SUPPLEMENTARY Assessment task: Case study
SUPPLEMENTARY Assessment task: Case study
(45marks)
CASE STUDY
You are a long-term staff member at JB HI FI. You have a good relationship with your manager. She is flexible so that you can manage university and your shifts at the store. She also regularly gives you added responsibilities as she knows you are a competent, hard worker who she can trust. You often work at the refunds counter. While many customers are pleasant and accept instances where they are not eligible for a refund, there are a few customers who become either angry or upset when they are not entitled to one.
One busy Saturday morning a mother and her three children approach you about wanting to return an Apple MacBook she tells you that her partner recently purchased. The MacBook is not faulty. She does not have a receipt. But the MacBook is presented in its original packaging. You explain that the request for a refund does not meet the criteria of the stores policy.
The woman gets very upset and tells you that she is desperate and needs a full refund on the product. She tells you that her partner has issues with gambling and bought the MacBook after a big win two weeks ago. But he has now lost all of their money on the pokies. The family are struggling financially, and she says cannot afford food and the rent. The refund will at least cover her until she gets paid for her part time job in the next fortnight. You understand her plight at your mother too had addiction issues when you were growing up and money was scarce. You know what it means to go to bed hungry. You know that you could process this refund as a cash refund without your manager noticing.
How do you respond?
FYI
https://support.jbhifi.com.au/hc/en-au/articles/360053005194******
Work count: 1500 words
There is a +/-10% leeway on the word limits. For this task, this means 1350-1650 words are acceptable (excluding reference list). Your intext citations count towards the word count.
Minimum number of references: You should make use of a minimum of 6 references. At least 3 of these references should be scholarly sources.
Students will be expected to read widely for this assessment task and identify a range of reputable sources that will be useful to completing the paper. It would be particularly beneficial to make use of the readings provided to you in the readings and resources tab and from the list for each case study, however you are welcome to, and strongly encouraged, to supplement the research by finding your own.
*Wikipedia will not be considered a legitimate reference.
*Please be advised that websites are of inconsistent value and you need to be vigilant in your use of various websites (this includes blogs, YouTube, social media platforms etc).
*The Conversation is not a scholarly source.
*Government reports will be considered a scholarly source.
You are strongly advised to use the WSU library webpage to locate resources for this task.
A reference list should be provided at the end of your answer (not included in the word count). These must be cited at some point within your response. You are encouraged to use the suggested readings and resources below.
Ensure that you acknowledge all sources and influences on your ideas.
Deductions
Assessment breaches word count (+/- 10%): - 10% deduction for every 10% beyond the limits.
****
Instructions
Choose a case study from the list below.
You will be expected to consider what dilemmas are presented by the case study, and how these issues and the solution might be informed by the theories examined this semester.
This assessment is designed to help you explore the conversations around ethics in your academic discipline and/or professional pathway.
The extra readings and resources will be useful for this task. You are also encouraged to do independent research and use applicable scholarly literature in addition to those provided to you.
For this assessment, you will need to choose two of the following theories to apply to the case study:
Universal Ethical Egoism
Act Utilitarianism
Rule Utilitarianism
Divine Command Theory
Kants Duty Ethics
Rosss Prima Facie Duties
Nicomacean Virtue Ethics
Confucian Role Ethics
Indigenous Australian Philosophy(s)
***The following is a guide for completing the written paper:
1. The introduction should identify the case study that you have chosen and the two theories you are going to apply to the case.
Detailed in criteria 1.
2. The first section of the body of the paper should detail the dilemmas presented by the case study. This is where you should provide some facts and context around the case which may include academic material from the additional readings, legislation, policy, scientific/medical evidence, statistics, government and NGO reports, etc. This is also where any relevant codes of ethics/conduct should be identified. These should be relevant to Australian professional conduct that is, Australian focused codes of ethics/conducts.
The evidence presented here will be the foundation of your ethical analysis and is detailed in marking criteria 2.
3. Section two of the paper should analyse how your two theories apply to the case study. This will include applying all components of each theory to the case study, the strengths and weaknesses of applying each theory to the case study and providing consideration of the result of using each theory for all stakeholders impacted by the case study.
You can conduct this analysis separately or juxtapose both theories throughout the structure of the paper; you have creative license in expressing the analysis.
This section should form the bulk of your paper and is covered in marking criteria 3, 4, and 5.
4. The final section of the paper should attempt to provide a feasible, workable, and ethical solution to the dilemma by synthesising the main arguments that have been made throughout the paper and should particularly draw upon the strengths discussed.
This is covered in marking criteria 6.
