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