DIRECTIONS:
You will write an APA 7th Edition paper, 5-7 double-spaced pages in length, on someone of your choosing who is currently in an executive position or in a leadership role. They should be considered a C-Level (CEO, CIO, CFO, etc.) executive or in a prominent leadership position. At a minimum this person needs to be responsible for a significant function in an organization and have supervisory responsibility over others. The interview may be conducted on the phone, virtually, or in person (your methodology or mode of conducting the interview, must be DIRECTIONS:
You will write an APA 7th Edition paper, 5-7 double-spaced pages in length, on someone of your choosing who is currently in an executive position or in a leadership role. They should be considered a C-Level (CEO, CIO, CFO, etc.) executive or in a prominent leadership position. At a minimum this person needs to be responsible for a significant function in an organization and have supervisory responsibility over others. The interview may be conducted on the phone, virtually, or in person (your methodology or mode of conducting the interview, must be documented in your paper). This paper must include a minimum of five (5) peer-reviewed, refereed journal articles pertaining to your subject’s ethics. As a guideline, your paper should include:
- DESCRIBE: A description of the subject’s ethical beliefs and practices. In two pages (approximately) you should address the following: What challenges have they encountered in the workplace that have shaped their views on ethics? How have they addressed those challenges (their ethical reasoning)?
- ANALYZE: An analysis of the subject’s ethics. How did he or she evolve their view of ethics?
What ethical theories are expressed or implied in his or her discussion of ethics. Examine whether there were inconsistencies, deficiencies, inadequacies in his or her ethical theory. If there were no shortcomings, account for the strength of the subject’s ethical position. What motivated the leaders to act appropriately or inappropriately, in your opinion? This should be approximately two-three pages.
-
- SYNTHESIZE and EVALUATE: Do you agree with your subject’s approach to ethics? If not, why not, and if so, then why? What did you learn from this interview and your research? About two pages are adequate for this portion.
You are to summarize and analyze the content of the interview, not provide a verbatim transcript of the interview. This is due on Sunday of Week Six, and is worth 300 points. The grading rubric for this paper is provided in Course Information in Blackboard.
| Signature Assignment | Executive Interview Rubric | ||||
| Criteria | Exemplary | Proficient | Needs Improvement | Below Expectations | No credit |
| Content Accuracy | 80 Provides clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify two or more ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
73 Provides fairly clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify two or more ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
67 Provides somewhat clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify one ethical theorist or theory to explain the leader’s approach. |
61 Does not provide a clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Does not utilize the course textbook or any journal articles, and does not identify any ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Critical Analysis | 80 In-depth discussion of three (3) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
73 In-depth discussion of two (2) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
67 In-depth discussion of one (1) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
61 Does not discuss any of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Does not utilize the textbook and/or journal article(s) to state your case. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Application/ Learning |
60 The writer provides a clear and detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies a minimum of 3 learnings from the interview. |
53 The writer provides a somewhat clear and somewhat detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies 2 learnings from the interview. |
47 The writer provides an inadequate and minimally detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies 1 learning from the interview. |
41 The writer does not provide a clear or detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Does not identify learnings from the interview. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Writing Mechanics and APA | 40 The writer clearly demonstrates an understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others by consistently utilizing current APA style. |
33 The writer demonstrates some understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others with some APA flaws. |
27 The writer demonstrates minimal understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others with major APA flaws. |
21 The writer uses a style, form, and language that are not college level quality. The writer does not acknowledge the work of others, and does not utilize APA style. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Use of Sources |
40 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws from primary sources for discussion. |
33 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws heavily upon secondary sources for discussion. |
27 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws heavily upon secondary sources for discussion. |
21 The writer has used 4 or fewer scholarly sources of reference. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
documented in your paper). This paper must include a minimum of five (5) peer-reviewed, refereed journal articles pertaining to your subject’s ethics. As a guideline, your paper should include:
- DESCRIBE: A description of the subject’s ethical beliefs and practices. In two pages (approximately) you should address the following: What challenges have they encountered in the workplace that have shaped their views on ethics? How have they addressed those challenges (their ethical reasoning)?
- ANALYZE: An analysis of the subject’s ethics. How did he or she evolve their view of ethics?
What ethical theories are expressed or implied in his or her discussion of ethics. Examine whether there were inconsistencies, deficiencies, inadequacies in his or her ethical theory. If there were no shortcomings, account for the strength of the subject’s ethical position. What motivated the leaders to act appropriately or inappropriately, in your opinion? This should be approximately two-three pages.
-
- SYNTHESIZE and EVALUATE: Do you agree with your subject’s approach to ethics? If not, why not, and if so, then why? What did you learn from this interview and your research? About two pages are adequate for this portion.
You are to summarize and analyze the content of the interview, not provide a verbatim transcript of the interview. This is due on Sunday of Week Six, and is worth 300 points. The grading rubric for this paper is provided in Course Information in Blackboard.
| Signature Assignment | Executive Interview Rubric | ||||
| Criteria | Exemplary | Proficient | Needs Improvement | Below Expectations | No credit |
| Content Accuracy | 80 Provides clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify two or more ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
73 Provides fairly clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify two or more ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
67 Provides somewhat clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Utilizing the course textbook or journal articles identify one ethical theorist or theory to explain the leader’s approach. |
61 Does not provide a clear identification of the interviewee’s ethical beliefs and practices. Does not utilize the course textbook or any journal articles, and does not identify any ethical theorists or theories to explain the leader’s approach. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Critical Analysis | 80 In-depth discussion of three (3) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
73 In-depth discussion of two (2) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
67 In-depth discussion of one (1) of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Utilizes the textbook and journal article(s) to state your case. |
61 Does not discuss any of the following: · Inadequacies, deficiencies, or inconsistencies in the subject’s ethics · Strengths of the subject’s ethics · Presents evidence corroborating your position of the subject ethical behavior Does not utilize the textbook and/or journal article(s) to state your case. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Application/ Learning |
60 The writer provides a clear and detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies a minimum of 3 learnings from the interview. |
53 The writer provides a somewhat clear and somewhat detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies 2 learnings from the interview. |
47 The writer provides an inadequate and minimally detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Identifies 1 learning from the interview. |
41 The writer does not provide a clear or detailed rationale explaining support or opposition to the subject’s ethics. Does not identify learnings from the interview. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Writing Mechanics and APA | 40 The writer clearly demonstrates an understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others by consistently utilizing current APA style. |
33 The writer demonstrates some understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others with some APA flaws. |
27 The writer demonstrates minimal understanding of the assignment while using a style, form and language that is appropriate for a college level paper. The writer properly acknowledges the work of others with major APA flaws. |
21 The writer uses a style, form, and language that are not college level quality. The writer does not acknowledge the work of others, and does not utilize APA style. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |
| Use of Sources |
40 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws from primary sources for discussion. |
33 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws heavily upon secondary sources for discussion. |
27 The writer has used at least 5 scholarly reference sources. Draws heavily upon secondary sources for discussion. |
21 The writer has used 4 or fewer scholarly sources of reference. |
0 Assignment, meeting grading criteria, was not submitted. |