0% found this document useful (0 votes)
3 views5 pages

Module 8 Post Class Questions

This document outlines an assignment for a Business Ethics course, requiring students to apply four ethical tests to various South African scenarios. Students must provide structured reasoning, original analysis, and personal examples while adhering to academic integrity. The assignment includes multiple case studies and a marking rubric to guide assessment.

Uploaded by

percywendy565
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
3 views5 pages

Module 8 Post Class Questions

This document outlines an assignment for a Business Ethics course, requiring students to apply four ethical tests to various South African scenarios. Students must provide structured reasoning, original analysis, and personal examples while adhering to academic integrity. The assignment includes multiple case studies and a marking rubric to guide assessment.

Uploaded by

percywendy565
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

MODULE 8: POST CLASS EXERCISE

Course: Business Ethics


Due: 02 April 2026 @ 23h59
Marks: 35

Purpose
This assignment requires you to apply the FOUR ethical tests (Legal, Company
Rules, Fairness, Disclosure) to South African scenarios. You must demonstrate
structured reasoning and original thinking.

Academic Integrity
You may use resources to understand concepts, but your analysis must be your
own. You may be asked to explain your answers orally.

Instructions
- Answer ALL questions.

- Answers should be typed except for the Part 4.

- Use the FOUR ethical tests in every answer.

- Follow the required structure for each test.

- Include ONE real-life example from your own experience in each case.

PART 0: Thinking Process (5 marks)


1. Write the FOUR ethical tests in your own words.

2. Briefly explain how you approached the case.

3. Identify one personal challenge you experienced.

CASE STUDY 1: Hiring & Nepotism (10 marks)


A manager in a local municipality must hire a new administrative officer.

Two candidates apply:


- Candidate A: Highly qualified with strong experience
- Candidate B: Less qualified, but a relative of the manager
The manager hires Candidate B.

Use the following structure for EACH test:

Test Your Analysis

Legal

Company Standards/Rules

Fairness

Disclosure

CASE STUDY 2: Load Shedding & Business Fees (10 marks)

A small business owner buys a generator to continue operating during load


shedding.

To cover fuel costs, the owner:


- Charges customers an additional 'energy fee'
- Does not clearly explain this charge

Apply the same structure as above.

CASE STUDY 3: Data Privacy (10 marks)

A South African mobile app collects user data (location and spending habits) and
sells this data to third-party companies.

Users agreed to the terms and conditions but did not read them.

Apply the same structure as above.

PART 4: Final Judgement (Handwritten – 5 marks)

Write 8–10 lines explaining 3which case is the MOST unethical? Justify your
answer using the framework.
For this section you must do it in handwriting and submit as a photo or
scanned page.
MODULE 8: MARKING RUBRIC

This rubric explains how your assignment will be assessed. Use it as a guide
when preparing your answers.

Criteria Excellent Competent Developing / Limited


(Partial
(Full Marks) Marks)

Legal Test (5 marks) Clearly explains Basic Incorrect or unclear


legality AND explanation understanding of legality
distinguishes of legality but
between legal vs lacks depth
ethical

Company Standards/ Accurately Mentions Little or no reference to


Rules (5 marks) applies company rules but company rules
rules and lacks full
explains ethical explanation
implications

Fairness (5 marks) Clearly identifies Identifies Fails to identify


stakeholders and some stakeholders or fairness
explains impact in stakeholders issues
depth but
explanation
is limited

Disclosure (5 marks) Strong Basic No clear understanding of


explanation of mention of disclosure test
public justification disclosure
and transparency but lacks
depth

Application & Applies all tests Applies tests Answers are mostly opinion
Reasoning (5 marks) clearly with but with little structure
strong reasoning reasoning is
and examples weak or
incomplete
Overall Structure & Well-structured, Some Poor structure, difficult to
Clarity (5 marks) clear, logical, and structure but follow, lacks clarity
easy to follow inconsistent
or unclear in
places

Personal Example (3) Relevant and well Some Missing or unclear


integrated relevance

Handwritten Section Clear, structured, Some Weak or unclear


(5) shows structure
understanding

You might also like