Ethical Dilemma at L’Oreal: WH Framework
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Ethical Dilemma at L’Oreal: WH Framework
For this assignment, refer to the scenario located in the “Questions & Problems” section of Ch. 2, “Business Ethics” in Dynamic Business Law. This scenario involves Steven J. Trzaska, the head of L’Oreal USA’s regional patent team, and the ethical rules and core values of the company.
Read the scenario in the textbook and complete the following activity.
Create a WH Framework chart, similar to Exhibit 2.2. Refer to L’Oreal’s core values and the primary values in Exhibit 2.3 to determine
Write an explanation of how you decided on the list of stakeholders and guidelines to include in your WH Framework. Address the following questions in your explanation:
Which stakeholders did Traszka and the management of L’Oreal cater to? Why?
What values did L’Oreal’s management choose when they decided to fire Trzaska? Why?
Self-Reflection
In addition to your explanation, address the following self-reflection questions:
How did the WH Framework help you analyze the situation?
Now that you’ve put together the framework, how does the WH Framework help managers with making business decisions?
What type of decisions would the WH Framework chart help you make as a manager?
Submit your chart and answers.
Ethical Dilemma at L’Oreal: WH Framework
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 |