Governance, Ethics and Sustainability Assessment 2 (MBA402) Assignment Help

Subject Code:

MBA402

Subject Name:

Governance, Ethics and Sustainability

Assessment Title:

Code of Ethics Workplace Simulation

Assessment Type:

Case study

Assessment Length:

1500

Words (+/-10%)

Weighting:

40 %

Total Marks:

40

Submission:

MyKBS Turnitn

Due Date:

Week 9

Your Task 

Analyse a short case study (realistic scenario) and prepare a short, written report.

Assessment Description

A thorough understanding of how a company’s Code of Ethics must be worded to effectively communicate  behavioural expectations is an essential managerial competency.

The Learning Outcomes (LOs) students will demonstrate in performing this assessment include:

LO1:

Evaluate the success (or lack thereof) of an organisation’s governance  responsibilities

LO2:

Analyse the legal and regulatory environment in Australia with a view to  understanding its impact on business strategy

LO3:

Analyse the role of the board in the assessment of strategy and risk, and the way in  which this expertise can be better utilised

LO5:

Apply corporate sustainability practices in a real‐world example and examine their  appropriateness in a variety of contexts

Assessment Instructions

1. Read the Case Study document which will be made available to you on Monday, Week 7 in My KBS  under the Assessment 2 tab.

2. Prepare short, written report-style responses to each of the questions given as part of the Case  Study.

3. Include at least five academic references from academic journals and textbooks, as well as full details  of informational sources you consulted as part of your assignment research.

Please refer to the assessment marking guide contained in the Case Study document to assist you in  completing all the assessment criteria.

Note: Submissions that do not use the Answers Template supplied will lose 2 marks.

Important Study Information

Academic Integrity and Conduct Policy

KBS values academic integrity. All students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating,  plagiarism and other academic offences under the Academic Integrity and Conduct Policy.

Please read the policy to learn the answers to these questions:

• What is academic integrity and misconduct?

• What are the penalties for academic misconduct?

• How can I appeal my grade?

Late submission of assignments (within the Assessment Policy)

Length Limits for Assessments

Penalties may be applied for assessment submissions that exceed prescribed limits.

Study Assistance

Students may seek study assistance from their local Academic Learning Advisor or refer to the resources on  the My KBS Academic Success Centre page. Further details can be accessed at

Generative AI Traffic Lights

Please see the level of Generative AI that this assessment has been designed to accept:

Traffic

Light

Amount of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) usage Evidence Required

This

assessment  (✓)

x

x

✓

Level 1

This assessment fully integrates Generative AI,  encouraging you to harness the technology’s full  potential in collaboration with your own expertise.

It will highlight your ability to demonstrate how effectively  you can work alongside AI to achieve sophisticated  outcomes, blending human intellect and artificial  intelligence.

Your collaboration  with AI must be

clearly referenced  and documented in  the appendix of your  submission, including  all prompts and

responses used for  the assessment.

Level 2

This assessment invites you to engage with  Generative AI as a means of expanding your  creativity and idea generation.

It will highlight your ability to complement your original  thinking with the capabilities of AI. For example, through  brainstorming and preliminary concept development.

Your collaboration  with AI must be

clearly referenced  and documented in  the appendix of your  submission, including  all prompts and

responses used for  the assessment.

Level 3

This assessment showcases your individual  knowledge and skills in the absence of Generative AI  support.

It will highlight your personal abilities. For example, to  analyse, synthesise, and create based on your own  understanding and learning.

Use of generative AI  is prohibited and may  potentially result in  penalties for

academic

misconduct, including  but not limited to a  mark of zero for the  assessment.

Assessment Marking Guide

Criteria

F (Fail)

0% – 49%

P (Pass)

50% – 64%

C (Credit) 65%-74%

D

(Distinction)

75% -864%

HD (High Distinction)  85%-100%

Mark

Industry versus  Company Code

Fails to identify features  of either Code (industry,  company).

Fails to identify benefits  of adopting a company specific Code.

Answer is

confused/difficult to  follow.

Shows awareness of one  of the relevant industry  Codes (ANA, Early

Childhood).

Identifies at most one  clear difference between  an industry & company  Code. Benefits of adopting  a company Code are

poorly explained.

Considers both

relevant industry

Codes (ANA, Early

Childhood). Finds at  least two differences  between the species  of Code (industry,

company).

Identifies one or more  benefits of adopting a  company Code.

