The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
Presentation/PPT
27/08/2022
ADMS 3660D 2011 Final AssignmentAllan GreenbaumRead the following article:Geoffrey York “Barrick’s Tanzanian project tests ethical mining policies” Globe and Mail Report on Business Oct 2011http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/barricks-tanzanian-project-tests-ethical-mining-policies/article2183592/singlepage/#articlecontentand the following short items: Aaron Regent “Barrick Gold and North Mara: the search for common ground” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/barrick-gold-and-north-mara-the-search-for-common-ground/article2069632/ [this is also linked to in the Geoffrey York article]Golden possibilities: Mining and economic development in Tanzania March 31 2011http://barrickbeyondborders.com/2011/03/mining-in-tanzania/?noexit=true Florian Kaijage, “ North Mara investors risk being kicked out” the Guardian (Tanzania) June 19th, 2011http://protestbarrick.net/article.php?id=757Questions.Assume you are an business ethics and CSR consultant retained by Barrick Gold to advise the company on how to address the North Mara mine situation. Use only the information the above sources, and course materials, in preparing this assignment. This is an analytic assignment, not a research assignment. Assume that the assigned articles provide the relevant facts. Indicate, explicitly, any additional assumptions regarding matters of fact that you find necessary in order to analyze the case. You should not, however, invent facts for the sake of simplifying the analysis or avoiding dilemmas.In your paper you should do the following: 1.Indentify what in your opinion is the core problem confronting the firm. Support your assessment with facts from the case, but be brief and focused. Do not simply rehash information from the case—assume the person who is reading it is familiar with the background. If relevant facts are contested, clarify as far as possible the specific points of disagreement between different versions of events. It is not, however, your job to assess the accuracy of the different accounts.2. Given your definition of the core problem, identify two feasible options (alternative courses of action) that the company might undertake in response to the problem. The options should be distinct from one another. One of the options may be (but does not have to be) to continue the status quo (‘do nothing’). Explain why you have chosen those two options to assess. Both options should be plausible, defensible and motivated—don’t choose an obviously bad or impractical one just to make the choice easier. Your job is to advise the company on which of these options to choose, and to explain why the company ought to choose it. 3. Analyze the two options in terms of how they affect each of the relevant stakeholder groups. Relevant stakeholders here are those to whom it makes a difference which of the options are chosen. Make sure to include all and only relevant stakeholder groups. Systematically compare the effects of the two options for each of the stakeholder groups. Where relevant facts are contested (see #1, above), the effects of the options might depend on which version of the facts is accurate. Your analysis should take this into account. However, since you are not retained as a fact-finder, you should focus on facts that are not in dispute. 4. With reference to the moral standards and principles and CSR approaches discussed in the course, and with reference to the analysis of the facts of the case you have conducted above, analyze and evaluate the two options you have identified. Indicate which option the company ought to choose and explain why. Your analysis should be addressed to the company management but your explanation should be persuasive to an impartial observer. Be selective about the standards, theories and principles you are invoking, and connect them in a detailed way to the facts. It is better to explore a few ideas in depth than to refer superficially to many. Keep in mind that your interpretation is contestable and should be defended.The fourth step is the most important and will have the greatest bearing on your grade. The first three steps are preparatory. You will not, however, be able to do a good job on step four unless you have done a good job on steps one, two and three. You may make reference to any course materials, frameworks or cases discussed throughout the course. If you are specifically referring to any textbook material, then simply indicate “Textbook, p.x”. If you are referring to information from the articles, you can just indicate “York p. x” or “Regent” or “Barrick” or “Kaijage”. Additional referencing of material is not necessary (i.e., don’t provide a bibliography). Your answer will not be evaluated on the basis of what course of action you recommend, but rather on the cogency of your reasoning, your comprehension of concepts discussed in the course, and the clarity and precision with which you express yourself. Remember that as an “ethics consultant” you are acting as a professional and are expected to write accordingly. Choose words and construct sentences with care. Careless, awkward, ungrammatical sentences or frequent spelling errors and typos create an unprofessional impression and will affect your grade accordingly. You may make (sparing) use of point form or tables where appropriate to the content, but these devices are not a substitute for explanation and argument in sentences and paragraphs. You are to do this assignment on your own, without collaborating with other students. See the York Senate’s policy on “Academic Honesty”: http://www.yorku.ca/univsec/policies/document.php?document=69Length: The assignment may be no more than 1,700 words. It may, of course, be less. Generally speaking, a very short paper is likely to be deficient in explanation. On the other hand, padding will not increase your grade and is likely to reduce it.Instructions for submitting the assignment (please read carefully!):Please email your assignment to me at by the end of Thursday December 15 (i.e., by midnight). The assignment must come as a Word file (extension .doc or .docx). The file must be named as follows: your last name, then your first name, then ADMS3660D. So, for example, mine would be saved as: Greenbaum Allan ADMS3660D.doc If the file is not properly named and I have to rename it, I will deduct a point! You should also put this name in the subject line of your email.Late Penalty:•Please note that there is an automatic grade deduction of 5% for each day (24 hrs) late for any reason (i.e., do not wait until the last day to complete the assignment). This policy will be strictly enforced, so if you ask for an extension, the response will be that you can submit the assignment late but will receive the per day grade deduction.
The writer is very fast, professional and responded to the review request fast also. Thank you.
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.
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 moreEach 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 moreThanks 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 moreYour 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 moreBy 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