BGMT 496

Before you begin writing the assignment, you will read the following requirements that will help you meet the writing and APA requirements. Not reading this information will lead to a lower grade: Read the grading rubric for the assignment. Use the grading rubric while writing the report to ensure all requirements are met that will lead to the highest possible grade. Third person writing is required. Third person means that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person. Contractions are not used in business writing, so you are expected NOT to use contractions in writing this assignment. You are expected to paraphrase and NOT use direct quotes. You are expected to paraphrase, which can be learned by reviewing this link: https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase2.html. You are responsible for APA only for in-text citations and a reference list. Use at least 10 scholarly or credible resources as supporting documentation. Three of the resources will come from the class readings. Books cannot be used as resources for this assignment. If any material is used from a source document, it must be cited and referenced and the page or paragraph number must be provided. A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa. View the sample APA paper to gain a better understanding of how to use APA within the paper. How to Set Up the Paper Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 6-8 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page. It is important to write clearly and concisely. Use the following format with headings: Create a title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name and date;Introduction (one paragraph)The Ethical Issue;Traditional Theories/Resolution;Ethical Relativism The Best ResolutionDue Date Dec 16, 2017 11:59 PMHide RubricsRubric Name: Final Project – Phase 2Criteria 1 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard FailureIntroduction 0.6 pointsStates thesis clearly and concisely, and comprehensively discusses the main points made in the paper. (0.54 – 0.6)0.51 pointsStates thesis clearly but further development of the main points of the paper is needed. (0.48 – 0.539)0.45 pointsStates thesis and explains general ideas of the main points of the paper.(0.42 – 0.479)0.39 pointsAttempts to state thesis that discusses the main points to be covered in the paper or presents an introduction that is irrelevant to the thesis. (0.36 – 0.419)0 pointsDoes not provide an introduction.(0)Criteria 2 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard FailureEthical Issue 3 pointsCentral ethical issue is identified thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research.(2.7 – 3.0)2.55 pointsCentral ethical issue is identified but argument needs more detailed development and/or support.(2.4 – 2.69)2.25 pointsAttempts to define ethical issue but not defined appropriately or completely. Misunderstanding of the issue related to the situation. Some reasoning; minimal use of support.(2.1 – 2.39)1.95 pointsAttempts to define ethical issue concluded with little or no use of reasoning and support.(1.8 – 2.09)0 pointsFailed to identify ethical issue and no support provided.(0)Criteria 3 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard FailureIdentify and Explain One Common Ethical Dilemma 2.4 pointsOne common ethical dilemma is thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research without undercutting position.(2.16 – 2.4)2.04 pointsOne common ethical dilemma is clearly, and soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.(1.92 – 2.159)1.8 pointsOne common ethical dilemma is presented with some reasoning; minimal use of research. (1.68 – 1.91)1.56 pointsOne common ethical dilemma is presented with little or no use of reasoning and research.(1.44 – 1.679)0 pointsFailed to present one common ethical dilemma.(0)State Dilemma. Choose Two Ethical Theorists & Use Their Principles to Explain a Solution to the Ethical Dilemma Presented. 4.5 pointsChooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma taking a strong, well defined position; Supports position with thorough and concise argument(s). (4.05 – 4.5)3.825 pointsChooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma that is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.(3.6 – 4.04)3.375 pointsChooses two ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma that is brief; unrelated, unsupported general statements, reasons, and details; minimal research used.(3.15 – 3.59)2.925 pointsChooses one ethical theorists and applies their principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma; may select a theorist that was not covered under week 2 or presents two theorist without providing an analysis. (2.7 – 3.149)0 pointsFails to present theorists or apply principles to explain a solution to the ethical dilemma.(0)Identify and Use Two Traditional Theorists to Provide Two Resolutions to the Ethical Dilemma According to Theorist Perspective 4.5 pointsIdentifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma presenting a strong, well defined position; Supports position with thorough and concise argument(s). (4.05 – 4.5)3.825 pointsIdentifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma that is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.(3.6 – 4.049)3.375 pointsIdentifies and uses two traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma that is brief; unrelated, unsupported general statements, reasons, and details; minimal research used.(3.15 – 3.59)2.925 pointsIdentifies and uses one traditional theorists providing two resolutions to the ethical dilemma ; may select a theorist that was not covered under week 2 or presents two theorist without providing a discussion. (2.7 – 3.149)0 pointsFails to identify and use traditional theorists to providing resolutions to the ethical dilemma.(0)Ethical Relativism 2.4 pointsDefines and discusses ethical relativism thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research.(2.16 – 2.4)2.04 pointsDefines and discusses ethical relativism but needs more detailed development and/or support.(1.92 – 2.159)1.8 pointsAttempts to define and discuss ethical relativism appropriately or completely. Some reasoning; minimal use of support.(1.68 – 1.919)1.56 pointsAttempts to define and discuss ethical relativism with little or no use of reasoning and support.(1.44 – 1.679)0 pointsFailed to define and discuss ethical relativism.(0)Ethical Relativism Concerns 1.5 pointsIdentifies and discusses ethical relativism concerns thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.(1.35 – 1.5)1.275 pointsIdentifies and discusses ethical relativism concerns is soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research. (1.2 – 1.349)1.125 pointsAttempts to define and discuss ethical relativism appropriately or completely. Some reasoning; minimal use of support or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.