THBT survival in business is the responsibility of the leader and hinges fully on maximising stockholder value (e.g. lifeboat ethics are necessary and desirable and leaders who mess up must be punished)

THBT survival in business is the responsibility of the leader and hinges fully on maximising stockholder value (e.g. lifeboat ethics are necessary and desirable and leaders who mess up must be punished)

The first task in this project, once you’ve sorted out your groups, is to create the following:
1. A group/project code of conduct/ethics
2. An accountability plan
3. A skills assessment and team structure scheme
4. A weekly project reporting form
5. A project plan specifying each group members’ tasks, project milestones, and measurement criteria
These can be simple and straight to the point. Use your project management skills you’ve learned in previous modules to inform this part of your project.
Next week, you will report to the class on your progress.
The individual summative report will be 3000 words in length not including references and appendices.
The final report will include the above project management tools as appendices as well as the following substantive content:
1. One executive summary of the report (250 words)
2. A summary of each individual’s content contribution to preparing for the project presentation. (250 words)
3. Qualitative assessments of each individual’s contribution (250 words)
4. A well-researched report demonstrating the group’s approach to understanding, developing, evaluating, arguing, and rebutting the project issues, including a statement of final position of the group on the issue reached by consensus. (2250 words)

Mark range 90 – 100%
A piece of work should fall within this class if it displays characteristics of:
• Original, incisive and creative research, using relevant and contemporary literature
• Outstanding comprehension displayed
• Insightful, outstanding analysis
• Compelling evidence, supporting analysis
• Complete and authoritative piece of work
Mark range 80 – 89%
Work in this category will display characteristics of:

• Original, incisive and creative research, using relevant and contemporary literature
• Outstanding comprehension displayed, with some evidence of misconceptions/errors
• Outstanding analysis, though lacking some relevant insights
• Compelling evidence, supporting analysis
• An authoritative piece of work, though may lack completeness

Mark range 70 – 79%
Work in this category should display an excellent understanding of the assessment area, with a clear demonstration of pertinent, critical analysis. Work presented will demonstrate an excellent understanding of appropriate concepts and contemporary, contextual appreciation of literature.

Mark range 60 – 69%
Work in this category should display a high level of competence, with clear demonstration of critical analysis relevant to assessment requirement and some contemporary, contextual appreciation of literature.

Mark range 50 – 59%
Work in this category should display overall competence, however it will be lacking in analytical depth and /or display a limited comprehension of the subject matter so that the work falls short of a B grade. A good deal of the relevant content may have been presented by the student but this will be less well articulated and developed than the grade B student. The more difficult concepts will be omitted or dealt with superficially. The application of the principles and theory to the problem/question will be more limited and perhaps dealt with in a more “re-gurgitative” manner. The work may contain minor errors; however there should be no major misunderstandings.

Mark range 40 – 49%
Work will fall into this category if it contains relevant material in relation to the issues raised by the problem/question, including the central issue. The answer will be presented in a coherent and largely correct manner, although the analytical aspects and comprehension will be of a limited nature. Use of principles, theory and evidence may be poor and the overall coverage of the subject matter will be of a limited nature.

Mark range 30 – 39%
Work in this category has elements that are correct: however the work displays a number of major misconceptions that call into question the student’s comprehension of the material. The analytical contents may be very weak or even non-existent. Application of principles, theory and evidence to the problem may be weak. Overall coverage may be poor. Reference to sources or authorities may be weak or inappropriate. Structure may be weak.

Mark range – below 30%
The work is limited and contains fundamental errors that indicate a substantial lack of comprehension by the student. There will be little or no analytical content and the references to authorities and sources will very limited or non-existent. The presentation and structure of the work may be poor. The work may also be characterized by falling far short of the overall word limit and possibly repetition of material or arguments. Conclusions may be non-existent or limited.
Essential Reading
journal article » essential reading
DeTienne, Kristen Bell and Lewis, Lee W. – The Pragmatic and Ethical Barriers to Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: The Nike Case in Journal of Business Ethics (2005)
book » essential reading
Johnson, Craig E. (2014) – Meeting the Ethical Challenges of Leadership: Casting Light or Shadow (5th ed)
journal article » essential reading
McMahon, Thomas F. – Lifeboat Ethics in Business in Business Ethics Quarterly (2000)

book chapter » essential reading
Putnam,L. (2013) – SAGE Handbook of Organizational Communication
» chapter 16: “Leadership Communication”

journal article » essential reading
Robert R. Ulmer – Effective Crisis Management through Established Stakeholder Relationships : Malden Mills as a Case Study in Management Communication Quarterly (2001)

Recommended Reading
book chapter » recommended reading
Antonakis,J. et al (2004) – The Nature of Leadership
» chapter 13: “Ethics and Leadership Effectiveness”

journal article » recommended reading
BORGERSON, JANET L. – On the Harmony of Feminist Ethics and Business Ethics in Business and Society Review (2007)
journal article » recommended reading
Burton, Brian K. and Goldsby, Michael G. – The Moral Floor: A Philosophical Examination of the Connection between Ethics and Business in Journal of Business Ethics (2010)
journal article » recommended reading
Clegg, Stewart, Kornberger, Martin and Rhodes, Carl – Business Ethics as Practice in British Journal of Management (2007)
journal article » recommended reading
Dawkins & Ngunjiri – Corporate social responsibility reporting in South Africa in Journal of Business Communication (2008)
journal article » recommended reading
Faith Wambura Ngunjiri – Lessons in spiritual leadership from Kenyan women in Journal of Educational Administration (2010)
journal article » recommended reading
Grassl, Wolfgang and Habisch, André – Ethics and economics: towards a new humanistic synthesis for business in Journal of Business Ethics (2011)

book chapter » recommended reading
Hamington, M. and Sander-Staudt, M. (2011) – Applying Care Ethics to Business
» chapter 14: “Care as a Corporate Virtue”
book » recommended reading
Johnson, Craig E. (2016) – Organizational ethics : a practical approach
journal article » recommended reading
Levine & Boaks – What does ethics have to do with leadership? in Journal of Business Ethics (2013)
book chapter » recommended reading
Mendonca, M. & Kanugo, R.N. (2007) – Ethical Leadership
» chapter 6: “Cultural Contingencies of Leadership”
book chapter » recommended reading
Ogunyemi (2013) – Responsible Management: Understanding Human Nature, Ethics, and Sustainability
» chapter: “Module 3”
book chapter » recommended reading
Putnam,L. (2013) – SAGE Handbook of Organizational Communication
» chapter 16: “Leadership Communication”
journal article » recommended reading
Scholtens, Bert and Dam, Lammertjan – Cultural Values and International Differences in Business Ethics in Journal of Business Ethics (2007)
book chapter » recommended reading
Schyns and Hansbrough (2010) – When Leadership Goes Wrong
» chapter 18: “Heroic Illusions”
Due to copyright restrictions this chapter can not be scanned, please read/photocopy.
book chapter » recommended reading
Schyns and Hansbrough (2010) – When Leadership Goes Wrong
» chapter 10: “The corporate reflecting pool”
book chapter » recommended reading
Schyns and Hansbrough (2010) – When Leadership Goes Wrong (1st ed)
» chapter 6: “The nature, prevalence, and outcomes of destructive leadership”

Background Reading
book » background reading
Ciulla, Professor and Coston Family Chair in Leadership and Ethics Joanne B., Martin, Professor and Chair of Philosophy and Professor of Business Ethics Clancy and Solomon, Was Quincy Lee Centennial Centennial Professor of Business and Philosophy and Distinguished Teaching Professor Robert C. (2013) – Honest Work: A Business Ethics Reader (3rd ed)
book » background reading
Hartman, Laura Pincus, DesJardins, Joseph R. and MacDonald, Chris (2014) – Business ethics: decision-making for personal integrity and social responsibility
book » background reading
Jackson, Kevin T. (2004) – Building reputational capital: strategies for integrity and fair play that improve the bottom line
book » background reading
Johnson, Craig E. (2016) – Organizational ethics : a practical approach
book » background reading
Johnson, Larry and Phillips, Bob (2003) – Absolute honesty: building a corporate culture that values straight talk and rewards integrity
book » background reading
Palmer, Donald (2013) – Normal organizational wrongdoing: a critical analysis of theories of misconduct in and by organizations
book » background reading
Schyns, Birgit and Hansbrough, Tiffany (2010) – When leadership goes wrong: destructive leadership, mistakes, and ethical failures
book » background reading
Zsolnai, Laszlo (2011) – Spirituality and ethics in management