ETHICS, CORPORTATE GOVERNANCE AND RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP

ETHICS, CORPORTATE GOVERNANCE AND RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP

Coursework Assignment

You are required to choose an organisation that has been involved in corporate failure at board level. You are required to critically discuss from an ethical and corporate governance perspective the key failings in the organisation that lead to such an event occurring. Your essay must include obvious links to academic literature and ethical and corporate governance theories.

6858081280

The essay should be well-presented, should contain a well-informed critical analysis, and should show a good standard of academic referencing.

This essay should be 2500 words in length (+/- 10%)

Due date: 2nd December, 2022 (week 10) at 12 noon.

All students must submit an electronic copy in word format (NOT PDF) via GCU LEARN and Turnitin UK along with your reference list. Please note toward the hand in date turnitin will be really busy so do not leave your test turnitin until the last moment, you can only submit to test turnitin once every 24 hours. Click the Assignments tab on the control panel on the GCU Learn screen for the Module to find the turnitin submission section.

NOTE: Students must only use the turnitin test facility on this module for the EGRL assignment, if students are found to be submitting their case study to other modules test turnitin then they will automatically fail the assignment.

The approach to the essay

Students should demonstrate the breadth of their reading in their essays with reference to original peer-reviewed academic articles, additional to those journal articles covered in the class (marks will be deducted where this is not demonstrated). There will also be a need to include media and company reports. Marks will be awarded for the clarity of argument and quality of presentation as well as technical content.

Format of the course work

The essay should be submitted online only. Text should be double spaced except for indented quotations which should be single spaced. Font Calibri (Body) 12pt.

ETHICS, GOVERNANCE AND RESPONSIBLE LEADERSHIP 2021/22

Case Study: Spectrum for Assessment Marking

<40 40-49 50-59 60-69 70+

Understanding of knowledge and theory Serious misconceptions and factual errors Limited understanding Adequate understanding Good understanding Thorough and

Comprehensive

understanding

Organisation identified Lack of analysis of the issues in the case study Little or no analysis of the issues in the case study Superficial analysis of some of the issues in the case study Thorough analysis of most of the issues Insightful and thorough analysis of all the issues

Requirements of the assessment using the case study Narrative did not address requirements of the assessment Narrative did go some way towards addressing the requirements of the assessment in relation to the organisation Narrative did address the requirements of the assessment in relation to the organisation but some tangential material Narrative did address the requirements of the assessment in relation to the organisation Narrative did address the requirements of the assessment in relation to the organisation and also provided some very insightful angles and innovative thoughts on the issues.

Identification and use of literature No reference to literature References to literature not appropriate or integrated with text Some appropriate literature identified Methodical reference to relevant literature Wide range of sources with most relevant literature identified

Original thought No original ideas Some evidence of original thought but largely ill-conceived Some evidence of original ideas Evidence of original ideas, which are sound and relevant to the literature Excellent original critical assessment of the issues with well-structured conclusions

Logic of argument No logic flow Serious weaknesses in logic of argument Some indication of logical thought but still weaknesses present Logical presentation with good focus on the main issues of the question Excellent logical flow to the argument, dealing precisely with the question asked

Conclusion Totally lacking or trite conclusions Poor in parts Adequate conclusions Good, well-structured conclusions Precise, logical conclusions perhaps providing new insight/suggestions for future research

Presentation, Style and structure. Incomprehensible Poor style with weak grammar/spelling Adequate Logical and clear Outstandingly good presentation