Assessment item 3
Ethics Leadership & Decision Making
Value: 45%
Due date: 09-Oct-2017
Length: 3000 words
Submission method options
Alternative submission method
Task
Write a 3000 word essay in which you:
• Use an organisation that is or has been in the news during the past two years (work-related learning) and identify an ethical dilemma faced by that organisation as an example.
• Apply at least two theoretical concepts from managerial ethics to examine this dilemma critically.
• Go on to examine and critically evaluate how these theoretical concepts influence managerial practices in the chosen organisation.
• In conclusion, reflect critically on how leaders may ensure organisational decisions are made ethically.
• Academic and professional communication skills: You must follow an essay structure that is at a minimum an introduction; a main body that outlines the argument, analyses the material you have researched and assesses this according to the guidelines above; and a conclusion.Your writing style must follow professional literacy: Citations and a final reference list that follows the APA 6 guidelines accurately; the quality of writing and presentation: accurate mechanics (spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.); use respectful language to discuss all people; avoid emotive language; employ inclusive, non-sexist language. Use a minimum of ten (10) citations/references

In short, you will need to demonstrate an understanding and critical analysis of the theories surrounding the topic, as well as evaluating the practical reality in the workplace. Please refer to relevant academic literature and source materials, as well as drawing upon your knowledge of the organisation.
Rationale
This assignment is designed to address Learning Objectives 1 to 5 (see above) by :
• familiarising students with the various theories relating to organisations and organisational planning and control.
• encouraging students to discern the strengths and weaknesses of the wide array of theoretical contributions;
• encouraging students to use empirical evidence to support their arguments.
Marking criteria

Criteria? Standards? LO Mark High Distinction (38.25-45) Distinction (33.75-37.8) Credit (29.25-33.3 29.25-33.3 29.25-33.3 29.25-33.3) Pass (22.5- 28.8) Fail (00.0 -22.05)
An organisation that is or has been in the news during the past two years (work-related learning) is used to identify an ethical dilemma an example.

/2 Highly appropriate organisation is Identified that provides an outstanding and critical basis for further examination. Identification of organisation provides a detailed and accurate basis from which to develop further examination. Identification of organisation provides a sufficiently detailed basis for further examination. Identification of organisation is underdeveloped, inhibiting deeper examination. Identification of organisation is inaccurate, inadequate, insufficient, and unclear.
At least two theoretical concepts from managerial ethics are applied to examine this dilemma critically 3 /8 Identifies, explains, applies and critiques major alternative theoretical concepts with depth, detail and clarity. Identifies, applies and critiques major alternative theoretical concepts clearly and accurately. Identifies, explains & applies important alternative theoretical concepts but occasionally lacks clarity or accuracy. Critique is limited. Identifies, explains & applies alternative theoretical concepts but with some limitations, inconsistency and/or inaccuracy. Superficial critique . Limited grasp of alternative theoretical concepts; lacking in critical examination.
Examination and critical evaluation of how these theoretical concepts influence managerial practices in the chosen organisation. 1
2 /15 Clearly demonstrates a high level ability to synthesise theory and practice using readings and/or alternative perspectives.
Able to interpret the relationship between theory and practice accurately. Offers appropriate and relevant examples to support line of argument. Able to identify the relevant relationships between theory and practice. Offers some evaluation, but occasionally lack consistency. Demonstrates an adequate level of relating theory to practice; and some consideration provided of alternative perspectives.
Descriptive. Reproduces information from lectures and readings. The relationship between theory and practice underdeveloped and is poorly argued.
Conclusions reflect critically on how leaders may ensure organisational decisions are made ethically. 5 /10 Shows deep critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making.
A strong and reasoned argument is made to support the conclusions. Shows detailed critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making.
A strong argument is made to support the conclusions. Shows a degree of critical reflection of and engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making. Notes alternative perspectives and provides examples where necessary to support conclusions. Examples of alternative perspectives are provided; reflection is superficial rather than meaningful. Shows a basic level of engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making. Engagement is minimal. Conclusions are reached providing no or little evidence. Shows scant engagement with leadership and ethical decision-making.
Academic and professional communication skills:
Follows an essay structure.
Writing style must follow professional literacy: Citations and a final reference list that follows the APA6 guidelines accurately; the quality of writing and presentation: accurate mechanics (spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.); use respectful language to discuss all people; avoid emotive language; employ inclusive, non-sexist language. Minimum of ten (10) citations/references used.
/10 Structure uses clear and concise topic and linking sentences, and connected paragraphs. Sophisticated level of professional language achieved. Paragraphs succinct with excellent ability with grammar, vocabulary and spelling. Impeccable referencing in APA6. Outstanding presentation.
Structure that uses paragraphs and sentences. Extensive use of topic and linking sentences. Leads the reader through the argument in a clear and logical way. Follows guidelines comprehensively. Professional literacy well demonstrated. Substantial ability with grammar, spelling and vocabulary. Ample relevant, accurate referencing using APA6. Clear structure. Adequate use of sentences and paragraphs. Guidelines followed clearly. Level of professional language used. Paragraphs are succinct. Generally good ability with grammar, and spelling; appropriate vocabulary. Significant but limited referencing. Structure is apparent, fair use of topic and linking sentences and paragraphs. Some of the guidelines followed. Only general level of professional language achieved. Adequate level of control over grammar, fair ability with spelling and vocabulary. Referencing lacks specificity with some inaccuracies. No apparent structure. Poor sentence and paragraph construction. Guidelines not followed. Language not professional, inclusive or respectful. Paragraphs off the point. Inadequate ability with grammar, poor vocabulary and spelling. Insufficient and/or inaccurate referencing.
Total marks:
/45
Comments:
Presentation
Presentation requirements are as follows :
• The Assessment must adopt an essay structure and not that of a management report.
• Writing style must follow professional literacy.
• Citations and a final reference list mist be included that follow the APA6 citation guidelines accurately.
• The quality of writing and presentation: accurate mechanics (spelling, grammar, punctuation etc.); use respectful language to discuss all people; avoid emotive language; employ inclusive, non-sexist language.
• Minimum of ten (10) citations/references used.
Requirements
Two requirements are worthy of note :
1. Students must use APA referencing in their assessments -
**Full details of how to set up an account on Turnitin and submit an essay are included in a short two page guide found in the Resources folder in Interact2.**
Student note – I need at least 40 marks.