

The following are points to note about this assessment:

The assessment relates to learning outcomes a, b, c and d.
The word count for this assessment is 2500 words (-/+ 10%). The count excludes the cover sheet, contents
page, references, appendices, and illustrations (e.g. diagrams, graphs and tables).
Do not use footnotes.

Guide to presenting Assessment 1

Assessment Criteria	Fail (0 – 49%)	Pass (50 – 64%)	Credit (65 – 74%)	Distinction (75 – 84%)	High Distinction (85 – 100%)
Organisation	Presentation is not audible and the audience cannot follow what is being presented.	The audience finds it hard to follow the presentation.	The audience can easily follow the presentation.	The presentation is logical and coherent.	The presentation is very organised, comprehensive and easy to understand.
Subject knowledge	Presenters are not confident with the subject content.	Presenters are not confident with the subject content but are able to respond to questions.	Presenter is confident with the subject content but is unable to elaborate or respond adequately to questions.	Presenter shows in-depth knowledge with adequate explanations.	Presenter shows superior knowledge and provides very detailed explanations.
Presentation slides	There are major spelling and grammatical errors in the slides.	There are spelling and grammatical errors in the slides.	There are minimal spelling and grammatical errors in the slides.	There are very minimal spelling and grammatical errors in the slides.	There are no spelling and grammatical errors in the slides.
Eye contact	There is no eye contact by the presenters. Presenters read during the entire presentation.	There is minimal eye contact. Presenters read during most of the presentation.	There is maintained eye contact. Presenters refer to presentation notes.	There is maintained eye contact while occasionally referring to the notes.	There is maintained eye contact and barely refers to the notes.
Time management	The presentation is not rehearsed, lacks the important requirements and does not adhere to the time limit.	The presentation is not practised and has been made in a hurry.	The presentation has been practised and is within the allocated time.	The presentation is well rehearsed and is within the allocated time.	The presentation is well organised and is within the allocated time.
Response to questions	The response is not rehearsed, lacks the important requirements and does not adhere to the question in content and context.	The response is not relevant or practical and has been made in a hurry.	Addresses part(s) of the question but not all of the questions promptly. Refers to text or other sources in a general manner v. specific.	Addresses all parts of the question (s) referring to text using direct quote(s) to provide support for response.	Addresses all parts of the question (s) referring to text using direct quote(s) to provide support for response. May or may not use other sources but if included, source is referred to explicitly

References to text may not provide the best support for response

and demonstrates deeper connections. Explains and elaborates in an effort to thoroughly answer question and demonstrate deeper thinking.

Assessment Criteria	Fail (0 – 49%)	Pass (50 – 64%)	Credit (65 – 74%)	Distinction (75 – 84%)	High Distinction (85 – 100%)
Individual Component. Oral presentation assessed at an individual level displaying coherence and consistency with the assessment objectives. (5 marks)	A member in the group displayed a partial lack of coherence or was not able to answer a question or explain in detail which was inconsistent with the assessment objectives or the efforts of the majority of the cohort.	A basic presentation provided with errors in grammar that still allow transparent links to explain the assessment objectives, however, clearly not at the same standard as the rest of the cohort	Presentation supported with limited verbal analysis, however, an attempt has been made to explain how the assessment objectives are achieved and supported in the presentation	A clearly articulated presentation supported by multiple sources in an attempt to explain, synthesise and critique the material and support the assessment objectives	A robust presentation with structured ideas in a format that engages and informs the audience through a compelling, comprehensive, and well-articulated argument seamlessly supported by a wide range of relevant and credible sources that supports the assessment objectives
Group presentation Presentation including correct grammar, spelling and structure of supporting material i.e. PPT’s that demonstrates links to academic literature (5 marks)	Assessment has more than 5 spelling and or grammar errors. The arguments or ideas being expressed are difficult to understand and make little sense in terms of the assignment task. Poor structure that is akin to internet sources rather than academic.	Written expression at a basic level, with less than 4 spelling and or grammar errors. Ideas and arguments understandable and relatively clear. An effort has been made to organise the presentation in a clear manner with evidence of academic literature.	Less than 3 errors in spelling and/or grammar. Well- crafted with concepts clearly expressed and credible. A sound, logical structure which aids in understanding the presentation, facilitating flow of the students work and clear links to academic literature.	Minor error or omission in verbal and written expression and formatting choices that have no impact on the transparency of the presentation and/or traceability of the source, or academic integrity.	Sophisticated verbal and written expression, with not a single spelling or grammatical error; supported by logical reasoning seemingly derived from thorough research; demonstrating academic integrity.
Group Report Referencing (5 Marks)	Little to no in-text referencing. reference list included has multiple errors and or Harvard Anglia referencing not attempted.	Basic attempts at referencing in-text, and inclusion of reference list, however with errors. Harvard Anglia referencing needing improvement. Some information not referenced where necessary.	Inclusion of referencing in text as well as the reference list and for the most part follows Harvard Anglia guidelines. Some errors, but overall, a good attempt at referencing made.	Referencing with no more than two errors. Reference list follows Harvard Anglia format almost perfectly. Sources acknowledged and any omission has no impact on the transparency and traceability of the source, or the demonstration of academic integrity.	Faultless Harvard Anglia referencing included in text, with all sources accurately acknowledged where necessary. Reference list included in the assignment that adheres to Harvard guidelines
Group Report Literature Review, analysis, interpretation, and description of relevant unit literature incorporated thus supporting the presentation (10 Marks)	Articles of little interest or from non peer reviewed journals with irrelevant information included thus lacking vital detail to demonstrate understanding of a business ethics situation or scenario.	Case study, agent and situation identified, but not in an organised, informative manner. Enough situational information provided to give a general idea about the task, however, could be better or more clearly analysed with relevant source material	Case study, agent and situation identified in an organised, informative manner. A detailed description of the situation that lends itself clearly to being able to identify business decisions inherent in the case/situation. Links made with the contemporary issues with obvious inclusion of	Analysis and situation identified in an informative manner. A description of the case study with links made to material that lends itself clearly to identify ethical decision making in business. Links to issues that are relevant with inclusion of business ethics cases.	Analysis and situation identified in an organised, informative manner. A detailed analysis of academically sound literature with links made to contemporary issues that are relevant with inclusion and analysis of business ethics cases relevant to the purpose and context, supported by original complex thinking.

