1. 1. 1. 1. QUESTION

          

         Purpose: You will research a Unique Ethical Issue and discuss an ethical issue.

         Outcome Met by Completing This Assignment

         identify ethical issues that arise in domestic and global business environments using an understanding of ethical concepts and of legal and business principles
         develop and evaluate alternatives to, and recommend solutions for, ethical dilemmas, taking into account ethical and legal requirements and the essential mission of the business enterprise
         effectively communicate to internal and external business stakeholders the complexities of ethical issues, suggesting and analyzing various solutions in order to ensure appropriate business practices and accountability

         Instructions:

         NOTE: All submitted work is to be your original work. You may not use any work from another student, the Internet or an online clearinghouse. You are expected to understand the Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism Policy, and know that it is your responsibility to learn about instructor and general academic expectations with regard to proper citation of sources as specified in the APA Publication Manual, 6th Ed. (Students are held accountable for in-text citations and an associated reference list only).

         Step 1: Preparation for the Assignment

         Before you begin writing the assignment, you will read the following requirements that will help you meet the writing and APA requirements. Not reading this information will lead to a lower grade:

         Read the grading rubric for the assignment. Use the grading rubric while writing the report to ensure all requirements are met that will lead to the highest possible grade.

         Third person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person.

         Contractions are not used in business writing, so you are expected NOT to use contractions in writing this assignment.

         You are expected to paraphrase and NOT use direct quotes. You are expected to paraphrase, which can be learned by reviewing this link: https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html. You are responsible for APA only for in-text citations and a reference list.

         Use at least 10 scholarly or credible resources as supporting documentation. Three of the resources will come from the class readings. Books cannot be used as resources for this assignment. If any material is used from a source document, it must be cited and referenced and the page or paragraph number must be provided. A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa. View the sample APA paper to gain a better understanding of how to use APA within the paper.

         Step 2: How to Set Up the Paper

         Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 6-8 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page. It is important to write clearly and concisely.

         Use the following format with headings:

         Create a title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name and date;
         Introduction (one paragraph)
         The Ethical Issue;
         Traditional Theories/Resolution;
         Ethical Relativism
         The Best Resolution

         Step 3: Create the introductory paragraph

         Within this paragraph, provide a brief overview of the scenario. Then, provide a thesis statement and tell the reader the main topics covered in the paper. The introduction comes at the beginning of the paper and tells a reader the main topics covered in the paper. View this website to learn how to write an introductory paragraph: http://www.writing.ucsb.edu/faculty/donelan/intro.html

         Step 4: In Phase 1, you select a topic not specifically discussed in class from the Unique Ethical Issues lists from weeks 3, 5, and 7. In Phase 1, you wrote a brief one-to-two page paper that introduced the unique ethical issue that is the focus of research for Phase 2.

         Step 5: Research

         In Phase 2, you will explore the readings for the unique ethical issue.

         Step 6: The Ethical Issue

         Discuss the selected ethical issue topic.
         Identify one common ethical dilemma associated with the ethical issue and explain why it is so.
         State the dilemma. Choose two ethical theorists from week 2 and use their principles to explain their solution to the ethical dilemma you have presented.

         Step 7: Traditional Theories/Resolution

         Identify and use two of the traditional theorists discussed in the course to provide two resolutions to the ethical dilemma in accordance with the theorist’s perspective.

         Step 8: Ethical Relativism

         Define and discuss ethical relativism.
         Are there any ethical relativism concerns with your selected Unique Ethical Issue? If so, what are they? If not, why not?

         Step 9: The Best Resolution
         Select the solution that best fits your code of ethics and explain by supporting your reasoning/conclusions using the course readings and research.

         Step 10: Summary paragraph

         Write the summary paragraph. A summary paragraph restates the main topics of the paper. Make sure to leave a reader with a sense that the paper is complete. The summary paragraph is the last paragraph of a paper and does not need a heading.

         Step 11: Submit the paper in the Assignment Folder.

