MINICASE: ACCT – 13 BUSINESS ETHICS PROGRAM Page 1 of 1 Survive the Year Topic: Asset Valuation/Writ

MINICASE: ACCT – 13

BUSINESS ETHICS PROGRAM

Page 1 of 1

Survive the Year

Topic:

Asset Valuation/Write-Downs

Characters:

Shani

,

n

ew contro

ller of a small

constru

ction company

Marcus

,

CEO

of the same

company

Shani

, a CPA

and formerly

a staff accountant

for a large

public

accounting

firm,

is the

new

controller

for a small

construction

company

that employs

60 people.

The company

is

now

facing tough times in light of

a downturn in the construction industry.

Both

Shani

and the CEO,

Marcus

, know the collect

i

bility

of a material receivable from

Ender

Corp

oration

is in doubt. Just

before year-end,

Shani

goes in to talk

to

Marcus

.

Shani

says,

“Ender has real problems.

The word

on the street

is they won’t

last

the year.

We need to

adjust the allowance for the Ender receivable.”

Marcus

replies,

“If we d

o that, we're

not going to look good, and the auditor

may

have to

mention

ou

r shaky

financial

position.

If we don’t

get a clean opinion,

we won’t

get the

bank

loan we’re

applying

for, and we might

be out of business,

too, by this time next year.

This

loan

is really

important

to us. If we can just weather

this downturn,

I know

business

will pick

up.”

Back

in the contro

ller’s

office,

Shani

ponders what

can be done

to help

Marcus

and the

company.

Shani

remembers

the past years

working

in public

accounting

and is

certain the

auditor would want to know

about Ender’s

difficulties.

Author:

Sandra K F1eak, Associate Professor of Accounting, Northeast Missouri State

University

Co-author:

Phillip J. Korb, Assistant Professor, University of Baltimore.

Instructions

     This analysis paper involves a case analysis. You must first choose the case you wish to analyze. You can find the cases on our Canvas site, under AP cases.

   The cases involve one of four business areas: accounting, finance, management, and marketing. You are free to choose any case you wish, though you may wish to narrow it down by first selecting a business area. Within each area, read through the cases (they are around 1 page) and pick the one that most interests you. Each case presents an ethical dilemma. If you’re not sure you understand the dilemma in the case you choose, please contact me.

     Your paper should be divided into 3 separate sections as discussed below. Submit your paper through Canvas. Please put your last name in the document title when submitting. Also please submit your paper using Word (doc. Format). Please don’t submit your paper in a PDF or another format as Canvas won’t accept it.

Section I.     Each case ends with a decision to be made.  First, putting yourself in the role of the person making the decision, indicate your key decision options. What basic choices do you have? In stating your decision options please avoid imagining a solution that would solve the ethical issue in the case, as the purpose of this case is to assess your ability to apply accurately the ethical perspectives. Second, do a stakeholder analysis that lists the stakeholders to the decision, and include an explanation of how the decision would affect each stakeholder.

            Note: Do not summarize the case in your paper unless you wish to make some additional assumptions. Assume the reader knows the content of your case.

Section II.     Analyze your decision options from an ethical standpoint. To do this, apply each of three main perspectives discussed in the course for making an ethical decision: utilitarianism, and universalism (Kant). You are free (and encouraged) to apply others discussed as well; although apply at these. Indicate what each perspective would say is the ethical course of action, and why. Be sure to refer back to your stakeholder analysis when discussing the utilitarian decision in the case.

     Please subdivide this section into 2 subsections – first, discuss what utilitarianism would say is the most ethical choice. Second, discuss what universalism (Kant) would say is the most ethical choice.

Section III. Indicate which of your decision options presented in Section I you would choose, and the degree to which it is consistent with each ethical perspective. Be as detailed in possible in describing the decision you would make and/or the action(s) you would take. If one or more of the perspectives disagrees with your decision, indicate why you do not choose to follow the guidance of that perspective(s). Say what is wrong with the perspective for you, either in the context of the decision, and/or for you in general.

Suggested length: Approximately 3-5 double-spaced pages, normal sized font and margins, though your paper can be as long or short as you like. However it will be difficult to present an analysis of sufficient depth in less than 5 pages. Also, please put the case name at the top of your case analysis.

Evaluation

Grading Rubric: The maximum score for your paper is 40 points. It will be evaluated on four criteria, with 10 points available for each: A) your stakeholder analysis and application of utilitarianism (10 points) B) your application of profit maximization (10 points) C) your application of universalism (10 points) D) how well your paper is written and organized (as discussed below) (10 points)

Please note: To get a good grade on this paper (i.e., A or B), you need to apply the ethical perspectives in depth. This will require a thorough understanding of the ethical perspectives. If you do not feel you possess this depth of understanding, you should contact me so that we can go over the ethical perspectives to enhance your understanding.

Writing and organization: spelling, grammar, sentence construction as well as clarity in presentation are evaluated.  
how come? i pose the case follow up instraction ? i post ot twice this is a waste of my wuestions on chegg

"Is this question part of your assignment? We can help"

ORDER NOW