			business ethics material.
Real World Work effectively linking the theory to the real world and demonstrating how the textbook material can be explained with practical examples. (5 Marks)	Poor attempt to outline the main assumptions of ethical theory being applied. No attempt at critical analysis, or discussion of benefits/limitations of the theory as it applies to business case studies and or the assignment task.	Basic outline of theory included, but little attempt made to outline understanding of the theory in own words. Over reliance on textbook and or quotes to communicate understanding with a lack of other case studies to reinforce points.	Theory selected outlined in depth with evidence to go beyond the text and describe understanding of theory in their own words. A minor error apparent, but overall, a demonstrated understanding of the theory. Inclusion of case studies.	Theory selected outlined in depth. Understanding of the theory demonstrated in the students’ description of the analysis. Inclusion of benefits and limitations of the theory addressed, with an attempt to apply these to their interpretation of real world case studies.	Robust understanding of the theory demonstrated in the detailed description and discussion of theory. Understanding of the theory clearly articulated, theoretical aspects, tying this to case studies and the text. Theory clearly linked to real world case studies gleaned from multiple sources.
Final mark /30

Assessment 2

Assessment Type: Individual Report 2,500 (+/- 10%).

Assessment purpose: The assessment allows students to plan, research and analyse a specific topic relating to an ethical issue that has occurred in the current business environment. It also allows students to draw conclusions that impact on various stakeholders and to communicate their findings in a professional manner. This assessment contributes to learning outcomes a, b, c and d.

Value: 30% Due Date: Week 10, 11:30 pm, Friday

Submission requirements details: Turnitin Week 10

Howto submit: Individual Report: Soft copy- Word.doc or .docx uploaded to Moodie &Turnitin. Do not submit PDF documents or documents in other non-word formats atopic to be researched

Assessment topic: Sustainability has traditionally been defined as longevity, yet its meaning has been reshaped by the growth in business activities post Industrial Revolution. Reference to this has been termed “Triple Bottom Line “or “People Profit Planet”.

Task details:

Question: Define Sustainability in the Business community. Analyse the argument that the extraction of crude oil from oil sands in Canada is of benefit to the community, environmentally sound and sustainable.

How to submit: Individual Report: Soft copy- Word .doc or .docx uploaded to Moodle in the Turnitin portal. Do not submit PDF documents or documents in other non-word formats. Students will undertake research to support the discussion, recommendations and conclusion with suitable and

relevant references. A minimum of 8 peer-reviewed academic journal articles should be analysed, included and if appropriate Reflect a passing grade. This is set at a minimum for a pass although there may be exceptions.

Journals with a focus on business ethics and sustainability are highly recommended and can be accessed via the journal databases provided by the KOi library.

