Final Assessment
Trimester 2, 2025
Assessment Type: Individual Weighting: 50%
Learning Outcomes Assessed: ULO1, 2, 3 and 4 Word Limit: 3,000 words (Written Report)
Time Limit: 10 minutes (Video Presentation)
Due Date: 24 November 2025 (Monday) 11:59 pm (AEDT)
All submissions must be submitted with assigned Ozford Institute of Higher Education Cover Sheet via Moodle. No late submission is accepted unless an application for special consideration is approved.
You are required top rep area written report for the following case study:
Ben is an experienced sales representative at Foxweb a large multinational information technology company. He’s worked there for years and has developed strong friendships within the company, especially with other sales representatives. Ben has been good friends with Lionel, another sales representative, since they joined the company around the same time.
Over the last months, Lionel shared some personal struggles with Ben, and Ben was doing his best to be a supportive friend. Ben knew that Lionel was dealing with some serious financial issues at home and that he was barely making ends meet, trying to support his wife and young kids while also having to financially support is aging parents. Lionel let on that he was taking some risky moves at work to come up with some more money and that he was really starting to worry about it. But he never fully disclosed what that entailed.
Unexpectedly, Lionel abruptly left the company, leaving Ben shocked and suspicious about the true nature of his colleague’s activities. Ben was assigned to take over Lionel’s sales territories and get back on track. During the transition, he discovered the extent of the financial harm that the company suffered as a result of Lionel’s actions. Through careful examination of sales transactions and accounting records, it became evident that Lionel had engaged in a fraudulent scheme.
Lionel had orchestrateda deal with an external company whereby he booked a large number of orders with delayed delivery dates. He received upfront commission payments (meaning he was paid the commission when the sale was made but not when the order was fulfilled) by his own company for nearly one hundred orders and then split that commission with the external company. In collaboration with the external firm, Lionel continuously pushed back the delivery dates every few months, ensuring the orders were never fulfilled. Despite the absence of payment from the external company, the tech company continued paying commissions to Lionel for these fictitious sales. Essentially, Lionel was being compensated for sales that were listed as orders but that were never actually fulfilled (payment for the sale was due on delivery).
Reflecting on their past conversations, Ben grew increasingly un easy, realizing that Lionel’s desperate need for quick money through sales commissions had likely driven him to engage in this fraudulent behavior. Ben felt a sense of responsibility and questioned whether he could have prevented the situation, and now, with Lionel gone from the company with no repercussions, he wondered what all of this would mean for him.
As Ben assumed the responsibility of taking over Lionell’s sales territory, the company began an internal investigation to seek any information that could shed light on the issue. This presented Ben with a moral dilemma. During the investigation, Ben was asked if he knew any information that might help the company understand and resolve the issue. Lionel’s actions - the deceit, dishonesty, and disregard for responsibility – deeply troubled Ben as they clashed with his own moral compass.
While Ben wanted to uphold his personal integrity as an individual and an employee, and disclose all he knew to the company, he worried that doing so might jeopardize his own position and potentially lead to termination if he were deemed complicit in Lionel’s actions. Additionally, Ben empathized with Lionel’s difficult circumstances, understanding that he only resorted to fraud out of desperation. Apart of him felt inclined to protect his friend and maintain their friendship, despite the wrong doings committed.
Feeling caught between conflicting interests, Ben wondered: should he choose to remain silent and move on as quickly as possible, now that Lionel has left the company, and avoid giving any information? After all, exposing the truth could lead to serious consequences for Lionel, who was already dealing with significant challenges. It could also cost Ben his friendship. But, even if the fraud was wrong, Ben knew his huge company wouldn’t really feel a big financial hit from the loss and that the product in question was not a life-or-death matter. Not every wrong can or even should be righted, Ben thought. Moreover, his job, his reputation as a sales rep and his company’s image might all be at stake if he speaks up.
Answer the following four questions:
The written report should consist of the following components:
You are required to present your responses to the case study in a video and the presentation should be made with the use of presentation slides. The presentation should take 10 minutes with minimum 6 slides. The video should be uploaded to Moodle together with the written report.