         The assignment submitted to the Assignment Folder will be considered a student’s final product and therefore ready for grading by the instructor. It is incumbent upon the student to verify the assignment is the correct submission. No exceptions will be considered by the instructor.

         Due Date

         Aug 12, 2017 11:59 PM
         Hide Rubrics
         Rubric Name: Final Project – Phase 2
         Criteria 1 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard Failure
         Introduction 0.6 points
         States thesis clearly and concisely, and comprehensively discusses the main points made in the paper.
         (0.54 – 0.6)
         0.51 points
         States thesis clearly but further development of the main points of the paper is needed.

         (0.48 – 0.539)

         0.45 points
         States thesis and explains general ideas of the main points of the paper.

         (0.42 – 0.479)

         0.39 points
         Attempts to state thesis that discusses the main points to be covered in the paper or presents an introduction that is irrelevant to the thesis.

         (0.36 – 0.419)

         0 points
         Does not provide an introduction.

         (0)

         Criteria 2 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard Failure
         Ethical Issue 3 points
         Central ethical issue is identified thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research.

         (2.7 – 3.0)

         2.55 points
         Central ethical issue is identified but argument needs more detailed development and/or support.

         (2.4 – 2.69)

         2.25 points
         Attempts to define ethical issue but not defined appropriately or completely. Misunderstanding of the issue related to the situation. Some reasoning; minimal use of support.

         (2.1 – 2.39)

         1.95 points
         Attempts to define ethical issue concluded with little or no use of reasoning and support.

         (1.8 – 2.09)

         0 points
         Failed to identify ethical issue and no support provided.

         (0)

         Criteria 3 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard Failure
         Identify and Explain One Common Ethical Dilemma 2.4 points
         One common ethical dilemma is thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research without undercutting position.

         (2.16 – 2.4)

         2.04 points
         One common ethical dilemma is clearly, and soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.

         (1.92 – 2.159)

         1.8 points
         One common ethical dilemma is presented with some reasoning; minimal use of research.

         (1.68 – 1.91)

         1.56 points
         One common ethical dilemma is presented with little or no use of reasoning and research.

         (1.44 – 1.679)

         0 points
         Failed to present one common ethical dilemma.

         (0)

         State Dilemma. Choose Two Ethical Theorists & Use Their Principles to Explain a Solution to the Ethical Dilemma Presented. 4.5 points
         Chooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma taking a strong, well defined position; Supports position with thorough and
         concise argument(s).
         (4.05 – 4.5)
         3.825 points
         Chooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma that is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.

         (3.6 – 4.04)

         3.375 points
         Chooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma that is brief; unrelated, unsupported general statements, reasons, and details; minimal research used.

         (3.15 – 3.59)

         2.925 points
         Chooses one ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma; may select a theorist that was not covered under week 2 or presents two theorist without providing an analysis.

         (2.7 – 3.149)
         0 points
         Fails to present theorists or apply principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma.

         (0)

         Identify and Use Two Traditional Theorists to Provide Two Resolutions to the Ethical Dilemma According to Theorist Perspective 4.5 points
         Identifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma presenting a strong, well defined position; Supports position with thorough and
         concise argument(s).
         (4.05 – 4.5)
         3.825 points
         Identifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma that is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.

         (3.6 – 4.049)

         3.375 points
         Identifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma that is brief; unrelated, unsupported general statements, reasons, and details; minimal research used.

         (3.15 – 3.59)

         2.925 points
         Identifies and uses one traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma ; may select a theorist that was not covered under week 2 or presents two theorist without providing a discussion.

         (2.7 – 3.149)
         0 points
         Fails to identify and use traditional theorists to providing resolutions to the ethical dilemma.

         (0)

         Ethical Relativism 2.4 points
         Defines and discusses ethical relativism thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research.

         (2.16 – 2.4)

         2.04 points
         Defines and discusses ethical relativism but needs more detailed development and/or support.