References that are unacceptable include: online encyclopaedia such as Wikipedia, general websites, blogs, newspapers and magazines. Please check with your tutor or the librarian if unsure about the validity of sources identified. Students seeking a higher grade should support present a higher number of references to support the discussion, recommendations and conclusion.

The Report should be written in formal academic narrative style. Referencing should be appropriately done. The Harvard Anglia type is preferred, and bullet points or casual language should not be used.

The report should follow the following format:

Cover page
Table of contents
Introduction
Sections and sub-sections
Conclusion
List of references

o Appendices (if any)

The following specifics should be applied to the essay format:

Paper size – A4
Font – Arial, 12 point
Line spacing – 1.5
Margins – 2.5 cm top, bottom, left and right

The following are points to note about this assessment:

The assessment relates to learning outcomes a,b, c and d.
The word count for this assessment is 2500 words (-/+ 10%). The count excludes the cover sheet, contents page, references, appendices, and illustrations (e.g. diagrams, graphs and tables).
Do not use footnotes.
The assessment accounts for 30% of the final grade and will be marked out of 30.

The individual essay will be graded using the criteria below:

Assignment goals and substance – 6/ 30
Analysis – 12/30
Clarity of written work – 6/30
Format – 6/30

The details of the grading criteria are presented in the assessment rubric on the following page and will be scaled to 30 marks.

Marking Rubric Assessment 2: 30%

Assessment Criteria	Fail (0 – 49%)	Pass (50 – 64%)	Credit (65 – 74%)	Distinction (75 – 84%)	High Distinction (85 – 100%)
Assignment Goals and Substance (Max 6 marks)	Did not respond well to assignment. Adequate but weak and not effective. Information/data presented general terms, often plagued with platitudes or clichés. Minimal, basic use of sources. Lapses in understanding	A solid paper, responded adequately to assignment. Provided some of the requested information/data. Shows reasonable use of sources, but may not communicate them clearly.	A solid paper, responding appropriately to assignment. Provided most of the requested information/data. Shows good use of sources, and communicated then reasonably clearly.	A very good paper, responded well to assignment. Provided almost all of the requested information/data. Showed good use of sources, with most communicated clearly.	Excelled in responding to assignment. Interesting. Demonstrated sophistication of thought. Key information/ data is well used and clearly communicated.
Analysis (Max 12 marks)	Very little or very weak attempt to relate evidence to argument; may be no identifiable argument, or no evidence to relate it to. More description than critical thinking	Quotes appear often without analysis relating them to topic, or analysis offers nothing beyond the quotes. Is an even balance between critical thinking and description?	Evidence related to topic, though links perhaps need to be clearer. Some description, but more critical thinking required	Evidence often related to topic. Sound analysis and critical thinking.	Author clearly relates evidence to topic. Analysis is fresh and exciting, posing new ways to think of the material. Work displays critical thinking and avoids simplistic description or summary of information.
Clarity of written work (Max 6 marks)	Fails to express ideas clearly Writing style is extremely weak and difficult to follow. Tone is inappropriate for formal academic work. Poor sentence and paragraph structure. Many run-on sentences and awkward phrasings make report hard to read. Word choices or words used may be wrong or inappropriate. Quite a few “typos”.	Some sentences are awkward or are run- on, or fragmented Uses average/ standard grammar, spelling and punctuation. Writer makes routine word choices. Need some improvements to writing, such as sentence and paragraph structure, grammar to meet academic writing standards. Some “typos”	Writing style is good. While the reader can follow the argument, h the meaning may be obscured in places. Tone is formal. Grammar and spelling usually follow correct grammar conventions but may have some grammatical or punctuation errors	Report is clearly written. Well-constructed sentences. Uses correct grammar, spelling & punctuation Written in a superior, while accessible style that is easy for the reader to follow. Tone is appropriate for formal academic work. Minimal grammatical or spelling errors.	Report has been written to an exemplary, academic standard. Outstanding clarity -written in a precise and accessible academic style that is always easy for the reader to follow. Excellent sentence structure. Contains few if any grammatical or spelling errors.
Format: Adherence to Presentation standards Citations & Referencing (Max 6 mark)	Poor presentation. Fails to adhere to the style guide requirements. Formatting is poor, suggesting an absence of attention to detail. Fails to meet or exceeds word limit. Referencing	Satisfactory presentation and adherence to the style guide requirements in this area. Formatting indicates a significant lack of attention to detail. May fail to meet or may exceed word	Good presentation and adherence to the style guide requirements. Formatting is generally good. Pushes the boundaries of the upper- or lower-word limits. Satisfactory	Superior presentation. Adheres to the style guide requirements. Formatting lapses are minimal. Word limit is adhered to. Shows good understanding of Harvard Anglia referencing format Referencing techniques are excellent containing	Exceptional presentation. Strictly adheres to the style guide requirements. Formatting is excellent. Word limit is adhered to. Exceptional & consistently correct use of Harvard Anglia academic referencing, with all sources consistently and fully documented.
Final mark	/30

BUS300 BUSINESS ETHICS AND SUSTAINABILITY T123 PAGE 15 OF 19

Assessment 3

Assessment Type: Final Exam – individual assessment – invigilated exam.

