Apply and critically evaluate the relevant theoretical framework and models of governance and responsibility.


BACHELORS DEGREE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFICATION

 

Learning Outcomes tested (from module syllabus)

Assessment Criteria  To achieve each outcome a student must demonstrate the ability to:

  1. Apply and critically evaluate the relevant theoretical framework and models of governance and responsibility. 

 

 

  • Produce an individual essay/Report of a min of 2000 words incorporating :

-          Evaluate the various stakeholders and their respective interests.

-          Critical evaluation of key governance issues for each of the key characters and their stakeholders.

-          Evaluate key governance challenges, and how effective they may manage them.

-          Does philanthropic activities justify wealth making

 

 

TASK DESCRIPTION


Robber Barons vs. Captains of Industry vs. Philanthropists

John D Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie have been called many things good and bad. Narrowing down the type of individuals they are, they have been put into one of the following 3 categories:

  • Robber Barons
  • Captains of Industry
  • Philanthropist 

You are required to choose one of the above examples from the sporting world in order to:

For Both John D Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie:

  1. Stakeholders : Evaluate the various stakeholders and their respective interests. (100 words guideline)
  2. Governance a: Critical evaluation of key governance issues for each of the key characters and their stakeholders. (250 words guideline)
  3. Governance b: Evaluate key governance challenges, and how effective they may manage them. (250 words guideline)
  4. Does philanthropic activities justify wealth making? Discuss the merits of philanthropic activities for business. (500 words guideline)
  5. Do the actions of the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie Foundation justify or legitimate the past actions of John D. Rockefeller and Standard Oil, and Andrew Carnegie and Carnegie Steel? (500 words guideline)
  6. Do a comparison between Rockefeller and Carnegie are they of the same mind set to life? (200 words guideline)
  7. In your opinion are Rockefeller & Carnegie good guys or bad guys? Which category would you place them and why? (200 words guideline)

 (Either structured essay or report format   –  min 2000  words )

GUIDANCE FOR Students IN THE COMPLETION OF TASKS

 

NOTE: The guidance offered below is linked to the five common assessment criteria overleaf.

 

  1. 1.       Research-informed Literature

Your work must be informed and supported by scholarly material that is relevant to and focused on the task(s) set.    You should provide evidence that you have accessed a wide range of sources, which may be academic, governmental and industrial; these sources may include academic journal articles, textbooks, current news articles, organisational documents, and websites.  You should consider the credibility of your sources; academic journals are normally highly credible sources while websites require careful consideration/selection and should be used sparingly.   Any sources you use should be current and up-to-date, mostly published within the last five years or so, though seminal/important works in the field may be older.  You must provide evidence of your research/own reading throughout your work, using in-text citations in the main body of your work and a reference list that is alphabetical at the end of your work. Please use the Harvard referencing system.

Specific to this assignment

Select, read, and research from credible sources information to provide structured discussion of the  tasks set above. A full and appropriate reference listing will be required.

  1. 2.       Knowledge and Understanding of Subject

Your work must demonstrate the growing extent of your knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the subject area.  Knowledge relates to the facts, information and skills you have acquired through your learning.  You demonstrate your understanding by interpreting the meaning of the facts and information (knowledge). This means that you need to select and include in your work the concepts, techniques, models, theories, etc. appropriate to the task(s) set.  You should be able to explain the theories, concepts, etc. meaningfully to show your understanding.  Your mark/grade will also depend upon the extent to which you demonstrate your knowledge and understanding; ideally each should be complete and detailed, with comprehensive coverage.

Specific to this assignment:

Clear demonstration of knowledge on governance and philanthropy with examples pertaining  to the characters

  1. 3.       Analysis

Your work must contain evidence of logical, analytical thinking, evaluation and synthesis. For example, to examine and break information down into parts, make inferences, compile, compare and contrast information.  This means not just describing What! but also justifying: Why? How? When? Who? Where? At all times, you must provide justification for your arguments and judgements.  Evidence that you have reflected upon the ideas of others within the subject area is crucial to you providing a reasoned and informed debate within your work.  Furthermore, you should provide evidence that you are able to make sound judgements and convincing arguments using data and concepts.  Sound, valid conclusions are necessary and must be derived from the content of your work.  There should be no new information presented within your conclusion.  Where relevant, alternative solutions and recommendations may be proposed.

Specific to this assignment:

Evaluation and critical discussion of theories and models with reference to practical examples from Rockefeller and Carnegie and how that relates to the real world today.

  1. 4.       Practical Application and Deployment

You should be able to demonstrate how the subject-related concepts and ideas relate to real world situations or a particular context.  How do they work in practice?  You will deploy models, methods, techniques, and/or theories, in that context, to assess current situations, perhaps to formulate plans or solutions to solve problems, some of which may be innovative and creative.  This is likely to involve, for instance, the use of real world examples and cases, the application of a model within an organisation and/or benchmarking one organisation against others based on stated criteria.  You should show awareness of the limitations of concepts and theories when applied in particular contexts.