         (1.92 – 2.159)

         1.8 points
         Attempts to define and discuss ethical relativism appropriately or completely. Some reasoning; minimal use of support.

         (1.68 – 1.919)

         1.56 points
         Attempts to define and discuss ethical relativism with little or no use of reasoning and support.

         (1.44 – 1.679)
         0 points
         Failed to define and discuss ethical relativism.

         (0)

         Ethical Relativism Concerns 1.5 points
         Identifies and discusses ethical relativism concerns thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.

         (1.35 – 1.5)

         1.275 points
         Identifies and discusses ethical relativism concerns is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.

         (1.2 – 1.349)

         1.125 points
         Attempts to define and discuss ethical relativism appropriately or completely. Some reasoning; minimal use of support or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.

         (1.05 – 1.19)

         0.975 points
         Attempts to define and discuss ethical relativism with little or no use of reasoning and support with the same level of logic and research..

         (0.9 – 1.04)
         0 points
         Failed to define and discuss ethical relativism.

         (0)

         The Best Resolution 3 points
         Selects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and explains thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research.

         (2.7 – 3.0)

         2.55 points
         Selects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and explanations are soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.

         (2.4 – 2.69)

         2.25 points
         Selects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and attempts to provide explanations; Some reasoning; minimal use of support or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.

         (2.1 – 2.39)

         1.95 points
         Selects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and attempts to provide explanations; little or no use of reasoning and support with the same level of logic and research..

         (1.8 – 2.09)
         0 points
         Failed to select a solution that best fits your code of ethics.

         (0)

         Criteria 4 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard Failure
         Summary 0.6 points
         In a clear and concise manner, comprehensively concludes the paper by restating/ summarizing the argument. Refer to the opening statements and main points made throughout the paper. Reflect on the importance of the arguments and conclude their development.

         (0.54 – 0.6)

         0.51 points
         In a clear manner concludes the paper by restating/ summarizing the argument. Refer to the o main points made throughout the paper. Attempts to reflect on the importance of the arguments but further development of the main points of the paper is needed.

         (0.48 – 0.539)

         0.45 points
         Concludes the paper by somewhat restating/ summarizing the argument. Attempts to the bring in some explanation of the general idea of the main points of the paper.

         (0.42 – 0.479)

         0.39 points
         Attempts to restate/summarize the argument but explanations are irrelevant to the main points of the paper.

         (0.36 – 0.419)

         0 points
         Fails to present restatement/summarization of argument.

         (0)

         Criteria 5 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard Failure
         Attention to Instructions 3 points
         The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper also includes completion of all minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format.

         (2.7 – 3.0)

         2.55 points
         The paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper missed one minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format.

         (2.4 – 2.69)

         2.25 points
         One major assignment tasks or two minor aspects of the assignment missed.

         (2.1 – 2.39)

         1.95 points
         Two major assignment tasks and/or three or more minor aspects of the assignments missed.

         (1.8 – 2.09)

         0 points
         Three or more major assignment tasks missed.

         (0)

         Criteria 6 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard Failure
         Writing Mechanics 3 points
         Strictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. Zero to two errors noted.

         (2.7 – 3.0)

         2.55 points
         Excellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Three to six errors noted.

         (2.4 – 2.69)

         2.25 points
         Satisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Seven to 10 errors noted.

         (2.1 – 2.39)

         1.95 points
         Minimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.

         (1.8 – 2.09)

         0 points
         Does not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.

         (0 – 1.07)

         Criteria 7 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard Failure
         Adherence to APA (6th ed.) 1.5 points
         One to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.

         (1.35 – 1.5)

         1.275 points
         Attempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 – 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.

         (1.2 – 1.349)

         1.125 points
         Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 – 4 times in document.

         (1.05 – 1.19)

         0.975 points
         Attempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document.

         (0.9 – 1.049)

         0 points
         No attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.

         (0 – 0.89)

         Overall Score Outstanding
         27 or more Superior
         24 or more Good

Related Samples