Duration: On-campus: 2 hours + 10 mins reading time. Online: 2 hours + 30 mins technology allowance.

Purpose: The final exam will require students to explain and apply the subject theory to practical situations as would be found in a modern organisation, identifying issues, drawing conclusions, and making recommendations. The exam may cover materials used in tutorials, class discussions and/or from the readings. This assessment contributes specifically to learning outcomes a, b, c and d.

Topic: The examination may cover content from any part of the entire subject.

Value: 40% Due Date: The final exam will be held in the official KOI exam period in Week 14 of the trimester. The specific date and time will be posted towards the end of the trimester.

Task Details: The final exam will require students to answer short and/or long answer questions relating to key functions and practices associated with concepts of business ethics and sustainability within organisations.

Presentation format for written assignments: Essays and reports are to be typed, in Microsoft Word (doc or

.docx format). They are to be prepared and presented in the format detailed in the table below. This assists the lecturer and tutors in assessing your work. Further, as the majority of organizations require the use of standard formats, this process will provide you with helpful experience. Marks will be deducted for assignments which do not use this format.

Do NOT:

use colour printing, fancy cover sheets, formatting templates, when submitting your assignments
- use footnotes or endnotes.

Page size	A4
Font	Arial
Point size	12 point
Line spacing	1 and a half lines
Margins	2.5 cms, top, bottom, left and right margins
Paragraph	Block set up
Page numbers	Bottom header, right corner on EVERY page
Student name and Student Number	Top header, right corner of EVERY page
Word count	Top header, page 1.

3.2 General information about assessment

Late Penalties and Extensions

An important part of business life and key to achieving KOI’s graduate outcome of Professional Skills is the ability to manage workloads and meet deadlines. Completing assessment tasks on time is a good way to master these habits.

Students who miss mid-trimester tests and final exams without a valid and accepted reason may not be granted a deferred exam and will be awarded 0 marks for the assessment item. Assessment items which are missed or submitted after the due date/time will attract a penalty unless there is a compelling reason (see below). These penalties are designed to encourage students to develop good time management practices, and to create equity for all students.

Any penalties applied will only be up to the maximum marks available for the specific piece of assessment attracting the penalty.

Late penalties, granting of extensions and deferred exams are based on the following:

In Class Tests and Quizzes (excluding Mid-Trimester Tests)

Generally, extensions are not permitted. A make-up test may only be permitted under very special circumstances where acceptable supporting evidence of illness, hardship or unavoidable problems preventing completion of the assessment is provided (see section (b) below). The procedures and timing to apply for a make-up test (only if available) are as shown in the section Applying for an Extension (see below).
Missing a class test will result in 0 marks for that assessment item unless the above applies.

Written Assessments and Video Assessments

There is a late penalty of 5% of the total available marks per calendar day unless an extension is approved (see Applying for an Extension section below).

Presentations

Generally, extensions are not permitted. Missing a presentation will result in 0 marks for that assessment item. The rules for make-up presentations are the same as for missing in-class tests (described above).

For group presentations, if serious circumstances prevent some members of the group from participating, the members of the group who are present should make their contributions as agreed. If a make-up presentation is approved, the other members of the group will be able to make their individual presentation later and will be marked according to the marking rubric. A video presentation may be used to facilitate the process.

Mid-Trimester Tests and Final Exams

If students are unable to attend mid-trimester tests or final exams due to illness, hardship or some other unavoidable problem (acceptable to KOI), they must:

Complete the Assignment Extension / Exam Deferment Form available by contacting [email protected] as soon as possible, but no later than three (3) working days after the exam date.
Provide acceptable documentary evidence (see section (b) below).
Agree to attend the deferred exam as set by KOI if a deferred exam is approved.