(1.05 – 1.19)0.975 pointsAttempts to define and discuss ethical relativism with little or no use of reasoning and support with the same level of logic and research..(0.9 – 1.04)0 pointsFailed to define and discuss ethical relativism.(0)The Best Resolution 3 pointsSelects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and explains thoroughly, concisely and logically concluded with a thorough use of research. (2.7 – 3.0)2.55 pointsSelects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and explanations are soundly reasoned and concluded through the use of research but argument needs more detailed development.(2.4 – 2.69)2.25 points Selects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and attempts to provide explanations; Some reasoning; minimal use of support or correctly identifies and discusses that no ethical relativism concerns exists with the same level of logic and research.(2.1 – 2.39)1.95 pointsSelects the solution that best fits your code of ethics and attempts to provide explanations; little or no use of reasoning and support with the same level of logic and research..(1.8 – 2.09)0 pointsFailed to select a solution that best fits your code of ethics.(0)Criteria 4 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard FailureSummary 0.6 pointsIn a clear and concise manner, comprehensively concludes the paper by restating/ summarizing the argument. Refer to the opening statements and main points made throughout the paper. Reflect on the importance of the arguments and conclude their development.(0.54 – 0.6)0.51 pointsIn a clear manner concludes the paper by restating/ summarizing the argument. Refer to the o main points made throughout the paper. Attempts to reflect on the importance of the arguments but further development of the main points of the paper is needed. (0.48 – 0.539)0.45 pointsConcludes the paper by somewhat restating/ summarizing the argument. Attempts to the bring in some explanation of the general idea of the main points of the paper.(0.42 – 0.479)0.39 pointsAttempts to restate/summarize the argument but explanations are irrelevant to the main points of the paper. (0.36 – 0.419)0 pointsFails to present restatement/summarization of argument.(0)Criteria 5 Outstanding Excellent Good Substandard FailureAttention to Instructions 3 pointsThe paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper also includes completion of all minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format.(2.7 – 3.0)2.55 pointsThe paper contains all major assignment tasks. The paper missed one minor aspects of the assignment such as third person writing, required use of course readings, outside sources if needed, and assignment format. (2.4 – 2.69)2.25 pointsOne major assignment tasks or two minor aspects of the assignment missed.(2.1 – 2.39)1.95 pointsTwo major assignment tasks and/or three or more minor aspects of the assignments missed.(1.8 – 2.09)0 pointsThree or more major assignment tasks missed.(0)Criteria 6 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard FailureWriting Mechanics 3 pointsStrictly adheres to standard usage rules of written English using paragraphs and sentence rather than bullets, including but not limited to capitalization, punctuation, run-on sentences, missing or extra words, stylistic errors, spelling and grammatical errors. No contractions or jargon used. Zero to two errors noted.(2.7 – 3.0)2.55 pointsExcellently adheres to standard usage of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Three to six errors noted.(2.4 – 2.69)2.25 pointsSatisfactorily adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Seven to 10 errors noted.(2.1 – 2.39)1.95 pointsMinimally adheres to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English, including capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. More than 10 errors found.(1.8 – 2.09)0 pointsDoes not adhere to standard usage rules of mechanics: conventions of written English largely incomprehensible; or errors are too plentiful to count.(0 – 1.07)Criteria 7 Outstanding Superior Good Substandard FailureAdherence to APA (6th ed.) 1.5 pointsOne to 2 APA style or usage errors; Proper citation of source material is used throughout paper; Reference titles follow APA with only the first word, the first word after a colon and proper nouns capitalized.(1.35 – 1.5)1.275 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference list but 3 – 4 APA style errors noted or fails to use APA citations when appropriate 1-2 times.(1.2 – 1.349)1.125 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference lists; APA style errors are noted throughout document with 5-6 errors noted; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 3 – 4 times in document.(1.05 – 1.19)0.975 pointsAttempts in-text citations and reference lists; Fails to use APA citation when appropriate 5-6 times; Fails to use APA citations when appropriate 5-6 times in document or presents a total of 1-2 in-text citations and reference list in a paper when requires APA citations are needed throughout the document.(0.9 – 1.049)0 pointsNo attempt at APA style; or attempts either in-text citations or reference list but omits the other.(0 – 0.89)Overall Score Outstanding27 or more Superior24 or more Good21 or more Substandard18 or more Failure0 or moreSubmit FilesFiles to submit (0) file(s) to submitAfter uploading, you must click Submit to complete the submission.Add a FileRecord Audio Comments Skip Toolbars for Comments.More Insert actions. Show All Components

Order your essay today and save 20% with the discount code: ESSAYHELP

Place your order
(550 words)

Approximate price: $22

Calculate the price of your order

550 words
We'll send you the first draft for approval by September 11, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Total price:
$26
The price is based on these factors:
Academic level
Number of pages
Urgency
Basic features
  • Free title page and bibliography
  • Unlimited revisions
  • Plagiarism-free guarantee
  • Money-back guarantee
  • 24/7 support
On-demand options
  • Writer’s samples
  • Part-by-part delivery
  • Overnight delivery
  • Copies of used sources
  • Expert Proofreading
Paper format
  • 275 words per page
  • 12 pt Arial/Times New Roman
  • Double line spacing
  • Any citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard)

Our guarantees

Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.

Money-back guarantee

You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.

Read more

Zero-plagiarism guarantee

Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.

Read more

Free-revision policy

Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.

Read more

Privacy policy

Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.

Read more

Fair-cooperation guarantee

By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.

Read more