MGMT 601 Assignment 2 Ethical analysis paper
MGMT 601: Assignment #2 – Three Levels of Ethical Analysis Paper
Read the posted article called “Business Leadership: Three Levels of Ethical Analysis” and write a paper discussing your understanding of the model presented and how it relates to leadership.
Use the Gibbs’ Cycle to discuss concepts in the article and relate them to how you personally deal with these type of situations. Provide example(s) to substantiate and analyze concepts from the Three Levels of Ethical Analysis paper. Discuss how your actions relate to the three levels in the paper.
Write the paper using APA style with between 8 and 10 citations and references, in addition to the textbook, including several peer reviewed references. All sources MUST HAVE: authors, publication dates, and publishers. “Anonymous” authors, and sources without dates or publishers will not be accepted as valid sources and marks will be deducted.
The paper should be at least 1750 words (8-9 pages), and should exhibit good writing and analytical skills – review the marking rubric. It holds a value of 10% of your final mark.
|Written Communication Assessment 10%|
|1-2 Did not meet expectations||3-4 Met expectations||5 Exceeded expectations|
|Writing Conventions (grammar, word use, punctuation, mechanics)||Frequent grammatical errors and misspellings inhibit readability Informal language, abbreviations and slang are used||Few grammatical errors (3 or fewer per page) Correct verb tense used Paragraphs flow from one to another Active voice pervasive||Free of grammatical errors and misspellings Effective verb tense used; Uses phrases and construction that delight as well as inform the reader Primarily active voice|
|Overall Effectiveness appearance/format||Not formatted to Specifications, Lacking professional appearance||Formatting is generally correct, acceptable professional appearance.||Assigned format followed explicitly: Exceptional professional appearance|
|Critical Thinking and Written Analyses Rubric 90%|
|Criteria||1-5 Did Not Meet Expectations||6-8 Met Expectations||9-10 Exceeded Expectations|
|Clarity||Writing is not clear. It is difficult to understand points being made. The writing lacks transitions, and few examples and/or illustrations are provided to support explanation or recommendations.||Writing is generally well organized and understood. Transitions are used to facilitate clarity. Some examples and/illustrations are used to support explanation or recommendations.||Writing is succinct, precise, effectively organized no ambiguity. Transitions, explanation and elaboration are extensive to elucidate points. Detailed illustrations and/or examples are used to support explanation & recommendations|
|Relevance||Critical issues/questions are omitted or ignored in the writing.||Most of the critical issues/questions are addressed in the writing.||All critical issues/questions are addressed completely in writing|
|Depth of Discussion /20||Ignores bias; Omits arguments Misrepresents issues; Excludes data; Includes but does not detect inconsistency of information; Ideas contain unnecessary gaps, repetition or extraneous details overlooks differences||Detects bias; Recognizes arguments; Categorizes content; Paraphrases data; Sufficient detail to support conclusions and/or recommendations||Analysis includes insightful questions; Refutes bias; Discusses issues thoroughly; Critiques content; Values information Examines inconsistencies; Offers extensive detail to support conclusions and recommendations; Suggests solutions/ implementation|
|Breadth of Discussion /20||Omits arguments or perspectives; Misses major content areas/concepts; Presents few options||Covers the breadth of the topic without being superfluous||Considers multiple perspectives; Thoroughly delves into the issues/questions; Thoroughly discusses relevant facts|
|Integration Elements of Reasoning /20||Fails to draw conclusions or conclusions rely on author’s authority rather than strength of presentation; Draws faulty conclusions; Shows intellectual dishonesty||Formulates clear conclusions with adequate support||Assimilates and critically reviews information, uses reasonable judgment, and provides balanced, well justified conclusions|
|Internally Consistent||There is little integration across the sections of the paper. Several inconsistencies or contradictions exist. Few of the issues, recommendations and explanations make sense; not well integrated.||Sections of the paper are generally well linked/connected. Only minor contradictions exist. Most of the issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated.||All sections of the paper are linked. There are no contradictions in the writing. All issues, recommendations and explanations make sense and are well integrated|