Specific to this assignment

N/A

  1. 5.       Skills for Professional Practice

Your work must provide evidence of the attributes expected in professional practice.  This includes demonstrating your individual initiative and/or collaborative working. You must communicate effectively in a suitable format, which may be written and/or oral, for example, essay, management report, presentation. Work should be coherent and well-structured in presentation and organisation.

Specific to this assignment:

Either provide a clear, coherent and well structured essay or Report in order to address the seven tasks.  (2000 words )

 

OUTRIGHT FAIL

UNSATISFACTORY

SATISFACTORY

GOOD

VERY GOOD

EXCELLENT

EXCEPTIONAL

Assessment Criteria

0-29%

30-39%*

40-49%

50-59%

60-69%

70-79%

80-100%

1. Research-informed Literature

Extent of research and/or own reading,  selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions

Little or no evidence of reading.

Views and findings unsupported and non-authoritative.

Referencing conventions largely ignored.

Poor evidence of reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources.

Referencing conventions used inconsistently.

References to a limited range of mostly relevant sources. Some omissions and minor errors.

Referencing conventions evident though not always applied consistently.

Inclusion of a range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Referencing conventions mostly consistently applied.

Inclusion of a wide range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently.

Selection of relevant and credible sources.  Very good use of referencing conventions, consistently applied.

A comprehensive range of research informed literature embedded in the work. Excellent selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills, consistently applied.

Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Outstanding selection of relevant and credible sources. High-level referencing skills consistently and professionally applied.

2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject

Extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline.

Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level. Substantial inaccuracies.

Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial understanding. Some significant inaccuracies.

Evidence of basic knowledge and understanding of the relevant concepts and underlying principles.

Knowledge is accurate with a good understanding of the field of study.

Knowledge is extensive.  Exhibits understanding of the breadth and depth of established views.

Excellent knowledge and understanding of the main concepts and key theories. Clear awareness of challenges to established views and the limitations of the knowledge base.

Highly detailed knowledge and understanding of the main theories/concepts, and a critical awareness of the ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.

3.  Analysis

Analysis, evaluation and synthesis; logic, argument and judgement; analytical reflection; organisation  of ideas and evidence

Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable/ missing conclusions. Lack of any attempt to analyse, synthesise or evaluate.

Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most part descriptive. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and contradictory. Generalised statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance.

Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and some attempts to synthesise, albeit with some weaknesses.

Some evidence to support findings/ views, but evidence not consistently interpreted.

Some relevant conclusions and recommendations, where relevant

Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance.

An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support the argument.

Valid conclusions and recommendations, where relevant

Sound, logical, analytical thinking; synthesis and evaluation. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity & significance of evidence. Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and convincingly.

Sound, convincing conclusions / recommendations.

Thoroughly logical work, supported by evaluated evidence. High quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration.

Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions.

Strong, persuasive, conclusions, justifiable recommendations.

Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration.

Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions.

Highly persuasive conclusions

4. Practical Application and Deployment

Effective deployment of appropriate methods, materials, tools and techniques; extent of skill demonstrated in the application of concepts to a variety of processes and/or contexts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems.

Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.

Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.

Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed appreciation of the context of the application.

 

 

An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of well established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.

Basic appreciation of the context of the application.

 

A good and appropriate application of standard methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.

Good appreciation of the context of the application, with some use of examples, where relevant.

 

A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.

Very good consideration of the context of the application, with perceptive use of examples, where relevant.

Evidence of some innovation and creativity.

An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.

The context of the application is well considered, with extensive use of relevant examples.

Application and deployment extend beyond established conventions.  Innovation and creativity evident throughout.

Outstanding levels of application and deployment skills. Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and techniques.

5. Skills for Professional Practice

Demonstrates attributes expected in professional practice including: individual initiative and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media to communicate (including written and oral); clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation.

Communication media is inappropriate or misapplied.

Little or no evidence of autonomy in the completion of tasks.

Work is poorly structured and/or largely incoherent.

Media is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.

Poor independent or collaborative initiative.

Work lacks structure, organisation, and/or coherence

Can communicate in a suitable format but with some room for improvement.

Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in group activities.

Work lacks coherence in places and could be better structured.

Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have minor errors.

Can work effectively as part of a team, with clear contribution to group activities.

Mostly coherent work and is in a suitable structure.

Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a suitable format.

Can work very well as part of a team, with very good contribution to group activities.

Work is coherent and fluent and is well structured and organised.

Can communicate professionally and, confidently in a suitable format.

Can work professionally within a team, showing leadership skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting obligations.

Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.

Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of professionalism.

Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team, showing advanced leadership skills.

Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally.

  

Student Self Evaluation Form

Student name:

 

Student P number:

 

Programme:

BA Business Portfolio

Year of programme

 

Assignment Title:

Corporate Governance and Social Responsibility.

 

This section repeats in brief the common assessment criteria detailed on previous pages. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. Using these criteria, tick the box that best indicates the level of achievement you feel you have achieved with regard to each of them.

PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS IN WHICH YOU FEEL THAT YOU HAVE PERFORMED WELL

PLEASE COMMENT ON AREAS you feel that you need TO DEVELOP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Student’s Name

 

Date

 

Student’s Signature

 

 

 

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written, Tailored to your instructions