Presentation Structure Title Slide
Outline Slide-The key point of this presentation Main contents (at least 3 slides) Recommendations / Conclusion
MARKINGRUBRIC
| Criteria | High Distinction | Distinction | Credit | Pass | Fail |
| 80-100% | 70-79% | 60-69% | 50-59% | 0-49% | |
Introduction / 5 | An excellent over view of the key issues and contents of the report. | A very good overview of the key issues and contents of the report. | A good overview of the key issues and contents of the report. | An acceptable overview of the key issues and contents of the report. | Poor or missing overview of the key issues and contents of the report. |
Main Body /20 | Present an outstanding response to the case- based questions. Demonstrate an outstanding understanding of all key ethical issues for the case study. | Present a very good response to the case- based questions. Demonstrate a very good understanding of all key ethical issues for the case study. | Present a good response to the case- based questions. Demonstrate a good understanding of most key ethical issues for the case study. | Present a reasonable response to the case- based questions. Demonstrate a reasonable understanding of most key ethical issues for the case study. | Fail to provide a proper response to the case- based questions and/or demonstrate a proper understanding of most key ethical issues for the case study. |
Conclusion /2 | A clear and concise conclusion of the report | A well-written conclusion of the report. | A reasonably well- written conclusion of the report. | An acceptable conclusion of the report. | Poorly-written or missing conclusion of the report. |
Structure and Referencing /3 | The structure of the report is complete and all references are properly cited and provided in the reference list. | The structure of the report is complete and almost all references are properly cited and provided in the reference list. | The structure of the report is almost complete and most references are properly cited and provided in the reference list. | The structure of the report is acceptable and the majority of references are properly cited and provided in the reference list. | The report is incomplete and/or poorly structured and most references are not properly cited and provided in the reference list. |
Visual Aid /5 | Visual aids summarise key points well. Always simple, consistent and uncluttered. Clearly readable font style and size. No error in formatting or proofreading. | Visual aids summarise key points. Mostly simple, consistent and uncluttered. Clearly readable font style and size. Few errors in formatting and/or proofreading. | Visual aids summarise some key points. Usually simple, consistent and uncluttered. Mostly readable font style and size. Some errors in formatting and/or proofreading. | Visual aids do not summarise all key points. Complex, inconsistent and cluttered. Not always clearly readable font style and size. Many errors in formatting and/or proofreading. | Visual aids do not summarise most key points. Complicated or lacking basic content, inconsistent and/or cluttered. Many errors in formatting, proofreading |
Delivery /15 | Excellent delivery showed extensive practice and development. All speakers engaged with audience. Displayed clear pronunciation, measured ace, varied intonation and appropriate use of pausing. Audio synched perfectly with visuals. Presentation enhanced by use of body language, including eye contact, gestures, movement and emphasis. No reading of notes. All Speakers demonstrated confidence in the material being presented. Signposting directed the presentation. Clear signaling, seamless transitions and timing within guidelines. | Very good delivery showed practice and development. Most speakers demonstrated clear pronunciation, measured pace, varied intonation or appropriate use of pausing. Audio mostly synched with visuals. Effectiveness mostly enhanced by body language, including lack of eye contact, gestures, movement and emphasis. Most speakers demonstrated confidence in the material being presented. Very good signposting and transitions between speakers. Timing within guidelines. | Good delivery showed practice and development. Most speakers demonstrated clear pronunciation, measured pace, varied intonation or appropriate use of pausing. Audio mostly synched with visuals. Effectiveness mostly enhanced by body language, including lack of eye contact, gestures, movement and emphasis. Most speakers demonstrated confidence in the material being presented. Good signposting and transitions between speakers. Timing within guidelines. | Reasonable delivery showed some practice and development. Some speakers demonstrated clear pronunciation, measured ace, varied intonation or appropriate use of pausing. Audio sometimes synched with visuals. Effectiveness sometimes reduced by distracting body language, including lack of eye contact, gestures, movement and emphasis. Some speakers demonstrated lack of confidence in the material being presented. Reasonable signposting, transitions between speakers. Timings lightly outside guidelines. | Poor delivery showed little practice and development. Most speakers did not demonstrate clear pronunciation, measured ace, varied intonation or appropriate use of pausing. Audio did not synch with visuals. Effectiveness often reduced by distracting body language, including lack of eye contact, gestures, movement and emphasis. All or most speakers demonstrated lack of confidence in the material being presented. |
Total Marks /50 | Final Comments: |
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
