Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
BU 38880 IMCs Board of Directors Discussion
IMC’s Board of Directors
You have been elected to Investment Management Corporation’s (IMC) board of directors. The board consists of five members. Recently, by a vote of four in favor and one opposed (you were the one opposed), the board voted to give annual college scholarships in the amount of $100,000 to local students. Last year, IMC made a profit of $2 million dollars, but the board did not vote to give shareholders dividends. You are concerned that some of the other board members have violated the business judgment rule in making their decision, based on the following additional facts about the four board members who voted in favor of the annual scholarships:
Peter, who works as a guidance counselor, is newly elected to the board and has only been on the board for one month. Peter has made a cursory review of corporate records. Peter is very good friends with the CEO, who recommended in favor of the vote. Peter also has two children, ages 16 and 17.
Paul, an advertising executive, is a very busy man and attends about four meetings a year. The board meets every month. Paul has been on the board for 10 years and stays in touch with the CEO whenever he is out of town.
Mary, a CPA, has been a board member for three years. Mary just returned from a trip to Europe. After two hours of sleep, Mary reviewed all corporate records before voting.
Janice, a retired high school teacher, serves on many corporate boards of directors. Some of the corporations are competitors of IMC.
Instructions:
For your initial response, prepare an argument against one or more of the board members, suggesting that the member(s) has (have) violated the business judgment rule.
Be sure to discuss the member’s fiduciary duties and explain which duty or duties the member(s) may have violated and explain why
Include any assumptions you have made.
Post replies to at least two other students.
You can politely agree or disagree.
You must include new information in your replies to further the discussion.
Doing more than the minimum will enhance your grade.
All posts are to be substantial, incorporate course concepts, and relate to the discussion issue.
You might also want to conduct some independent research to enhance your posts.
Submission Details:
Post your initial response (250-300 words)
(The discussion Assignment is due tomorrow at 11:59pm ET so start on this first)
Peer Responses
(Respond to each of the two students. Use 150-200 words when responding to students, Start off with (“hello Name”).
*(The students haven’t posted their Discussion posts yet but when they do, I will give them to you so you can respond to them)
Lexis Nexis Assignment
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
The purpose of this problem assignment is for you to become familiar with how to use the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) website to investigate information on various publicly traded corporations and to use the LexisNexis database to explore statutory law pertaining to corporations in the state you selected in the Week 2 LexisNexis Assignment. The SEC website is also useful for exploring companies you may want to invest in. You will be preparing a brief report consisting of two sections.
*The Instructions and the assignment matrix are attached below
*(This Assignment is important so if you can’t guarantee quality work then don’t bid. if instructions are not followed then the assignment will be refunded.)
BU 38880 IMCs Board of Directors Discussion
RUBRIC |
||||||
Excellent Quality 95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Literature Support 91-84 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned. |
Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met. |
|||
Average Score 50-85% |
40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided. |
83-76 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration. |
52-49 points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met. |
|||
Poor Quality 0-45% |
37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided. |
75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration. |
48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met |
|||
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow
BU 38880 IMCs Board of Directors Discussion |
BU 38880 IMCs Board of Directors Discussion