QUESTION
Overview
200336 Business Academic Skills 2012.1
Essay Instructions (50%)
Writing academic essays is not only an important skill for succeeding at university; it also enables students to hone
general written communication skills in any setting – academic, business or personal. A good essay does not repeat what
is said in the literature. Rather, it should critically analyse the evidence and arguments presented by the authors; account
for and/or refute counter arguments; and demonstrate relationships between ideas and between theory and practice. To
that end, this assessment will enable students to bring together all the parts associated with the Learning Portfolio into one
coherent academic essay and evaluate what has been learnt throughout the entire semester.

Details
Due Date: Within the first 10 minutes of the Week 14 Workshop (week beginning 28 May) and online (Turnitin)
Length: 1000 words plus the references

Required reading
Read vUWS, ‘Five Required Readings’
Students are required to incorporate at least three (3) of the five (5) required assessment readings.
Read textbook, Chapters 12-15
These chapters detail the requirements needed to write in academic style.
Read textbook, Chapter 6: Harvard documentation
This chapter details the Harvard style of referencing and in-text citations.

Presentation and format
Students are required to download and fill in the assessment template by:
1. Typing in all required details on the coversheet.
2. Ticking all the boxes and signing the declaration.
3. Typing responses into the blank fields as indicated.
4. Removing any blank spaces/lines.
5. Printing single side only.
6. Ensuring the Turnitin Report is attached at the end of the assessment.
7. Ensuring that all pages, including the marking rubrics, are attached with a single staple in the left hand corner.

Note: All the margins, fonts and spacing are already set so there is no need to make any further adjustments.

Submission requirements
A hard copy of the assessment is due within the first 10 minutes of your assigned workshop in Week 14 along with a
copy of the Turnitin Originality Report which should be attached to the back of your assignment.  Assessments will not
be accepted without the Turnitin Originality Report. Once the 10 minute submission period in the workshop is over,
late assignments must be submitted to the School of Business’ assignment drop box and late penalties of 10% per day will
apply, including the day of the workshop.

Note: A penalty of 10% per day will apply to any submissions to the School of Business’ assignment drop box
irrespective of the time of day.
Hard copy is the only method of assignment submission. Turnitin-only submissions will not be accepted.

Extension of due date for submission
If students need to apply for a short extension of time to complete an assessment item they should attach all supporting
documentation to the completed Request for Extension form which is available from Student Central, the UWS website or
from the BAS vUWS site by going to the ‘Unit Information’ link and then ‘Administration’ and then ‘Forms’.  Requests for
extension must be submitted no later than three working days prior to the due date of the assessment task.  After that
period, requests for extensions will not be accepted and students will need to apply for special consideration.  The
completed Request for Extension form together with supporting documentation should be scanned and emailed to
bas@uws.edu.au.

1 of 2
Special consideration
If students need to apply for a special consideration, they should attach all supporting documentation to the completed
Application for Special Consideration form which is available from Student Central, the UWS website or from the BAS
vUWS site by going to the ‘Unit Information’ link and then ‘Administration’ and then ‘Forms’.  Requests for special
consideration must be submitted to Student Central no later than two working days after the assessment due date.

Early submission
If students need to submit an assessment item prior to the due date, they should attach all supporting documentation to
the completed Request for Early Submission form which is available from the BAS vUWS site by going to the ‘Unit
Information’ link and then ‘Administration’ and then ‘Forms’.  The completed form together with supporting documentation
should be scanned and emailed to
bas@uws.edu.au.

Note: Students should note that an application for extension, special consideration or early submission does not
automatically mean that it will be approved.

Late submission
A student who submits a late assessment without approval for an extension of the due date will be penalised by 10% per
day up to 10 days, i.e. marks equal to 10% of the assignment’s weight will be deducted as a ‘flat rate’ from the mark
awarded. For example, the Researching assessment task that is worth 15 marks will have 1.5 marks deducted from the
awarded mark for each late day including Saturdays and Sundays. Assessments will not be accepted after the marked
assessment tasks have been returned to students who submitted the task on time.  Late submissions should be submitted
as follows:
Parramatta Campus:  After-hours assignment box outside Building EQ
Campbelltown Campus:  BAS assignment box in foyer of Building 11
Bankstown Campus:  Reception, School of Business, Building 20, from 9.30 am to 4.00 pm.

