1000 words

BCO121 ETHICS IN BUSINESS Task brief & rubrics

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

• On Week 7, your Professor will share with you a Case Study on CSR, and will comment its most important aspects in class. The Case Study comes with

three questions that you are required to answer. From that moment on, you will have seven days to complete your task.

• On Week 8, you have to submit your analysis of the Case Study on Moodle.

Guidelines

• Each of the questions come with the minimum and maximum amount of words to be used in your answers:

o Question 1: 200/350 words.

o Question 2: 300/450 words.

o Question 3: 500/700 words.

• Therefore, the minimum amount of words to be used is 1.000, and the maximum is 1.500.

• Appendices and References, if used, do not count towards the final wordcount.

• Font: Arial. Size: 12,5pts. Line spacing: 1,5. Text align: Justified.

LAUNCH: WEEK 7 / SUBMISSION: WEEK 8 ON MOODLE, BY 23.59HRS.

Weight: This task is worth 30% of your overall grade for this subject.

Outcomes: This task assesses the following learning outcomes:

– LO1: Understand the concept of sustainability and its implications and become familiar with the main approaches to business ethics and corporate social responsibility
– LO2: Specify the ethical and social consequences of an alternative and understand why ethics are an essential dimension of decision- making
– LO3: Learn how to make ethical judgments and integrate them in the decision-making process
– LO4: Understand commonly-occurring ethical issues and dilemmas in managing businesses
– LO5: Relate ethics to the performance of organizations
– LO6: Determine how to improve the responsibility of business on respecting human rights and the natural environment, promoting human development and contributing to a better society
– LO7: Communicate in terms of responsibility and accountability.

Rubrics

Exceptional
90-100

Good
80-89

Fair
70-79

Marginal fail
60-69

Knowledge and
Identification of
the main Issues

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

Application
25%

Student applies fully relevant
knowledge to the situation
provided

Student applies mostly relevant
knowledge to the situation
provided

Student applies some relevant
knowledge to the situation
provided. Some minor
misunderstandings may be
evident.

Student applies little relevant
knowledge to the situation
provided. Misunderstandings are
evident.

Evaluation
25%

Student assembles a coherent
response to the question,
providing a range of support
and justification that leads to a
well-reasoned conclusion

Student assembles a good
response to the question,
providing support and
justification that lead to a well-
reasoned conclusion

Student assembles a fair
response to the question,
providing some support and
justification that lead to a well-
reasoned conclusion. Minor
misunderstandings may be
evident

Student’s response to the
question lacks coherence.
Limited support and justification
are provided that may or may
not be well linked to the
conclusion

Communication
25%

Student communicates ideas
extremely clearly and
concisely. Compliance with the
guidelines on font, size, line
spacing and text align will also
be taken into account.

Student communicates ideas
clearly and concisely.
Compliance with the guidelines
on font, size, line spacing and
text align will also be taken into
account.

Student communicates ideas
fairly clearly and concisely.
Compliance with the guidelines
on font, size, line spacing and
text align will also be taken into
account.

Student attempts to
communicate ideas clearly and
concisely, with some problems.
Student does not follow the
guidelines on font, size, line
spacing and text align.

StakeholderRelationships & CSR: Case Analysis
Global Entertainments (GE)

The Arboleda Corporation (AC) driver was meeting the four representatives
of Global Entertainments (GE) at Manila airport. These were the vice-
president of corporate development, director of Asian operations, vice-
president of global relations and the director of governmental relations for
Asia. GE, headquartered in New York, was considering the development of
a Philippines cultural entertainment centre on the main island of Mindanao.
The islands are a tourist destination in need of development.

Both GE and AC believed that Mindanao was a great candidate for a new
project. The entertainment centre would focus on the history of the
Philippines and include a variety of live performances, rides, exhibits and
restaurants. Domestic and international travellers who visited Mindanao
would be the primary target market

GE had been in business for almost 20 years and currently used a joint
venture approach in establishing new properties. AC was its Philippine
partner and the two firms had been successful two years ago in developing
a water entertainment park and casino outside Manila. Mindanao could hold
a lot of potential, but there were likely to be concerns about the likely
destruction of its beauty and the exploitation of some of the well-preserved
parts of the island.

Following a day to adjust to the time zone and refine the strategy for the
visit, the next three days would be spent in Manila, meeting with various
companies and government officials who had a stake in the proposed
entertainment facility.

After a the 6hr flight to Mindanao, the group would be the guest of the Office
of the tourism Authority of Southern Philippines for nearly a week. This part
of the trip would involve visits to possible sites as well as meetings with
island government officials and local interest groups. After arriving at the
hotel in Manila, the four employees of GE agreed to meet later that evening
to discuss their strategy for the visit. One of their main concerns was the
development of an effective stakeholder analysis in order to defend GE’s
position on any CSR and sustainability discussions.

QUESTIONS:

1. With reference to the above extract, explain the causes and the
consequences found in the case study in relation to social and/or
environmental issues.
(200-350 words)

2. Identify the main stakeholders involved in this case and evaluate to
what extent each of them is responsible for this situation.
(300-450 words)

3. What CSR model/approach would you recommend for this situation?

Explain in detail your reasoning for the chosen model and identify
potential weaknesses this model might have in this context.
(500-700 words)