ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF – SUPPLEMENTARY Subject Code and Title MGT301A: Ethics and Sustainability Assessment Scenario Report Individual/Group Individual Length 2000 words (+/ 10%) Learning Outcomes a) Identify questions of ethics and sustainability and analyse how they impact on one’s day-to-day work experience. b) Apply a range of ethical frameworks and develop a vocabulary for ethical issues. c) Demonstrate the ability to apply the various frameworks that underpin how individuals and organisations make decisions on complex ethical issues. d) Analyse the impact of economic, commercial, social and environmental trends on organisation’s ethical and sustainability behaviours. e) Explore specific sustainability tools such as values based management and stakeholder perspectives. f) Evaluate the role of the individual as an agent of ethical and sustainable behaviour in organisations. Submission By deadline set by Academic Services Weighting 50 % Pass/ Fail Total Marks Supplementary Pass (50 %) or Fail ( original grade) Context This Supplementary assessment allows students to develop writing skills in ethics and sustainability scenarios and to explore the ways in which stakeholder theory and values management can be used by organisations, as tools in addressing economic, commercial, social and environmental problems. Ethical Scenario The Manly Sea Eagles of the National Rugby League (NRL) have released a pride jersey to show support for the LGBTQIA commmunity. The Sea Eagles became the first club in NRL history to wear an LGBTQIA jersey in their match on the 30th July 2022. The issue arose when seven Manly players announced there were going to boycott the game in response to the club’s decision to wear these pride jerseys due to their cultural and religious beliefs. MGT301A Assessment 3 Brief 220831 1 The NRL has announced they will hold a Pride Round in 2023 to promote inclusivity. How can the NRL ethically manage the rights and interests of all stakeholders around the proposed NRL Pride round? Individual task use the ethical scenario above to prepare an individual report. The scenario report will take the form of a business case, made to the senior management of the organisation. The report will employ either stakeholder theory or values management as an analytical tool. The report will propose three alternative (not complementary) solutions for how the issue should be dealt with. Finally, the report will recommend one of the three proposed solutions, showing why it is superior in terms of stakeholder or values management theory. Structure Executive summary (100 words) Introduction (100 words) Summary of scenario (200 words) Description of theory used for analysis (stakeholder theory OR values management) (300 words) Analysis (850 words) Identification of 3 alternative solutions (250 words) Recommendations (100 words) Conclusion (100 words) Reference list (excluded from word count) Research and Referencing A minimum of 50% of referenced sources must be from the subject modules or include a URL to the Torrens University online library. Submissions which do not meet this criterion will receive a 50% reduction in the grade. This assessment task should include appropriate academic referencing following APA 7th edition style of referencing. Please see the Academic Skills page on Blackboard for information on referencing : https://torrens.blackboard.com/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?course_id=_20163_1 &content_id=_2498849_1 Scenario report The Learning Rubric is your guide to how your assessment will be marked. Please be sure to check this rubric very carefully before submission. Submission Instructions Submit the Individual Scenario Report and Peer Review Form by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of module 6.1 (week 11) via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu in MGT301A: Ethics and Sustainability. The learning facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades. MGT301A Assessment 3 Brief 220831 2 Learning Rubric: Assessment 3- Scenario Report Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 049% Pass (Functional) 50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84% High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% Knowledge and Understanding as reflected in analysis. 25% Report does not address the question, demonstrates limited understanding of the topic with limited/no developed aspects of the task. Report addresses the basic components of the question, demonstrates only a cursory understanding of the topic and develops the minimum aspects of the task. Report addresses most components of the question, demonstrates a good understanding of the topic and develops most aspects of the task. Report addresses the full components of the question, demonstrates a very good understanding of the topic and develops all aspects of the task. Report addresses the full components of the question, demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of the topic and develops thorough and critical analysis of the task. Evidence of Research
20% Report shows little or no evidence of relevant, current, credible research applied in the report Report shows some evidence of relevant, current, credible research applied in the report Report shows good evidence of relevant, current, credible research applied in the report Report shows strong evidence of relevant, current, credible independent research applied in the report Report shows exceptional evidence of relevant, current, credible independent research from extensive critical reading applied in the report Identification of solutions and recommendations 20% Requires a clearer identification of alternative solutions and recommendations. Requires justification, based on analysis of theoretical frameworks and academic resources, as applied to the organisation’s context and ethical/sustainability issue. Alternative solutions and recommendations have been identified. A basic standard of justification is inconsistently based on a satisfactory level of analysis and superficially supported by evidence to address the organisation’s ethical/sustainability issue. Alternative solutions and recommendations have been proficiently identified. A good standard of justification, based on a good level of analysis, and partially supported by evidence to address the organisation’s ethical/sustainability issue. Alternative solutions and recommendations have been effectively identified. A discerning and critical standard of justification based on in-depth analysis, and well supported by evidence to address the organisation’s ethical/sustainability issue. Alternative solutions and recommendations have been skilfully identified. An expert standard of justification based on critical, in-depth analysis, and supported by evidence thoroughly, to address the organisation’s ethical/sustainability issue. 3 MGT301A Assessment 3 Brief 220831 Flow of Ideas 15% Report lacks logical flow of ideas, making it difficult to understand. Line of reasoning is unclear not supported by evidence Flow of ideas can be difficult to understand. Line of reasoning sometimes requires clarity and is sometimes not supported by evidence Flow of ideas occasionally difficult to understand. Line of reasoning is easy to follow and usually supported by evidence Report has a good flow of ideas. Line of reasoning is of an exceptional standard and supported by evidence. Report has a good flow of ideas. Line of reasoning is of a professional standard and fully supported by evidence. Report Format and presentation 10% Business report format is not applied Business report format is applied with some errors Business report format is applied with few errors Business report format is properly applied Business report is presented to a professional standard Correct citation of key resources and evidence 10% Does not include correct references or in- text citations; does not use APA 7th style. Uses APA 7th style with some citation or referencing errors. Uses APA 7th style with few errors. Uses APA 7th style with minimal errors. Uses APA 7th style perfectly to a professional standard 4
Yorumlar