HC2121 Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility T2 2019

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines

Trimester

T2 2019

Unit Code

HC2121

Unit Title

Comparative Business Ethics & Social Responsibility

Assessment Type

Group Assessment

Assessment Title

Group Case Study Report and Presentations on ‘Herbalife Reborn’

Purpose of the assessment (with ULO

Mapping)

Students able to:

  1. Compare and contrast diverse approaches to ethical decision making
  2. Evaluate the implications of the legal pressure for ethical behaviour in organisations
  3. Examine ethical issues as they relate to basic values and the challenge of determining an ethical issues in business
  4. Understand how moral philosophies and values influence individual and group ethical decision making in business
  5. Apply and enhance problem-solving skills in solving and managing ethical dilemmas within an organisation.

Weight

35 % of the total assessments

Total Marks

25% for Group Report + 10% for Group Presentation

Word limit

Not more than 3,000 words

Submission Guidelines

All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.

The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.

Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.

Assignment 2 Specifications

Task: Group Report + Presentation

Topic: Case Study on “Herbalife Reborn”

Students will form into groups of a minimum of 3 (three) students and maximum 4 (four) students. You are not allowed to submit the assignment as an individual assignment. Each group will complete a detailed analysis and present their case assessment, analysis, and outside research to the class based on the case study on ‘Herbalife Reborn’. The case study is available on your prescribed textbook:

Ferrell, O., Fraedrich, J. and Ferrell, L (2018), Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases, 12th ed, Southwestern, Cengage Learning

You are required to answer the questions located at the end of the case study and the questions are as follows:

  1. Why has Herbalife’s multilevel compensation model been confused with a pyramid scheme?
  2. Describe the differences between a legitimate business model and a pyramid scheme
  3. How has Herbalife demonstrated social responsibility?

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

  • FTC decision on Herbalife: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/pressreleases/2016/07/herbalife-will-restructure-its-multi-level-marketing-operations
  • Multilevel marketing vs. pyramid schemes: https://www.bbb.org/phoenix/newsevents/consumer-tips/2015/03/opportunity-or-scam-multi-level-marketing-vs.-pyrasmidschemes/
  • FTC decision on BurnLounge: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2014/06/usappeals-court-affirms-ruling-favor-ftc-upholds-lower-court

Ideally, your report needs to consist at least the following structure:

  1. Executive Summary: ideally one page, but no more than two
  2. Section 1: Introduction
  3. Section 2: Main body of the report consists of the questions at the end of the case study (or as above)
  4. Section 3: Conclusions:
  5. Reference List: In between 15-20 references

Presentations will run for approximately 10 minutes. To successfully assess a case, you must engage in additional research to gather more background information as well as current information on the company and situation. The class presentation should present the case, elicit discussion and summarise the main points as far as your group has determined.

Marking criteria

HC2121 Report Marking Rubric (Group)

4

3

2

1

Mark

Format and Organization

All required sections are included, and each is effectively organized. No formatting errors exist.

All required sections are included but one may need to be organized better. No formatting errors exist.

All required sections are included but one or two are poorly organized. One formatting error exists.

Sections are poorly organized and some are missing. A few formatting errors exist.

Symptoms

Symptoms are clearly identified and clustered, with each cluster of symptoms pointing toward an underlying problem.

Identification of symptoms is good, sufficient, and clearly articulated

Sufficient symptoms are identified; understands differences between symptoms and problems.

Insufficient symptoms are identified; symptoms are confused with problems.

Problem Analysis

Each problem is analyzed thoughtfully and thoroughly.

Each problem is analyzed well.

At least one problem is analyzed adequately, but analysis needs more critical attention.

No analysis is offered. Only facts are repeated without scrutiny.

Evaluation of Alternatives

Pros and cons are provided for each alternative and each is very convincing.

Pros and cons are provided for each alternative and are, overall, generally convincing.

Pros and cons are provided for most alternatives. Most key points are convincing.

