1

BUSN 220BUSINESS ETHICS(3 credits)
School of Business – Cincinnati Christian University
Fall 2013

Instructor: Aaron Burgess (mailto:)

Face-to-FaceMeeting Times:
Wednesdays 9-10AM
(* 8/28; 9/4; 9/11; 9/25; 10/9; 10/23; 10/30; 11/6; 11/20;

12/4; 12/11; 12/18)

Online Meetings:
Weekly Online Discussion Forums & Assignments starting on the week of 9/4

Classroom:Worship & Ministry Blg. Rm. 121
* Orientation for the Course is Monday 8/28. We will review the syllabus and the course on Moodle.Do not miss this session!

Course Description:

A study of the ethical foundations for sound decision making in management with a focus on how managers incorporate ethical values into corporate governance and strategy to benefit all of society. A special emphasis will be placed on biblical ethics and its influence on managerial decisions.

Course Learning Outcomes:
After completing this course the student will be able to:

  1. Discuss ethical issues facing managers and supervisors in the modern business world.
  2. Demonstrate applied learning by applying ethical theories to the case studies in this course and thus be more capable of recognizing ethical dilemmas in work settings.
  3. Suggest what an ethical business dilemma is, how the dilemma came to be, and the possible outcomes for the dilemma.
  4. Demonstrate the ability to take an ethical position on a controversial issue and be able to defend your position.
  5. Understand and demonstrate how good ethical decision making strengthens an organization and leads to profits.

Textbook:

Business Ethics: Decision Making for Personal Integrity & Social Responsibility, 3rd Edition.
ISBN-13: 978-0-07-802945-5
Author(s): Hartman, Laura; DesJardins, Joseph; MacDonald, Chris
Publisher: McGraw-Hill
* Please make sure you purchase the 3rd edition as some assignments will be directly related to the textbook.

STUDENT ASSIGNMENTS and GRADE BREAKDOWN

Students in this course will be evaluated by the College's standard grading system. You should refer to the Student Handbook or the College Catalog for further details. The criteria for determining that grade will be as follows:

  1. Online Discussion Forums in Moodle (30%)

This course will be a blended course. A blended course meets in both online and face-to-face settings. The face-to-face meetings for this course are mandatory and absences will not be excused for any reason. If you must miss a face-to-face meeting you will need to make arrangements with the instructor to make up the absence with an assignment. Missing a face-to-face meeting without making arrangements to make up the absence will severely impact your grade. The following dates are set for face-to-face (F2F) meetings:

8/26; 9/4; 9/11; 9/25; 10/9; 10/23; 10/30; 11/6; 11/20;

12/4; 12/11; 12/18(Wed, WM 121)

On the days where there is no face-to-face meeting we will meet online in the form of discussion forums. These discussion forums are also mandatory and I will be actively involved in monitoring the weekly discussion posts. I can also monitor the time you spend online. I may even respond to your posts. If you do not participate in a discussion forum your grade will be severely impacted. There will be no discussion forums for the week of Spring Break (March 4-8).
You will need to log into the course at and post responses to the discussion forums. In our first meeting I will demonstrate how to use the discussion forums online. There will be questions in the discussion forum related to readings in the textbook. You will post your initial response (250 words) by Wednesday evening of the week’s discussion forum and two responses to classmate by the end of the week (Saturday).

You will be graded on the quality of your initial response and the response to your classmate. I will be grading each of your posts based upon the following statements:

  • You demonstrated clear, insightful critical thinking in your initial answer and responded to the discussion question in a manner that demonstrates to me that you read the textbook and course materials.
  • You demonstrated clear, insightful critical analysis of your classmate’s postings.
  • Your sentence structure is complete with correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization, varied diction, and word choices. Your assignment length is correct with sources correctly cited.

If I can answer “yes” to each of these questions you will receive full credit for your discussion forum for that week. If I cannot answer “yes” I will deduct points from your grade.
Note: A rubric is included in this syllabus that details further the requirements for this assignment.

  1. Business Ethics Case Studies(20%)

You will be required to prepare five business ethics case study analyses throughout the semester. These cases will be provided to you in a folder on Moodle. You are to read the cases in their entirety and answer the questions that are associated with the case. The case analysis should be writtenin paragraphs and should contain great detail and direct connections to the textbook readings & other course materials (double spaced). The more you incorporate ideas from the textbook readings, the higher your grade will be.

Cases will be due on Wednesdays of our face-to-face meetingsand we will be discussing our cases and the answers in class. You will be asked to stand in front of the class and give your answers so you must bring a copy of your case study to class. Students who are not prepared with their cases on the due dates will be severely limited in their ability to participate in classroom instructions. This will affect your grade. Here are the case studies and the due dates:

C#1 - The Ford Pinto (Due 9/11)
C#2 – Poverty in America (Due 10/9)
C#3 – One Nation Under Wal-Mart (Due 10/23)
C#4 – Yahoo in China (Due 11/6)
C#5 – Facial Discrimination (Due 11/20)

Each case analysis should be 3 to 4 pages in total length. Any analysis shorter than 3 pages or that does not meet the formatting requirement will be given a zero. The analysis should be typewritten with 1 inch margins and double spaced throughout. Use Times New Roman font (12 pt.). You can cite other sources such as the internet or your textbooks or class notes in helping to solve the case but you must give proper citation in MLA. Grammar and sentence structure will be evaluated. Poorly written answers will receive low scores.

Note: A rubric is included in this syllabus that details further the requirements for this assignment.

  1. Group Case Study Project & Presentation (40%) – Due 12/412/11

Case Question: Are Pay Day Loan Companies Ethical?

Presentation Details: You will be assigned to a group and will answer the above question in regards to the Business Week article. This presentation will be in front of the entire class and should include powerpoint slides and be 25 minutes in length. Some groups will be assigned the pro argument while others will be assigned the con-argument. In other words, some will argue that they are ethical and others that they are not ethical. Each group will breakdown the issue in the manner presented below and present it using a power-point presentation and handouts/other visual aids. The presentation should contain the discussion of formal ethical theories and the project grade will be determined by how well the group defended their stance.

OUTLINE OF THE PRESENTATION:

Part 1: INDUSTRY ANALYSIS. Give an overview of the payday loan industry & profile two leading firms in this industry. What is the market? Who are its customers? How do they advertize? Who are the investors in these companies? How do they compete? How is the industry regulated? What are the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) for these companies? Your analysis could also include a visit to a payday loan branch or an interview with a manager of a branch. Also, interview someone who uses them regularly.

Part 2: WHAT ARE THE ETHICAL ISSUES? What ethical principles emerge when discussing this issue? If you applied a rules based approach what are the moral rules involved? If you apply an ends based approach what are the benefits and harms to society? If you apply a care-based approach what are the benefits and harms to the individual? What might the Bible have say about this issue?

Part 3: YOUR DECISION & RECOMMENDATIONS. Should the industry be allowed to continue on ethical grounds? Why or why not? If yes, what can government do to regulate the industry to protect consumers? What should the church’s response be to the pay day loan industry?

Each student will also prepare a 7 page summary of the presentation.

Note: A rubric is included in this syllabus that details further the requirements for this assignment.

  1. Mid-Term Exam(10%)

An open book Mid-Term Exam will be distributed via Moodle around 10/23. The Mid-Term will be due 11/20. More details about the requirements will be provided in class and on Moodle.

ATTENDANCE AND ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

The attendance policy in the CCU student handbook will apply to this course: students who miss more than two face-to-face meetings of the class will receive the grade of FA (failure due to absences) unless they can document that their absences were for school-sponsored travel, illness or family emergency. Students who are chronically tardy or asleep or who read, play computer games, instant message or do other “multitasking” in class may also be counted absent. No other specific penalty for absences will be assessed, but students are reminded that there is no substitute for active participation in class sessions. Likewise, policies regarding academic integrity as published in the CCU student handbook will apply in this course.

Disabilities and Special Accommodations

Students who require academic accommodations due to any documented physical, psychological, or learning disability should request assistance from the Academic Support Director, Marie Reeves, within the first two weeks of class. The Academic Support Office is located in the lower level of the Worship and Ministry Building (room 153). You may also contact the office by phone (244-8420)

Criterion /
A-level qualities
(90–100) /
B-level qualities
(80–89) /
C-level qualities
(70–79) /
D- or F-level qualities
(60–69 or below 60)
Completeness / Complete in all respects; reflects all requirements / Complete in most respects; reflects most requirements / Incomplete in many respects; reflects few requirements / Incomplete in most respects; does not reflect requirements
Understanding / Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of thetopic(s)andissue(s) / Demonstrates an accomplished understanding of thetopic(s)andissue(s) / Demonstrates an acceptable understanding of thetopic(s)andissue(s) / Demonstrates an inadequate understanding of the topic(s)andissue(s)
Analysis / Makes appropriate and powerful connections between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading; demonstrates complete command of the strategic concepts and analytical tools studied / Makes appropriate connections between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading; demonstrates good command of the strategic concepts and analytical tools studied / Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between the issues and concepts studied in the reading; demonstrates limited command of the strategic concepts and analytical tools studied / Makes little or no connection between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading
Supports diagnosis and opinions with strong arguments and evidence; presents a balanced and critical view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective / Supports diagnosis and opinions with reasons and evidence; presents a fairly balanced view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective / Supports diagnosis and opinions with limited reasons and evidence; presents a somewhat one-sided argument / Supports diagnosis and opinions with few reasons and little evidence; argument is one-sided and not objective
Research / Supplements case study with relevant and extensive research into the present situation of the company; clearly and thoroughly documents all sources of information / Supplements case study with relevant research into the present situation of the company; documents all sources of information / Supplements case study with limited research into the present situation of the company; provides limited documentation of sources consulted / Supplements case study, if at all, with incomplete research and documentation
Writing mechanics / Writing demonstrates a sophisticated clarity, conciseness, and correctness; includes thorough details and relevant data and information; extremely well-organized / Writing is accomplished in terms of clarity and conciseness and contains only a few errors; includes sufficient details and relevant data and information; well-organized / Writing lacks clarity or conciseness and contains numerous errors; gives insufficient detail and relevant data and information; lacks organization / Writing is unfocused, rambling, or contains serious errors; lacks detail and relevant data and information; poorly organized
MLA guidelines / Uses MLA guidelines accurately and consistently to cite sources / Uses MLA guidelines with minor violations to cite sources / Reflects incomplete knowledge of MLA / Does not use MLA guidelines

Grading Rubric -- Business Ethics Case Studies

Grading Rubric -- Business Ethics Final Oral Presentation

Excellent
A / Good
B / Fair
C / Poor
D or F
CONTENT / Shows a full understanding of the topic. / Shows a good understanding of the topic. / Shows a fair understanding of parts of the topic. / Does not seem to understand the topic or the business very well.
SPEAKS CLEARLY / Speaks clearly and distinctly all (100 -95%) of the time, and mispronounces no words. / Speaks clearly and distinctly all (100 -95%) of the time, and mispronounces one word. / Speaks clearly and distinctly all (94-85%) of the time, and mispronounces no more than one word. / Often mumbles or cannot be understood OR mispronounces more than one word.
PREPAREDNESS / Speaker is completely prepared and has obviously rehearsed. Well scripted and written out in advance. / Speaker seems pretty prepared but might have needed a couple of more rehearsals.
Outlined with no or little scripting / Speaker is somewhat prepared but it is clear that rehearsal was lacking.
No Script / Speaker does not seem prepared to record
STAYS ON TOPIC / Stays on topic all (100) of the time. / Stays on topic most (99 - 90%) of the time. / Stays on topic some (89 - 75%) of the time. / It was hard to tell what the topic was.
Images/Visual Aid / Content well organized with no or grammatical errors. Excellent use of color graphics, effects to enhance project. / Content organized with three or fewer errors. Good use of font, color graphics, effects to enhance project. / Content logically organized with four or fewer errors. Excellent use of font, color graphics, effects, but these sometimes distract from the content. / No clear or logical organized structure with more than four errors. Use of font, color graphics, effects, but these are distracting.
EYE CONTACT / Speaker makes eye contact with every person in the room on several occasions. / Speaker makes eye contact with some people in the room on a few occasions. / Speaker makes eye contact with only one or two people on less than a few occasions. / Speaker does not seem to make eye contact with anyone at all. Overuse of visual aid as a focus.

Grading Rubric -- Business Ethics Discussion Forum(s)

Criteria / Unacceptable
D or F / Acceptable
C / Good
B / Excellent
A
Frequency / Participates not at all. / Participated the minimum required times in most forums. / Participated the minimum required times in all forums. / Went beyond the posting requirements in every forum.
Initial Assignment Posting / Posts no assignment. / Posts adequate responses with superficial thought and preparation; doesn’t address all aspects of the task. / Posts well developed responses that addresses all aspects of the task; lacks full development of concepts. / Posts well developed responses that fully addresses and develops all aspects of the task.
Follow-Up Postings / Posts no follow-up responses to others. / Posts shallow contribution to discussion (e.g., agrees or disagrees); does not enrich discussion. / Elaborates on an existing posting with further comment or observation. / Demonstrates analysis of others’ posts; extends meaningful discussion by building on previous posts.
Content
Contribution / Posts information that is off-topic, incorrect, or irrelevant to discussion. / Repeats but does not add substantive information to the discussion. / Posts information that is factually correct; lacks full development of concept or thought. / Posts factually correct, reflective and substantive contribution;
advances discussion.
Clarity & Mechanics / Posts long, unorganized or rude content that may contain multiple errors or may be inappropriate. / Communicates in friendly, courteous and helpful manner with some errors in clarity or mechanics. / Contributes valuable information to discussion with minor clarity or mechanics errors. / Contributes to discussion with clear, concise comments formatted in an easy to read style that is free of grammatical or spelling errors.