|
|
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY
COURSE CODE: "BUS 301-2"
COURSE NAME: "Business Ethics"
SEMESTER & YEAR:
Spring 2015
|
SYLLABUS
INSTRUCTOR:
Colin Biggs
EMAIL: [email protected]
HOURS:
TTH 4:30 PM 5:45 PM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS:
45
CREDITS:
3
PREREQUISITES:
Prerequisite: Junior Standing
OFFICE HOURS:
|
|
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This is an engaging, hands-on course which gives students an opportunity to explore for real some of the key ethical issues and challenges facing those working - and those about to work - in our increasingly global, multi-cultural world economy.
It has been designed both to explore and then to critically challenge our decision-making frameworks about what is right and wrong in business and commerce.
|
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
The course will use readings, cases, videos, debates and role-plays to explore how espoused absolute or relative standards of right and wrong are constantly conflicted by the competing responsibilities and demands of multiple stakeholders, with often highly divergent value-sets, frequently spread across significantly different cultures.
Students will come to appreciate, in a practical, experiential manner, the fundamental irony that in a course on business ethics there are rarely right answers, or wrong answers, but rather well-argued, nuanced, and more (or less) compelling (and well-intentioned) solutions to complex moral deliberations.
Consider for example (as we will in the class) the question of whether Google should have entered the Chinese market, offering millions of Chinese access to what has been described as one of the greatest tools for democratic self-determination (a freely searchable internet) - and also providing Google with access to one of the most important commercial markets in the world - given the insistence of the Chinese authorities that Google should be prepared (routinely and regularly) to disclose confidential information on its users to said authorities.
By the end of the course students will be able to:
- confidently articulate why neither 'yes' nor 'no' are helpful answers
- set out in relevant detail far more reflective yet useable answers
- anchor that very discussion in the wider context of recent accounts of alleged compliance by Google (and other giants in the technology arena) with US authorities.
|
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
Students should come out of the course with a clearer idea of why they hold some actions (and attitudes) to be right and others wrong, and - importantly- with a detailed, nuanced understanding of some of the principal reasons why others may not share their moral values.
Above all students should be better equipped, intellectually and practically, to handle business situations, particularly cross-cultural encounters, in an effective, confident, and non-judgmental manner.
|
TEXTBOOK:
|
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
|
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
| Assignment | Guidelines | Weight |
| Attendance and participation | Active involvement in hands-on class | 10% |
| Participation in University's Elevator Pitch | Mandatory involvement in this event | 10% |
| Ethics case (individual): 1 | Individual case analysis and write-up | 10% |
| Ethics case (individual): 2 | Individual case analysis and write-up | 10% |
| Group assignment: 1 | Research based group project and formal presentation | 30% |
| Group assignment: 2 | Research based group project and formal presentation | 30% |
-ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
AWork of this quality directly addresses the question or problem raised and provides a coherent argument displaying an extensive knowledge of relevant information or content. This type of work demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate concepts and theory and has an element of novelty and originality. There is clear evidence of a significant amount of reading beyond that required for the cours
BThis is highly competent level of performance and directly addresses the question or problem raised.There is a demonstration of some ability to critically evaluatetheory and concepts and relate them to practice. Discussions reflect the student’s own arguments and are not simply a repetition of standard lecture andreference material. The work does not suffer from any major errors or omissions and provides evidence of reading beyond the required assignments.
CThis is an acceptable level of performance and provides answers that are clear but limited, reflecting the information offered in the lectures and reference readings.
DThis level of performances demonstrates that the student lacks a coherent grasp of the material.Important information is omitted and irrelevant points included.In effect, the student has barely done enough to persuade the instructor that s/he should not fail.
FThis work fails to show any knowledge or understanding of the issues raised in the question. Most of the material in the answer is irrelevant.
-ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS:
This is a highly participative, hands-on course where your absence will impact negatively on the learning outcome of your classmates. Absences should be limited to two per course and should be supported by medical evidence or agreed in advance.
|
|
|
ACADEMIC HONESTY
As stated in the university catalog, any student who commits an act of academic
dishonesty will receive a failing grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred.
In addition, acts of academic dishonesty, irrespective of the weight of the assignment,
may result in the student receiving a failing grade in the course. Instances of
academic dishonesty will be reported to the Dean of Academic Affairs. A student
who is reported twice for academic dishonesty is subject to summary dismissal from
the University. In such a case, the Academic Council will then make a recommendation
to the President, who will make the final decision.
|
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING OR OTHER DISABILITIES
John Cabot University does not discriminate on the basis of disability or handicap.
Students with approved accommodations must inform their professors at the beginning
of the term. Please see the website for the complete policy.
|
|
|
SCHEDULE
|
|
|
Week
|
Topic
|
Reading *
|
Principal activities
|
|
1
|
Introduction to business ethics.
Absolute and relative perspectives.
The role of culture
|
Of headhunters and soldiers: separating cultural and ethical relativism
Renato Rosaldo
|
Group discussion
Video on child slavery
|
|
2
|
Stakeholders and their differing responsibilities: the case of human organ trafficking
|
BBC report
|
Formal debate
|
|
3
|
Ethical values as a partial means of defining a culture versus cultures as a way of defining (relative) ethical values
|
Case: Crisis in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Colin Biggs
|
First assignment: case study
|
|
4
|
First Elevator Pitch (EP): background, issues and preparation
|
Guide to EP
|
Presentations
|
|
5
|
Do the means justify the ends? Stakeholders, cultural relativism (again), and the notion of a hierarchy of values
|
Reading to be assigned on Edward Snowden
|
Group assignments through Eggup, and group discussions
|
|
6
|
Your means and my means: relativism and the maintenance of power
|
Reading on Google in China
|
Group discussions and presentations
|
|
7
|
EP research, preparation and critique
|
EP guide
|
Practice presentations
|
|
8
|
The relationship between law and ethics: hierarchies of values (again)
Review of alternative bases of ethical theory: from principles to consequences
|
BBC case
Colin Biggs
|
Second assignment: case study
|
|
9
|
The stakeholder rights of customers and citizens – and their responsibilities
|
Crane and Matten, chapter 8
|
|
|
10
|
Employee rights and responsibilities
|
Montreal, Maine and Atlantic case study
Colin Biggs
|
Case review
|
|
11
|
Civil society organisations (CSOs)
|
Crane and Matten, chapter 10
|
Third assignment: group project and presentation
|
|
12
|
Corporate social responsibilities
|
Starbucks’ Social Responsibility Report 2013
|
Group discussion
|
|
13
|
Sustainability and the rights of grandchildren
|
Rauch: Will Frankenfood save the planet?
|
Group research
|
|
14
|
Group presentations
|
|
Fourth assignment: group project and presentation
|
* There is NO assigned textbook for this course. Learning materials will instead include articles, cases (including several written by the instructor), and video and other digital media.
There will be a strong emphasis on building students’ skills in arguing for particular solutions to business ethical challenges. This will operate both at the individual level – all students will be required to take part in the Elevator Pitch (for which they will be coached) – and the group level. To help form effective groups we are piloting the use of a diagnostic tool called Eggup. See https://www.eggup.net/
Full details of both the Elevator Pitch and Eggup will be provided separately.
|
|
|