Deferred exam

There will only be one deferred exam offered.
Marks obtained for the deferred exam will be the marks awarded for that assessment item.
If you miss the deferred exam you will be awarded 0 marks for the assessment item. This may mean you are unable to pass the subject.

b) Applying for an Extension

If students are unable to submit or attend an assessment when due, they must

Complete the Assignment Extension / Exam Deferment Form available by contacting [email protected] as soon as possible, but no later than three (3) working days of the assessment due date.
Provide acceptable documentary evidence in the form of a medical certificate, police report or some other appropriate evidence of illness or hardship, or a technician’s report on problems with computer or communications technology, or a signed and witnessed statutory declaration explaining the circumstances.
Students and lecturers / tutors will be advised of the outcome of the extension request as soon as practicable.

Please remember there is no guarantee of an extension being granted, and poor organisation is not a satisfactory reason to be granted an extension.

c) Referencing and Plagiarism

Please remember that all sources used in assessment tasks must be suitably referenced.

Failure to acknowledge sources is plagiarism, and as such is a very serious academic issue. Students plagiarising run the risk of severe penalties ranging from a reduction in marks through to 0 marks for a first offence for a single assessment task, to exclusion from KOI in the most serious repeat cases. Exclusion has serious visa implications. The easiest way to avoid plagiarising is to reference all sources.

Harvard referencing is the required method – in-text referencing using Author’s Surname (family name) and year of publication. A Referencing Guide, “Harvard Referencing”, and a Referencing Tutorial can be found on the right-hand menu strip in Moodle on all subject pages.

An effective way to reference correctly is to use Microsoft Word’s referencing function (please note that other versions and programs are likely to be different). To use the referencing function, click on the References Tab in the menu ribbon – students should choose Harvard.

Authorship is also an issue under plagiarism – KOI expects students to submit their own original work in both assessment and exams, or the original work of their group in the case of a group project. All students agree to a statement of authorship when submitting assessments online via Moodle, stating that the work submitted is their own original work.

The following are examples of academic misconduct and can attract severe penalties:

Handing in work created by someone else (without acknowledgement), whether copied from another student, written by someone else, or from any published or electronic source, is fraud, and falls under the general Plagiarism guidelines.
Copying / cheating in tests and exams is academic misconduct. Such incidents will be treated just as seriously as other forms of plagiarism.
Students who willingly allow another student to copy their work in any assessment may be considered to assisting in copying/cheating, and similar penalties may be applied.

Where a subject coordinator considers that a student might have engaged in academic misconduct, KOI may require the student to undertake an additional oral exam as a part of the assessment for the subject, as a way of testing the student’s understanding of their work.

Further information can be found on the KOI website.

d) Reasonable Adjustment

The Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act (1992) makes it unlawful to treat people with a disability less fairly than people without a disability. In the context of this subject, the principle of Reasonable Adjustment is applied to ensure that participants with a disability have equitable access to all aspects of the learning for the subject. For assessment, this means that barriers to their demonstrating competence are removed wherever it is reasonably practical to do so.

Examples of reasonable adjustment in assessment may include:

provision of an oral assessment, rather than a written assessment
provision of extra time
use of adaptive technology.

The focus of the adjusted assessment should be on enabling the student to demonstrate achievement of the learning outcomes for the subject, rather than on the method of assessment.

e) Appeals Process

Full details of the KOI Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy may be obtained in hard copy from the Library, and on the KOI website www.koi.edu.au under Policies and Forms.

Assessments and Mid-Trimester Exams:

Where students are not satisfied with the results of an assessment, including mid-trimester exams, they have the right to appeal. The process is as follows:

Discuss the assessment with their tutor or lecturer – students should identify where they feel more marks should have been awarded – students should provide valid reasons based on the marking guide provided for the assessment. Reasons such as “I worked really hard” are not considered valid.
If still not satisfied, students should complete an Application for Review of Assessment Marks form, clearly explaining the reasons for seeking a review. This form is available from the KOI website under Policies and Forms and is also available at KOI Reception (Kent St, Market St and O’Connell St). The completed Application for Review of Assessment Marks form should be submitted as explained on the form with supporting evidence attached to [email protected] .
The form must be submitted within ten (10) working days of the return of the marked assessment, or within five (5) working days after the return of the assessment if the assessment is returned after the end of the trimester.

Review of Grade – whole of subject and final exams:

Where students are not satisfied with the results of the whole subject or with their final exam results, they have the right to request a Review of Grade – see the Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy for more information.

An Application for Review of Grade/Assessment Form (available from the KOI Website under Policies and Forms and from KOI Reception at Kent St, Market St and O’Connell St) should be completed clearly explaining the grounds for the application. The completed application should be submitted as explained on the form, with supporting evidence attached to [email protected] .

Visit:https://aussienment.com/

Also visit:https://www.notesnepal.com/archives/767

Search