Assessment task
Based on the Learning Portfolio assessment, write a 1000 word academic essay addressing the question below. Students
should include six (6) to ten (10) scholarly references which include at least three (3) of the Five Required Resources
found on vUWS in the Assessments sub-folder called Essay – Week 14, as well as any other references that may help
them support their arguments. That is, only references that have been cited in-text should be listed in the reference list.

The essay should have a clear structure which includes:
1. An introduction that:
a. Includes a few general statements about the topic to clarify your interpretation of the question;
b. Includes a thesis statement that presents your position on the topic; and
c. Outlines the main points that support your position.
2. A body that:
a. Includes a series of logically developed arguments that support your position and
b. Ensures that each argument and/or sub-argument is supported by evidence and is elaborated upon.
3. A conclusion that:
a. Summarises the main points discussed in the body of the essay;
b. Restates the thesis statement; and
c. Includes a final comment that does not introduce any new ideas.
4. Cohesive text that aids with the logical flow of the arguments presented.
5. A reference list which includes only the resources that are used in the body of the text (i.e. in-text citations)

Note: This assessment will evaluate what students have learnt throughout the semester.
You must use at least three (3) of the Five Required Resources found in the Essay – Week 14 folder.

Assessment
question
By using corporate social responsibility (CSR) the tobacco industry is seeking to change
their unethical public image. Evaluate this strategy using three ethical principles of the
Global Business Standards Codex.
2 of 2

SOLUTION

Assessment question

By using Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) the tobacco industry is seeking to change their unethical public image. Evaluate this strategy using three ethical principles of the Global Business Standards Codex.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is defined as an obligation which every company should pursue in the form of long term goals to do some good to the society and these obligations are beyond the regulations of law and economics (Ruggie, 2002) . Which means the business conducted by any organization should be in completely ethical manner and should consider the interest of wider community, respond in a positive manner towards the upcoming societal expectations and priorities and an obligation towards all the stakeholders, not juts the shareholders.

Ethics are defined as  the process of differentiating the good and  right from the bad and wrong and in order to do that we need moral or social responsibility to pursue the good and right. This is the reason why social responsibility in case of corporate , which is defined as corporate social responsibility goes hand in hand with the business ethics. The tobacco industry has been the worst impacted due to their unethical image in the past as they have been facing many lawsuits, bad image and causing harm to the environment and society. That is why 8 governing ethical principles have been brought together to create and evaluate the Code of Conduct and are called Global Business Standards Codex (Arson, 2011).

The Transparency Principle of the Global Business Standards Codex (GBSC) specifies that any organisation should depict truthfulness, avoid deception with proper disclosure and should have candour and objectivity in their goals. But if we see the case of tobacco companies they developed CSR as a concept from the realisation that they need to redress their adverse impact on the society mainly on the issues like human rights, environment and labour practices (Hirschhorn, 2001). The development of CSR through examination of internal documents of transnational tobacco company Phillip Morris it is evident that they realise marketing tobacco is antithetical in the light of social responsibility. Although they follow the Transparency Principle of GBSC but the proper disclosure and truthfulness part is found missing in the internal documents which is unethical on the part of the company.

Moreover the CSR concept is just a tool to deceive their stakeholders by devoting resources and attention to the CSR, but fundamentally they remain the same by improperly influencing the scientific studies commissioned by them and also silencing the scientists who were of different opinion, depicting the tobacco companies in bad light and indicates unethical behaviour which they are doing by hiding under the umbrella of CSR.

Another ethical Code of Conduct of GBSC that is The Dignity Principle says that the ethical company should show respect for individual, privacy and confidentiality, learning and development, concern towards health and safety and employment security. But in case of tobacco industry their internal documents show that they are merely trying to rehabilitate their corporate image using the activities related to CSR and on the other hand they are trying to carry on with their traditional business practices of  combating regulations and litigations by improper and unethical manipulation of scientific studies, influencing the press coverage’s and giving their best shot to convince the regulators and  the public that the regulation of their  product should not be further warranted, mainly on the issues of second hand smoke (Freidman, 2009). The judge’s conclusion in a litigation case against tobacco company mentioned that the tobacco defendants publically denied whatever they acknowledged internally: that second-hand smoke is hazardous to the non-smokers, shows how much concerned the tobacco companies are towards the health and safety of the community or society (Trail testimony of John P.Ripp: United States of America Vs. Phillip Morris USA Inc., 2004). This clearly shows that they are trying to hide the health and safety aspects of tobacco products and merely using CSR as a sword and a shield to protect their image, which is completely unethical as per GBSC’s Dignity Principle.

