CASE STUDY
Task details:
· This is an individual assignment.
· You are asked to write an essay, proving answers to the question specified below (see page
2
). These answers must be based on corresponding theories. Make sure you are providing sufficient and relevant arguments sustaining your answers. In case of using real case example(s) in support of your standpoint, there should be a clear reference to that/those case(s).
· All the sources should be correctly cited, and the theories clearly identified.
· The essay should contain introduction, body(discussion) and conclusion parts. Questions must be answered in an essay format, no bullet points allowed.
· The submission must be in PDF file format.
Formalities:
· Wordcount: 1000 to 1500 words
· Structure: Cover, Table of Contents, References and Appendix are excluded of the total wordcount.
· Font: Arial 11 pts.
· Text alignment: Justified.
· Citation: The in-text References and the Bibliography must be in Harvard’s citation style.
It assesses the following learning outcomes:
· Outcome 1: Learn how to identify ethical issues.
· Outcome 2: Learn how to address ethical issues in a corporate setting.
· Outcome 3: Learn how to use ethical theories to analyze, critically assess, and make decisions related to ethical issues.
Task:
You are a junior manager in a professional services firm. David, a graduate professional in your team, comes to see you to say that he is applying for a job in another company and would like you to write him a reference. You like David and would like to help him, and the move would effectively be a promotion, but the truth is that his performance is mediocre even in his present job and would struggle in the one he’s applying for. It would suit you rather well, however, if he were to move on and you suspect that his other referees, who recommended him for his present position, will be positive.
Question: What should you write?
IMPORTANT: Your answer should be based on a specific ethical theory discussed in class (utilitarianism, deontology, etc.). Choose and apply the one you consider the best for identifying ethical issues involved and their solution. Do not forget to cite your sources.
Rubrics
|
Identification of main Issues/Problems 25% |
Identifies and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the main issues / problems in the case study. |
Identifies and demonstrates an accomplished understanding of most of the issues/problems. |
Identifies and demonstrates acceptable understanding of some of the issues/problems in the case study |
Does not identify or demonstrate an acceptable understanding of the issues/problems in the case study |
|
Analysis and Evaluation of Issues / Problems 25% |
Presents an insightful and thorough analysis of all identified issues/problems. |
Presents a thorough analysis of most of the issues identified. |
Presents a superficial analysis of some of the identified issues. |
Presents an incomplete analysis of the identified issues. |
|
Development of Ideas and Opinions 25% |
Supports diagnosis and opinions with strong arguments and well-documented evidence; presents a balanced and critical view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective. Excellent use of Harvard style |
Supports diagnosis and opinions with limited reasoning and evidence; presents a somewhat one-sided argument; demonstrates little engagement with ideas presented. Good use of Harvard style |
Little action suggested and/or inappropriate solutions proposed to the issues in the case study. Some use of Harvard style. |
No action suggested and/or inappropriate solutions proposed to the issues in the case study. Failed to use or incorrect use of Harvard style |
|
Link to Ethical Theories and Additional Research 25% |
Makes appropriate and powerful connections between identified issues/problems and strategic concepts studied in the course readings and lectures; supplements case study with relevant and thoughtful research and documents all sources of information |
Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between identified issues/problems and concepts studied in readings and lectures; demonstrates limited command of the analytical tools studied; supplements case study with limited research. |
Makes inappropriate or little connection between issues identified and the concepts studied in the readings; supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete research and documentation. |
Makes no connection between issues identified and the concepts studied in the readings; supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete research and documentation. |
2
