Enron Case: Ethical Contradictions and Healthy Relationship
Essay/Paper Rubric
The following rubric will be used to evaluate your writing sample. When preparing your document, please follow the Five C’s of Effective Writing. Make your writing: Clear, Concise, Correct, Courteous, and Comprehensive.
Excellent
Good
Acceptable
Unacceptable
Content (20 points possible)
The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the course material by thoroughly and correctly: (1) addressing the relevant content; (2) identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; (3) using correct terminology; (4) explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims; and (5) (where necessary or useful) substantiating points with several accurate and original examples.
(20 points)
The essay illustrates solid understanding of the course material by correctly: (1) addressing most of the relevant content; (2) identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; (3) using correct terminology; (4) explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and (5) (where necessary or useful) substantiating some points with accurate examples.
(15 points)
The essay illustrates rudimentary understanding of the course material by: (1) mentioning, but not fully explaining, the relevant content; (2) identifying some of the key concepts/ideas (though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them); (3) using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and (4) incorporating some key claims/points, but failing to explain the reasoning behind them (or doing so inaccurately).
(10 points)
The essay illustrates poor understanding of the course material by (1) failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; (2) failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; (3) ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and (4) incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology.
(5 points)
Reasoning (20 points possible)
The essay reflects expert reasoning by:
(1) synthesizing material; (2) making connections between relevant ideas/claims/points; (3) presenting an insightful and thorough evaluation of the relevant issue or problem; (4) identifying and discussing important nuances in the relevant material; and (5) identifying and discussing key assumptions and/or implications.
(20 points)
The essay reflects fairly strong reasoning by:
(1) synthesizing material, (2) making appropriate connections between some of the key ideas/claims/points; (3) accurately evaluating the issue/problem; and (4) identifying ad discussing key assumptions and/or implications.
(15 points)
The essay reflects basic reasoning by:
(1) synthesizing some of the material, though remains vague and undeveloped; (2) making a few connections between ideas/claims/points, but ignoring or inaccurately connecting others; (3) evaluating the issue/problem at a very basic/superficial level; and (4) ignoring assumptions and implications.
(10 points)
The essay reflects substandard or poor reasoning by: (1) failing to synthesize the material or doing so inaccurately; (2) failing to make connections between ideas/claims/points or doing so inaccurately; and (3) failing to evaluate the issue or problem.
(5 points)
Writing, Grammar and Mechanics (10 points possible)
The essay is clear, and concise as a result of: (1) appropriate and precise use of terminology; (2) absence of tangents and coherence of thoughts; and (3) logical organization of ideas and thoughts. (4) complete sentences, free of spelling errors and uses correct grammar, (5) follows correct formatting style, (6) falls between the minimum and maximum page requirement.
(10 points)
The essay is mostly clear as a result of: (1) appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; (2) minimal number of tangents and lack of repetition; and (3) fairly good organization (4) complete sentences, few spelling errors and grammar mistakes, (5) follows correct formatting style with minimal mistakes, (6) falls between the minimum and maximum page requirement.
(7 points)
The essay is often unclear and difficult to follow due to: (1) some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; (2) ideas sometimes being fragmented, wondering and/or repetitive; and (3) poor organization. (4) incomplete sentences, has spelling errors and uses acceptable grammar, (5) barely follows correct formatting style, (6) does not fall between the minimum and maximum page requirement.
(5 points)
The essay does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to: (1) inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; (2) reliance on disjointed and incomprehensible thoughts and clauses; and (3) lack of recognizable organization. (4) no sentence structure, many spelling errors and unacceptable grammar, (5) does not follow correct formatting style, (6) does not fall between the minimum and maximum page requirement.
(0 points)
Total
/50
Outstanding: (45-50)
Evaluation Criteria
The essay/paper demonstrates superior application of communication concepts and principles outlined in the readings and exercises. The assignment does not contain errors in content, reasoning, writing, grammar and mechanics.
Above Average: (40-44)
The essay/paper demonstrates above average application of communication concepts and principles outlined in the readings and exercises. The assignment has a few minor content, reasoning, writing, grammar and mechanics.
Satisfactory: (35-39)
The essay/paper demonstrates satisfactory application of communication concepts and principles outlined in the readings and exercises. The assignment has a moderate number of errors in content, reasoning, writing, grammar and mechanics.
Poor: (1-34)
The essay/paper has an inconsistent application of communication concepts and principles outlined in the readings and exercises and/or has frequent and serious errors in content, reasoning, writing, grammar and mechanics.
Incomplete: (0)
The essay/paper was not submitted before the due date and/or was not completed according to the published instructions.
Professor:
Course:
Date:
Ethical Contradictions: Enron Case Study
Ethics assumes a critical position in establishing a healthy relationship between an organization’s employees and employers. Both the employers and workers have the responsibility of ensuring that the organization’s codes of conducts are adhered to in order to remain within the stipulated ethical standards of an organization. As seen in the case study, there are a series of negligence in the enforcement of workplace ethics. On the side of the employees, they have the obligations of reporting cases of unethical behavior from any individual within a workplace regardless of the position held. In the case study, Enron employees failed to question the integrity of the leadership of Lay, but chose to be loyal despite the leader lacking integrity. Every employee has the obligation of addressing the unethical and immoral conduct of the leaders and colleagues. Enron employees failed to address the principles regarding the ethical and moral obligation of leaders and thus allowed to be swayed and blinded by the management on the issues that posed challenges on their individual ethos. As indicated by the emails, employees stood to see the collapse of the company by praising Lay despite his downfalls. The obligation of employees is to espouse corporate values, but in the case study it is espoused despite them being no longer under an enactment. Enron employees were obliged to address the deteriorating corporate values and not to ignore them for the fear of power.
When the management is confronted with a crisis of unethical behavior at work, their main obligation is communication. Communication should be a two-way process contrary to what the e-mails sent to Enron revealed. There was a breakdown in the chain of communi...