Pros and cons are not provided for each alternative. Some are weak.

Recommended Course of Action

Recommendations are directly responsive to problems and provide effective, efficient, feasible recommendations. Responsibilities for actions are included

Recommendations are actionable and responsive to problems. They’re effective, efficient, and feasible.

Recommendations are adequate but need attention regarding who will implement them, how they’ll be implemented, and what needs to get done.

Recommendations suggest simple solutions (such as outsourcing or hiring consultants) and are vague, unrealistic, expensive, too complex, or not related to problems.

Grammar

No grammatical errors exist.

Few grammatical errors exist and don’t impede meaning.

Some grammatical errors exist but generally don’t impede meaning.

Numerous grammatical errors exist and impede meaning.

Sources and referencing

Report contains no errors in documentation (including citations, signal phrases, or References). Student introduces and analyzes found information in a professional manner.

Minimal documentation errors exist; student understands how to use signal phrases; cite sources; compile a References page; and in general, introduce and analyse found information.

Some documentation errors exist but student generally understands how to use signal phrases; cite sources; compile a References page; and in general, introduce and analyse found information.

Found information is not documented correctly. Errors exist with signal phrases, citations, and References. Found information is not introduced or analysed adequately.

Task completion

Student has understood the objective of the task and completed the assignment as instructed and has made extensive reference to the ethical theory throughout and where relevant.

Student has understood the objective of the task and mostly completed the assignment as instructed, with some mention of the ethical theories

Student has not fully understood the objective of the task and makes little mention or referral to the ethical theories

Student has misunderstood the objective of the task and failed to follow instructions, with no mention or referral to the ethical theories

Total

/32

Converted to 25%

/25

Student Name

Student Id

Comments:

HC2121 Presentation Marking Rubric (Group)

4

3

2

1

Mark

Visual Appeal

There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Visually appealing/engaging.

There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on two or more slides. Significant visual appeal.

There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information was contained on many slides. Minimal effort made to make slides appealing or too much going on.

There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. The slides were difficult to read and too much information had been copied onto them. No visual appeal.

Comprehension

Extensive knowledge of topic. Members showed complete understanding of assignment. Accurately answered all questions posed.

Most showed a good understanding of topic. All members able to answer most of audience questions.

Few members showed good understanding of some parts of topic. Only some members accurately answered questions.

Presenters didn’t understand topic. Majority of questions answered by only one member or majority of information incorrect.

Presentation Skills

Regular/constant eye contact, The audience was engaged, and presenters held the audience’s attention. Appropriate speaking volume & body language.

Most members spoke to majority of audience; steady eye contact. The audience was engaged by the presentation. Majority of presenters spoke at a suitable volume. Some fidgeting by member(s).

Members focused on only part of audience. Sporadic eye contact by more than one presenter. The audience was distracted. Speakers could be heard by only half of the audience. Body language was distracting.

Minimal eye contact by more than one member focusing on small part of audience. The audience was not engaged. Majority of presenters spoke too quickly or quietly making it difficult to understand. Inappropriate/disinterested body language.

Content

The presentation was a concise summary of the topic with all questions answered. Comprehensive and complete coverage of information.

The presentation was a good summary of the topic. Most important information covered; little irrelevant info.

The presentation was informative but several elements went unanswered. Much of the information irrelevant; coverage of some of major points.

The presentation was a brief look at the topic but many questions were left unanswered. Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out.

Preparedness/

Participation/

Group Dynamics

All presenters knew the information, participated equally, and helped each other as needed. Extremely prepared and rehearsed.

Slight domination of one presenter. Members helped each other. Very well prepared.

Significant controlling by some members with one minimally contributing. Primarily prepared but with some dependence on just reading off slides.

Unbalanced presentation or tension resulting from overhelping. Multiple group members not participating. Evident lack of preparation/rehearsal. Dependence on slides.

Total

/20

Converted to 10%

/10

Student Name

Student Id

Comments: