Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Unit Code:
5K4Z1008
Governance Ethics and Law (GEL)
For contact information please see Moodle
Unit Leader(s):
Claire Fitzsimons
Submission Date: See date on Moodle. It is strongly advised that submission is commenced at the latest by 8.30pm on the day of submission to allow time for uploading Digital Submission Instructions: Please submit via the Moodle submission point for the unit
Feedback Return Date: See date on Moodle
Feedback Return Information: Please see Moodle for the return date for feedback and marks
Key task and word count (Please note that this assignment will be used as both the main and the resit assignment)
For this assignment, you need to write a 1,500-word report which critically evaluates the strength of corporate governance and the associated ethical issues in light of recent corporate scandals. Further details of some specific areas to be considered in this report are included below.
Unit Learning Outcomes:
1. Discuss the advantages and drawbacks of different forms of business organisation;
2. Identify key regulations and codes applying to companies and directors;
3. Apply the legal and ethical principles examined to actual and hypothetical scenarios.
Skills assessed:
The following programme learning outcomes will also be introduced/developed in this assessment.
PLO 1.1: Identify and interrogate relevant data and literature sources using methods appropriate to level of study and discipline PLO 1.2a: Apply theory to discussion and analysis
PLO 2.1.1: Organise work in a logical structure in order to draw conclusions that follow from line of argument PLO 2.1.2: Apply consistent and appropriate referencing and in text citations
PLO 3.1.1: Recognise, explore and reflect on key ethical issues as they affect own and other's practice PLO 3.1.2: Recognise, explore and reflect upon corporate social responsibility and sustainability issues as they affect different stakeholders
PLO 4.1.1: Identify and explain professional and commercial/corporate issues
PLO 4.1.2: Critically evaluate professional and commercial/corporate issue
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assignment Details and Instructions
Background
Trust in Corporate Governance and audit is important for the stability of capital markets and the confidence of investors and stakeholders. However, this trust has been seriously eroded over recent years due to the many corporate failings and scandals across the globe, including, for example, Volkswagen in Germany in 2015, BHS in the UK in 2016, Carilion in the UK in 2018, Patisserie Holdings in the UK in 2018 and Wirecard in Germany in 2020. All of these resulted in significant societal consequences.
Similar themes relating to the failings at these companies have emerged, such as questions over the quality of the external audit work, concerns over the effectiveness of the board and the board committees, fraudulent and unethical behaviour, poor risk management and internal control failings.
This resulted, in the UK, in various reviews into both Corporate Governance and audit, culminating in the Department of Business Energy and industrial Strategy (BEIS) publishing a White Paper on 18 March 2021 seeking views by 8 July 2021, on proposals to strengthen the UK's regulatory framework for major companies and the way they are audited, in an attempt address such issues. Since then, much watered-down proposals have been incorporated in the Queen's speech and are being taken forward to be implemented within Parliament, leading to much discussion as to whether these will be sufficient.
Your assignment task
Write a 1,500-word report which critically evaluates the strength of corporate governance and the associated ethical issues in light of recent corporate scandals.
In addressing this question, you should specifically include the following sections in your report: Introduction (100 words)
. Clear setting of the context as to why corporate governance regulation is currently an important issue.
o Highlighting specific examples of recent corporate scandals.
o Showing Corporate Governance ("CG") and audit failings is not an isolated issue.
. A very brief summary of what the report is addressing.
Consequences to society/stakeholders of corporate scandals (250 - 300 words)
. Recognition that corporate scandals have an economic impact and damage society/ fail to fulfil Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
. Evaluation of which stakeholders are impacted and how.
. Illustrate these impacts with specific recent examples.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Corporate governance (650 - 750 words)
. A brief overview of what CG is and why it is needed.
. Evaluation of best practice companies should follow for two main areas of CG (choose two of external audit, risk management, internal controls, or board of directors).
. Critical evaluation of some ways in which companies failed to meet these two chosen CG requirements. You must use at least three of the following specific corporate scandals to illustrate this: Patisserie Holdings, BHS, Carillion, Wirecard, Volkswagen and Arcadia.
Ethics (300 - 350 words)
. Evaluation of two specific examples of how an individual's unethical behaviour within the corporate scandal's examples discussed above contributed to the scandal.
. As part of your evaluation, you should refer to relevant ethical theories or models which were specifically discussed during the unit.
Conclusion (100 - 150 words)
. A brief summary of the main CG failings and unethical behaviours resulting in the corporate scandals discussed in your report.
. A conclusion, with support, as to whether CG regulation is strong enough to prevent further corporate scandals.
The number of words included for each section above is purely as guidance to assist you rather than definitive numbers as there is flexibility within this. The upper limit assumes that you will use the 10% additional allowance in the word count.
You are expected to include a header page comprising a relevant heading for the report and your name as author of the report.
The allocation of marks will be as follows:
Section
Percentage
Introduction
10
Consequences
15
Corporate governance failings
25
Ethics
20
Conclusion
10
Presentation
10
Referencing
10
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assignment instructions
The assessment criteria are detailed in the forms overleaf. The marks will be awarded based on the assessment criteria and so it is vital that you refer to these.
The report is to be 1,500 words in length + or - 10%, excluding citations, headings, tables/figures, references and appendices. The penalty applied for exceeding or falling short of this word count will be the dropping of one grade band using the stepped marking system.
A full reference list is to be shown and the body of the work must be fully cited. Students are required to use an author-date referencing style and are expected to use Cite Them Right Harvard. This version of the author-date referencing style is supported by Bloomsbury's Cite Them Right website and accompanying ebook.
The Cite Them Right website:
. Advises on how to cite and reference a broad range of source types in the Cite Them Right Harvard style.
. Encourages you to identify/correct any referencing mistakes via the 'You try' function.
. Provides guidance on How to use Cite Them Right
· Offers an online tutorial and video guidance.
. Cite Them Right content is regularly updated and new source formats are added.
If you have any queries about Cite Them Right Harvard, please email library@mmu.ac.uk
Assessment weighting
The assessment weighting is 100% of the overall mark for the Governance Ethics and Law unit and the unit will require achieving 40% for successful completion.
Resources, research and referencing.
A key element of university-level thinking, and your subsequent working life is the ability to critically analyse and evaluate information, usually from multiple sources, in order to develop an argument. This is what is expected in much of this assignment, and this is different to descriptive writing which is used to set the background and to provide evidence rather than to develop an argument.
You will be expected to undertake research in the press, academic and other professional journals to discuss the potential implications fully. A large amount of research has been undertaken in respect of corporate governance and ethics. A number of these articles will be provided to you throughout the course through Moodle each week and listed, with links, on Moodle each week. Others can be obtained through a search on Google Scholar or within the MMU library. Reference to such articles will, therefore, be expected. Failing to include such research or reference to it, may significantly impact your mark.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Further guidance to support you with the assignment will be provided in weekly lectures and tutorials and should you need further support or guidance, you can speak to your unit leader during her weekly student hours. You will be expected to complete your assessment in stages over the weeks which will coincide with the learning for those weeks.
What you MUST do:
. Use grammatically correct formal professional UK English, not USA.
. Attend all sessions and engage fully in discussions.
. Use your own words - the assignment is designed to demonstrate YOUR knowledge and understanding.
. Include a header page with a RELEVANT title for the report.
· Use headings and sub-headings.
. Use the correct voice i.e. third person.
· Use page numbers.
. You must reference your work fully.
· Proofread your work.
. You must read and follow the instructions in this assignment brief and address the supporting assessment criteria!
What you MUST NOT do:
. Do not use Wikipedia, Investopedia, business dictionary, UKessays.com or other inappropriate web sites.
. Do not submit work generated by artificial intelligence.
. Do not go over the word count of 1,500 words (+/- 10%).
. Do not leave completion until the last day.
. Do not submit late - see the Late Submission section below for details.
Late submissions
If your submission is after the deadline but within seven days of it, your mark will be capped at 40%. If you attempt to submit after the seven-day grace period, without approved mitigating factors, it will be classed as a non-submission. You will then be offered the opportunity to re-sit at the next assessment opportunity as determined by the exam board, but your mark will similarly be capped.
Please note that your tutor cannot grant extensions to the deadline, but you can contact your Personal Tutor in the first instance for guidance. All extension requests must be submitted with evidence to mitigating factors through Moodle. If you think that you will be unable to submit on time due to your health or other unforeseen issue you must apply through formal channels for Mitigating Factors.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Academic Integrity, Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism
Academic Integrity is about engaging in good academic practice. It means being honest and transparent, and demonstrating rigour and accuracy in your work. This can include the proper citation and referencing of the sources of your ideas and information, ensuring that you are using appropriate research methods, or checking that your work is free of errors.
Additional information, video tutorials and guides to support good academic practice and maintain Academic Integrity in your assignments can be found on the Academic Integrity area of the Academic and Study Skills page on Moodle.
Academic Misconduct is any action that could give you an unfair advantage in coursework, exams, or any other assessed work, which could lead to undermining the academic standards of the University. This includes practices such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating or falsification of data. Full details of the Manchester Metropolitan University guidelines for Academic Misconduct and definitions of terms can be found here.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
University Stepped Marking Guidelines
The assessment criteria are detailed in the forms overleaf. The marks will be awarded based on the assessment criteria and so it is vital that you refer to these.
Please note stepped marking is applied as below:
Mark
95 - 100%
UG Classification
Outstanding
90%
Very High First
85%
High First
78%
Mid First
75%
Low First
72%
Marginal First
68%
High 2.1
65%
Mid 2.1
62%
Low 2.1
58%
High 2.2
55%
Mid 2.2
52% Low 2.2
48%
High third
45%
Mid third
42%
Low third
38%
Marginal Fail
35%
32%
28%
Clear Fail
25%
22%
18%
Very poor Fail
15%
12%
8%
5%
2%
0%
Non submission
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Governance, Ethics and Law Coursework 2023/24 - assessment marking criteria
Assessment Marking Rubric In marking this assessment, the marking rubric below will be applied, and all aspects of the unit learning outcomes and professional skills (PLOS) will be evident.
Assessment descriptor
Intro/Context (10%) Clear setting of the context as to why corporate governance regulation is currently an important issue. Using specific examples of recent corporate scandals and showing Corporate Governance ("CG") and audit failings is not an isolated issue. A very brief summary of what the report is addressing. PLO 2.1.1/4.1.1
Less than 30%
Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
The introduction makes no reference to any context or the current environment, nor any recent example corporate scandals.
The introduction makes little reference to any context or the current environment and does not refer to recent example corporate scandals.
The introduction recognises some contextual issues relating to the current environment, but these are very limited, and the examples referred to are not appropriate.
The introduction recognises some of the key contextual issues relating to the current environment, but these could have been explained more clearly. Some recent example corporate scandals are given but not incorporated in the discussion.
Most of the key contextual issues relating to the current environment have been identified and discussed reasonably well, together with recent example corporate scandals.
Most of the key contextual issues relating to the current environment have been identified, discussed well, and supported by relevant recent example corporate scandals.
The key contextual issues relating to the current environment have been clearly identified, with excellent discussion that is fully supported by recent example corporate scandals.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assessment descriptor
Consequences to society/stakeholders (15%)
Recognition corporate scandals have an economic impact and damage society/ fail to fulfil Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Evaluation of which stakeholders are impacted and how. Illustrate these impacts with specific recent examples. ULO3 PLO 1.1, 1.2a, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 4.1.2
Less than 30%
Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
No reference to consequences to stakeholders of corporate scandals or of CSR. No examples given.
Very limited explanation of consequences to stakeholders and no examples given.
There is some reference to appropriate examples of consequences to stakeholders of corporate scandals, but these are too vague or irrelevant and not illustrated sufficiently by examples.
Appropriate examples of consequences to stakeholders, with the stakeholders impacted identified. However not fully illustrated with examples
Reasonable discussion of consequences to stakeholders, the relevant stakeholders identified and some appropriate
examples supporting this discussion.
Good discussion of consequences to stakeholders, with a number of relevant stakeholders identified and reasonable support given with appropriate examples.
Excellent and full discussion of the impact on stakeholders with the stakeholders clearly explained and full support with relevant examples.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assessment descriptor
Corporate Governance (25%) Brief overview of CG and why needed. Evaluation of best practice companies should follow for two areas of CG (two of external audit, risk management, internal controls, or board of directors). Critical evaluation of some ways cos failed to meet these two chosen CG requirements. At least three specific corporate scandals to illustrate this: (PH, BHS, Carillion, Wirecard, Volkswagen Arcadia. ULO 1/2 PLO 1.1/1.2a/2.1.1/3.1.2 4.1.1/4.1.2
Less than 30%
No consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, but rather a broad descriptive explanation of corporate governance in general and no consideration about the ways example companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements.
Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
No consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, but rather a broad descriptive explanation of corporate governance in general, although there is some attempt at discussion as to ways example companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements, but not necessarily those required.
Limited consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, although there is some attempt at evaluation of ways example companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements, albeit not always relevant to those areas required, nor using relevant examples.
Limited consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, although there is a reasonable attempt at evaluating ways companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements and these are relevant to those areas required, but not always using relevant example companies.
Some consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, with a reasonable attempt at evaluating ways companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements and these are both relevant areas and use three relevant example companies.
Clear consideration of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, with a good attempt at evaluating ways companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements, with both relevant areas and three appropriate example companies.
Full consideration and evaluation of the corporate governance requirements companies should specifically have followed, with excellent evaluation of the ways companies failed to follow these specific corporate governance requirements, using both relevant areas and appropriate example companies.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assessment descriptor
Less than 30%
Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
Ethics (20%)
Evaluation of two specific examples of how an individual's unethical behaviour in corporate scandal examples contributed to scandal. As part of your evaluation, you should refer to relevant ethical theories or models which were specifically discussed during the unit. ULO 3 PLO 1.1, 1.2a, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 4.1.2
No ethical issues identified but a very descriptive discussion on ethics in general. No theories or models mentioned.
Ethical issues discussed very broadly and vaguely with no specific ethical issues identified. Section is purely descriptive. No theories or models mentioned.
Ethical issues discussed broadly rather than clear specific examples being discussed, and section is mainly descriptive. Theories/models are mentioned but relevance not discussed.
2 relevant specific ethical issues have been identified but discussion tends to be more descriptive and little support as to why these are considered issues. Theories/models are mentioned but relevance not discussed.
2 relevant specific ethical issues have been identified with some evaluation of these issues and some support provided as to why they are issues. Theories models incorporated but only briefly
2 relevant specific ethical issues have been identified with good evaluation of these issues, clear evidence as to why they are issues and some practical examples referred to. Theories/models integrated well.
2 relevant specific ethical issues identified with excellent evaluation of these issues, clear evidence why they are issues and relevant practical examples referred to for each issue. Theories/models integrated well and discussed fully.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assessment descriptor
Less than 30%
Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
Conclusion (10%)
A brief summary of the main CG failings and unethical behaviours resulting in the corporate scandals discussed in your report. Appropriate and balanced conclusion, with support, as to whether CG regulation is strong enough to prevent further corporate scandals. PLO 2.1.1/3.1.1/ .
3.1.2/4.1.2
Conclusion does not refer to issues discussed within the report nor provide any overall conclusion.
Conclusion refers to very few of the issues discussed within the report and these are not the important ones nor is any conclusion provided.
There is limited reference within the conclusion to the issues discussed within the report and overall conclusion is vague and not justified.
Some of the issues within the report are discussed within the conclusion and an overall conclusion is included, but the link between the two is not clear and the justification/support is not clear.
Conclusion discusses the key issues identified in the report and develops from this an appropriate conclusion on the strength of corporate governance, although could be supported further.
The conclusion highlights and discusses the key issues from the report and provides a well- supported and justified conclusion on the strength of corporate governance based on this.
The conclusion has clearly identified all the key issues within the report to develop a well- thought out and supported and justified overall conclusion on the strength of corporate governance.
Manchester Metropolitan University
Faculty of Business and Law Accounting, Finance and Banking Coursework and resit coursework Brief 2023/2024
Assessment descriptor
Less than 30% Less than 30 -40%
40-49%
50-59%
60-69%
70-80%
Over 80%
Evidence of research (10%)
Evidence of independent research from a variety of sources through number of sources, proper referencing & inclusion of appropriate and correct citations. PLO1.1/2.1.2
No references or reference list included
Very limited references included and very brief incorrectly formatted reference list.
Insufficient references, report is poorly cited, references are in an incorrect format and reference list is too short and narrow in range.
Sufficient references, but insufficient citations within report and some references in incorrect format.
Adequate range of references. Reasonable citations within the report and references largely in correct format.
Very good range of references. References largely in correct format and generally correctly cited within the report
Extensive range of references, all in correct format and well cited throughout the report.
Presentation (10%)
Appropriate language and style of writing, with fine attention to detail of spelling, punctuation and grammar. PLO 2.1.1
Very poor presentation and communication, with poor language choice and style of writing and continuous spelling and punctuation errors. As a result, it is difficult to understand report.
Very poor presentation and communication, with poor language choice and style of writing and many spelling and punctuation errors.
Poor presentation, structure, communications and use of language, with a number of grammatical, spelling and punctuation errors.
Adequate presentation and language used, but structure could have been improved and there are spelling, punctuation, or grammatical errors.
Good presentation and communication. The structure for the coursework and the language used are both appropriate. With few grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors.
Excellent presentation & communication, with appropriate language, style of writing & an excellent structure. Few spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors.
An outstanding standard of presentation and communication with an appropriate structure and no noticeable errors in spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