Shows familiarity with both  relevant industry Codes  (ANA, Early Childhood). Cogently outlines key  differences between

industry & company

Codes.

Soundly explains the

benefits of adopting a  company Code, drawing  upon case study facts.

Displays masterly

awareness of both relevant  industry Codes (ANA, Early  Childhood).

Succinct but comprehensive  outline of differences

between industry &

company Codes.

Persuasive reasoning for  adopting a company Code,  drawing widely upon case  study facts.

/10

Sexual

Harassment and  Workplace

Bullying

Definitions are absent,  or very weak, and may  lack in-text citations. Illustrative examples are absent or defective  or fail to adequately  distinguish the

concepts.

No discussion of the  role of the Board &

management in

preventing such

behaviours.

Definitions are defective (e.g. say things

incidentally true without capturing one or both  concepts), and may lack in-text citations.

Examples only weakly  differentiate the two

behaviours.

No or very weak account  of the role of Board &  management, in

preventing such

behaviours.

Adequately defines both  concepts, with in-text citations.

Illustrative examples  differentiate the

workplace behaviours. Satisfactory account of  the role of Board &

management, in

preventing such

behaviours.

Strongly defines both

concepts with in-text

support. Illustrative

examples clearly

differentiate the workplace  behaviours.

Provides a strategic

account of the role of

Board & management, in  preventing such

behaviours.

Answer provides an HR  statement addressing the  CEO question.

Masterfully defines both concepts with strong in-text  support. Illustrative

examples expertly

differentiate the workplace  behaviours.

Provides a strategic &

detailed account of the role  of Board & management, in  preventing such behaviours. Answer tactfully provides an

HR statement addressing the CEO question.

/10


Criteria

F (Fail)

0% – 49%

P (Pass) 50% –

64%

C (Credit)

65%-74%

D (Distinction)

75%-84%

HD (High Distinction) 85%- 100%

Mark

Corruption

versus Fraud

Definitions are weak OR,  fail to distinguish

Corruption from Fraud.  Examples are defective  or missing.

No opinion provided on  combining or separating  concepts in the company  Code.

At least one concept

adequately defined and  illustrated for the Early

Learning context, OR

Concepts are only weakly  differentiated, with one

example provided for each  (corruption, fraud).

Provides unsupported

opinion on whether to

combine concepts within the  company Code.

Adequately defines and  separates the concepts,  with two examples of  each (corruption, fraud)  for the Early Learning  environment.

Reasons for combining  or separating concepts  within the company’s  Code are minimal or  weak.

Sound definitions and  researched, industry relevant workplace  examples serve to

strongly separate the  concepts.

Clear reasoning

provided for combining  or separating the two  concepts within the  company Code.

Strong definitions and

researched, industry

relevant workplace

examples insightfully

separate the two concepts.  Reasons for combining or  separating concepts within  the Code are considered  and persuasive.

/5

Professional/ Ethical

Social Media  Presence

Answer fails to

distinguish between

personal and

professional social media use.

Shows no or very weak  awareness of guidelines  provided in the ANA

Code document.

EITHER answer weakly  distinguishes between

personal and professional  social media use OR

Answer exclusively focuses  upon social media as a

career development tool. Little or no consideration of  the ethics of using social  media as a professional.

Answer distinguishes  between personal and  professional social

media use. Shows

awareness of the ANA  document guidelines.  Considers some of the  ethical obligations of  professionals as they  post online.

Answer soundly

differentiates personal  and professional social  media use.

Answer draws upon  the ANA Code as it  considers ethical

obligations to one’s  company, when

posting professionally  online.

Answer succinctly

differentiates the following:  personal social media use,  professional social media  use, and professional

obligations to one’s

company when posting  professionally online.

Strong behavioural

recommendations emerge,  based on the ANA Code and  other researched sources.

/10

Structure,

Research &

Referencing

Reference list is missing  or contains URLs and  not full reference

citations.

References fewer than 5 URLs supplied with the case  study,

OR

Most weblinks provided are  cited, but

References list does not  follow KBS Harvard.

References fewer than  6 URLs appearing in  the case study

document.

Many variations from  KBS Harvard in the list.

Full Reference details  provided for most

URLs in the case study  document.

Evidence of further  research undertaken.  References list follows  KBS Harvard, with

slight variations.

Full Reference details

provided for all URLs in the  case study document, plus  further sources consulted.  Near flawless application of  KBS Harvard.

/5

Comments:

/40