The Fiduciary Principle of GBSC states that the corporate should follow the code of conduct and be ethical in their practices by being diligent and loyal towards their consumers. The tobacco industries worldwide incorporated the social responsibility factors in their tobacco production by using the green supply chains and it was mentioned on the websites and tried to clear their image in front of their consumers due to growing public awareness regarding the issues related to tobacco farming. Whereas, the picture is totally different, the millions of hectares of tobacco farms cause environmental damage like soil depletion, deforestation and soil erosion, pesticide and nicotine poisoning of workers, water table pollution and child labour mainly in developing countries (Otanez and Glantz, 2012). On top of these concerns the profit maximising tobacco companies in order to gain maximum benefits negotiate very low prices which promotes indirectly child labour and enhances debt servitudes. These unethical practices followed by them clearly indicate that they are totally disloyal towards their customer and do not follow the Fiduciary principle of GBSC.

In conclusion, it has been proved that corporate social responsibility is just  definitely trying to change their unethical image by publically accepting that tobacco smoking is injurious to health and on their website too they have accepted and mentioned the hazards which occur due to smoking, but from the evidence and their actions of hiding the true and real information from their stakeholders (Palazzo and Richter, 2005) , they are not following the codes of conduct as mentioned in Global Business Standards Codex. This is the reason why their actions are considered unethical from the perspective of the Transparency Principle, Dignity principle and Fiduciary Principle of GBSC. Finally their unethical steps of incorporating green supply chains in CSR, hiding the real consequences of second-hand smoke and trying to hide the facts by manipulating the scientific studies also point that fundamentally the tobacco companies have not changed. It is just to clear their image they are using CSR as a camouflage to hide their true picture which is completely unethical as per the GBSC standards (Joyner and Payne, 2002). Moreover the basic fact which every citizen very well knows that tobacco kills cannot be denied, so whatever their efforts might be towards doing good to the society in the form of CSR, it will take time for tobacco companies to clean their unethical image.

Bibliography

Arson (2011) GLOBAL BUSINESS STANDARDS CODEX-(GBS) AND EXAMPLES.human resources management , 8 July, [Online], Available: http://arson04.blogspot.in/2011/07/global-business-standards-codex-gbs-and.html [29 May 2012].

Freidman, L.C. (2009) ‘Tobacco Industry Use of Corporate Social Responsibility Tactics as a Sword and a Shield on Secondhand Smoke Issues’, Jaournal of Law ,Medicine & Ethics, pp. 819-827.

Hirschhorn, N. (2001) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and the tobacco industry: hope or hype?’, Tobacco Control, 15 July, pp. 447-453.

Joyner, B.E. and Payne, D. (2002) ‘Evolution and Implementation: A study of values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 297-311.

Otanez, m. and Glantz, S.A. (2012) Social Responsibility in tobacco production? Tobacco companies’ use of green supply chains to obscure the real costs of tobacco farming., 3 January, [Online], Available: tobaccocontrol.bmj.com [29 May 2012].

Palazzo, G. and Richter, U. (2005) ‘CSR Business as usual? The Case of the Tobacco Industry’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 61, pp. 387-401.

Ruggie, J.G. (2002) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and the global impact’, Journal of Corporate Citizenship, vol. 5, pp. 27-36.

Trail testimony of John P.Ripp: United States of America Vs. Phillip Morris USA Inc. (2004), 28 October, [Online], Available: http://tobaccodocuments.org/data/RUPPJ102804Am.html [29 May 2012].

LG72

But you can order it from our service and receive complete high-quality custom paper.  Our service offers BUSINESS  essay sample that was written by professional writer. If you like one, you have an opportunity to buy a similar paper. Any of the academic papers will be written from scratch, according to all customers’ specifications, expectations and highest standards.”