SOLUTION AT Australian Expert Writers
Please make sure to include all the requirements of the assessment.Please find attached the article along with the assignment guideline.Thank you.Assessment Details and Submission GuidelinesTrimester T2 2020Unit Code HC2121Unit Title Comparative Business Ethics & Social ResponsibilityAssessment Type Individual AssessmentAssessment Title Individual Case Study Report on Case 20 ‘Enron: Not Accounting for the future’Purpose of the assessment (with ULOMapping) Students able to:1. Compare and contrast diverse approaches to ethical decision making 2. Evaluate the implications of the legal pressure for ethical behaviour in organisations3. Examine ethical issues as they relate to basic values and the challenge of determining ethical issues in business4. Understand how moral philosophies and values influence individual and group ethical decision making in business 5. Apply and enhance problem-solvingWeight 30% of the total assessmentsTotal Marks 30 marksWord limit Not more than 2,000 wordsDue Date Sunday of Week 10, 27/09/20, at 23 59Submission Guidelines • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.• The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.Assignment SpecificationsTask: Individual case study analysis (Report) Topic: Case Study on “Enron: Not Accounting for the future”You are required to complete a detailed analysis and present your case assessment, analysis, and outside research based on the case study on ‘Enron: Not Accounting for the future’.The case study is available on your prescribed textbook:Ferrell, O., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L (2018), Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases, 12th ed, Southwestern, Cengage LearningYou are required to answer the questions located at the end of the case study and the questions are as follows:1. How did the corporate culture of Enron contribute to its bankruptcy?2. Did Enron’s bankers, auditors, and attorneys contribute to Enron’s demise? If so, how?3. What role did the company’s chief financial officer play in creating the problems that led to Enron’s financial problems?ADDITIONAL RESOURCES• Ungagged.net: The Other Side of the Enron Story offers the perspectives of Enron employees who believe they were the victims of the federal government’s desire to get convictions and place blame: http://ungagged.net. • Interactive graph of Enron’s stock price and the actions of important Enron executives and partners: http://www.time.com/time/interactive/0,31813,2013797,00.html.• Former Enron CFO confronts fraud examiners: http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/Former-EnronCFO-Andrew-Fastow-Meets-Fraud-Examiners-67263-1.html.HC2121 Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual AssignmentAssignment StructureIdeally, your report needs to consist of at least the following structure:1. Executive Summary: One page2. Section 1: Introduction3. Section 2: Main body of the report consists of the questions at the end of the case study (or as above)4. Section 3: Conclusions5. Reference List: Between 15-20 referencesHC2121 Individual Assignment Marking Rubric (Rubric)Substantially ExceedsExpectations Exceeds Expectations Meets Expectations Does Not Meet Expectations UnacceptableScope (15%) 1. Applies unit material with logical order of ideas, with no gaps in information.2. Completely addresses the concepts, theories and material issues covered in unit and called for in the assignment instructions, and is supported by text and/or other literature.3. Best and most applicable points are presented while unnecessary content is left out. 4. Points are logical and well- supported by evidence and research. 1. Applies unitmaterial with some logical order of ideas, with minimal gaps in information.2. Substantially addresses issues covered in unit and called for in the assignment instructions, and is supported by text and/or other literature.3. Important points are presented while unnecessary content is left out. 4. You make your point, but could present more logically. Points are supported by evidence and research. 1. Applies unit material with gaps in information.2. Addresses some of the issues covered in unit and called for in the assignment instructions, 3. Some important points are addressed, but not fully covered. 4. You made some points, but they were notlogically related to the case itself. 1. Does not apply the unit principles and material as called for in thecase study.2. Does not address the relevant issues posed by the case study.3. You fail to make any important points and analyze the material presented in the unit and case study.4. You fail to make your point, and do not use the concepts, theories and material presented in the unit. 1. Paper lacks flow from point to point, order of ideas is not clear, and gaps in information are present. Structure lacks organization. 2. Major themes mentioned in the assignment instructions have not been met and are not supported by literature.3. Applicable points are not presentedand paper is full ofunnecessary content.4. Points are not logical and are not supported by evidence and research.Originality (5%) Demonstratescritical thinking about the topic and the student’s own impressions and interpretations of research. The research is not merely Demonstratescritical thinking about the topic and the student’s own impressions and interpretations of research. The research is presented, could be better Case study lacks somecritical thinking about the topic and the student’s own impressions andinterpretationsof research. Case study lacks criticalthinking about the topic and the student’s ownimpressions and interpretations of research. The research is not No critical thinking about the topic and the student’s own impressions and interpretationsof research. The research is notHC2121 Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility – Individual Assignmentpresented, but is interpreted and applied to overall themes. interpreted and applied to overall themes. The research presented could be better interpreted and applied to overall themes. interpreted and applied to overall themes. interpreted and applied to overall themes.Presentation (5%) Professional, no editing or revision required.1. Proper citing ofreferences andHARVARDREFERENCEGUIDELINE Style, no editing or revision required.2. Proper sentence structure, punctuation, and spelling, no editing or revision required. Professional, some light editing may be useful. 1. FollowsHARVARDREFERENCE GUIDELINE format with few errors.2. Few or no errors but sentence structure could be improved. Revision Suggested. 1. FollowsHARVARDREFERENCE GUIDELINE format about 50% of the time.2. Overlookederrors in sentence structure, punctuation, and spelling. Revision Required.1. FollowsHARVARDREFERENCE GUIDELINE format less than50% of the time.2. Overlooked several errors in spelling, punctuation, and/or sentence structure showing carelessness. Revision Required.1. Does not followHARVARDREFERENCE GUIDELINE format.2. Many errors in both mechanics and sentence structure; extremely poorly written.Integration (5%) Various themes and concepts throughout the paper are integrated and incorporated to form even stronger supportfor the thesis. Concepts are not presented independently of one another, but as part of a whole. Various themes and concepts throughout the paper are integrated and incorporated to form strong support for the thesis.Concepts, overall, are presented as a whole. 50% of the themes and concepts throughout the paper are integrated and incorporated to support the thesis. 50% of concepts are presented as a whole. Themes and concepts are not integrated and incorporated to support the thesis. Concepts are not presented as a whole. Themes and concepts do not support the thesis.Concepts are poorly presented.
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA Ph. D. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS
QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER