Homework answers / question archive / Case Study Analyses Assignment #3 (DUE: June 18th at 11:59pm) Case Study Analyses (CSAs) are short assignments in which you analyze a case using two of the ethical theories we have learned as well as your own judgment

Case Study Analyses Assignment #3 (DUE: June 18th at 11:59pm) Case Study Analyses (CSAs) are short assignments in which you analyze a case using two of the ethical theories we have learned as well as your own judgment

Business

Share With

---

Case Study Analyses Assignment #3 (DUE: June 18th at 11:59pm)

Case Study Analyses (CSAs) are short assignments in which you analyze a case using

two of the ethical theories we have learned as well as your own judgment.

For the purposes of this assignment, each of the following counts as an ethical

theory: Act Utilitarianism, Rule Utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, Ross' Prima Facie

Duties, Virtue Ethics, Care Ethics and Feminist Ethics. You may choose any two of

these ethical theories for your CSA, and you may choose the same two from assignment

to assignment. NOTE: Ethical Relativism (and its variations – Cultural Relativism,

Ethical Subjectivism), Ethical Objectivism, Shareholder Theory, etc., ARE NOT

ethical theories. DO NOT use them as ethical theories!

I will be grading each CSA based on how well you understand your chosen ethical

theories. I want you to demonstrate to me that you understand how to apply the chosen

ethical theories. That means you must work through the necessary rules, formulas, etc.

For example, if you are using Act Utilitarianism, you must construct a utility chart,

calculate utility for each person, etc. If you are using Kantian ethics, you must test it

using both formulations of the categorical imperative – i.e. Create a maxim; Universalize

it, Test it for contradictions, etc.

It is also very important that you explain why you assigned a particular utility, virtue,

duty, etc., to each person or action. Doing so demonstrates to me that you understand

how the ethical theory works and how to apply it.

CSAs should be no longer than 4 double-spaced pages, with regular font, font size,

margins, and paragraphing. They can be shorter than this and still receive an excellent

grade. However, if you exceed 4 double-spaced pages or try various tricks to avoid the

appearance of doing so your mark might noticeably suffer for that reason. NOTE: I do

not count charts, tables, etc. as part of the page limit.

There is no provision for accepting late work as you have the ability to hand the

assignment in at any time prior to the deadline. If you choose to leave it to the last minute

you run the risk of something happening that makes you unable to do your work. You

will therefore not earn any credit for that assignment. Similarly, I cannot accept deferrals

or adjusted timelines unless there are truly extraordinary circumstances.

 

Seek to answer the following questions in each CSA:

1. How would you characterize the main ethical issue in this case? For example, is the

main ethical issue an instance of fraud, employer loyalty, deception? (5 marks)

2. How would a proponent of [INSERT FIRST ETHICAL THEORY HERE] react to the

main ethical issue in this case? (15 marks for the ethical theory/5 marks for

incorporating concepts from the applicable chapter. 20 marks total)

3. How would a proponent of [INSERT SECOND ETHICAL THEORY HERE] react to

the main ethical issue in this case? (15 marks for the ethical theory/5 marks for

incorporating concepts from the applicable chapter. 20 marks total)

4. Which analysis of the main ethical issue is more convincing? Why? Why is the other

ethical theory not as convincing? (5 marks)

NOTE: You might find it useful to review the EDMF from Lecture #7 and apply it when

working through the case study. You aren’t receiving marks for this, but it may help you

identify the ethical issue, alternative actions, pros/cons, etc. – things for which you are

receiving marks.

Further, when applying the chosen ethical theories, you MUST also incorporate

concepts that we have studied since the midterm. (i.e. CSR, Fairness & NonDiscrimination, Social Action Problems, Business and the Environment, Marketing &

Advertising Ethics) Integrating chapter concepts into your ethical analysis will make for

a better answer and will result in a better grade. i.e. How might Shareholder/Stakeholder

theory affect Kantian ethics? (5 marks for each ethical theory.)

This assignment is designed to assess performance on Intended Learning Outcomes 1-4

& 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

For CSA #3, please choose one of the cases below:

Case Study #1 - Peppermint and Gold

Yukon Cornelius is a geologist who works for a small geological company. He is

hired by an elderly woman to investigate an old family claim that the family land she

resides on contains gold. She is considering selling the land and would like to know if

there is gold present, so as to get a fair price for her property since she has many children

and grandchildren and would like to ensure that they are all well taken care of after her

death. Yukon conducts a full geological investigation of the woman’s land and

determines that there is no gold present on the property. However, he does discover that

the land contains a very large peppermint mine – enough to make the elderly woman

extremely wealthy.

While Yukon likes being a geologist, he would also like to be very rich. While

preparing his report for the woman, he begins to feel conflicted. Should he include in his

report that although gold is not present on the property, it does contain a peppermint

mine? He considers leaving out the finding of peppermint on the property and buying the

land from the elderly woman – for a price greatly below its actual value – without

revealing what he knows. Not only would he profit as a result of owning the land, but he

also owns stock in a large peppermint company. If he were to allow the company to

work the peppermint mine on the land, he would also profit from an undoubted increase

in their stock value. What should Yukon do?

Case Study #2 - Beer and Jackalopes

Drunkard's Cloak, a well-known beer company, has one of its factories in Ontario

along Lake Superior. The factory produces substantial air and water pollution; however,

it does not exceed government regulations and is not breaking the law.

Unfortunately, the air and water pollution is of a high enough level that it has

begun to affect the local Jackalope population. Jackalope's are rare and highly intelligent

animals, and lab experiments have demonstrated that they are the most intelligent

mammal aside from human beings. However, Jackalopes are extremely vicious and

troublesome, often goring unsuspecting farmers, stealing whiskey from sleeping

cowboys, and attacking family pets. It is unknown why they do these things. Jackalopes

are also an oddity in nature as they contribute nothing to the ecosystem, and if they were

to go extinct, there would be no serious consequences. In fact, when troublesome

Jackalope broods have been relocated in nature, the ecosystem from which they are

removed flourishes, while the ecosystem they are transferred to suffers. Flora and fauna

are so detrimentally affected that the government has made it illegal to relocate Jackalope

broods.

Lately, Jackalopes around the Drunkard's Cloak factory have been dying. Initially

suspected to be foul play, authorities later determined that the Jackalopes died as a result

of the pollution from the Drunkard's Cloak factory. The pollution is within government

regulations and reducing the pollution will require Drunkard's Cloak to either reduce

production at that factory resulting in a substantial profit loss, or to equip the factory with

a state-of-the-art pollution reduction system – a system costing tens of millions of dollars.

At the factory's current operating levels, it is estimated that all Jackalopes in the

surrounding area will be dead within two years. What should Drunkard’s Cloak do?