MGT5CAC (Corporate Accountability), 2017
Description of Assessment – This is a special assessment for failing a final subject in the course. If you obtain a pass mark (at least 50%) on the assessment, your final mark and grade in the subject will be updated to 50D.
• Due – 13th October 2017 by 13:00 (Melbourne, AU time)
• Required Length – 2000 words
• Marks Allocated – Pass/Fail
• Submission Format – Email the final document as an attachment to the subject coordinator (email@example.com). Include a signed statement of authorship.
Instructions for Students – Individually write an essay on the following topic:
Describe the legislative framework as it applies to company secretarial practice and the rules of company meetings. Discuss the role of the company secretary in the organisation and administration of member and director meetings and the AGM.
In this discussion, pay particular attention to Section 249D of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which has been amended in the past few years to make it more difficult for shareholders to force directors to hold a general meeting of a company. Discuss this development, bearing in mind the principles of the legitimacy of the corporate form, in particular shareholder democracy, fairness, and responsibility to stakeholders.
Include in your discussion comparisons between legislation and the requirements of the ASX listing rules with respect to company meetings and corporate secretarial practice, and whether there is any reason for them to be different.
Your essay should include a thorough and critical analysis of the academic literature in governance and applied corporate law. The analysis should be academic and based on a minimum of 6 academic, peer-reviewed journal articles. You are encouraged to include additional information obtained from credible sources (e.g., additional articles, textbook, chapters, practitioner articles, organisation reports, etc.). You should also include relevant examples from industry and organisations where appropriate.
Also note that while you are encouraged to use a variety of sources to obtain evidence to supplement the academic literature, take care when considering which websites to use. For this assessment, only use reliable and credible websites (e.g., a company website’s description of HR practices, Harvard Business Review blog). Note that Wikipedia and similar sites are not acceptable sources.
Cite all references in-text, and include all reference information on a separate page at the end of the essay. Harvard or APA 6th edition are the preferred formatting styles.
Write in a clear, professional and engaging manner as appropriate for a postgraduate student.
Your essay should be formatted appropriately and professionally. Ensure that it is written using correct grammar, spelling, and transitions. Include a separate introduction and conclusion. Include headings and a table of contents if appropriate. Include the page number in the footer of the assignment. It should be typed using 12-point standard font. Use 1.5 or double spacing, and 2.54cm (1 inch) margins on all sides.
Include a title page that includes your name, student id number, and word count. Include a signed statement of authorship when you submit your assignment.
Evaluation of your individual written essay will be in terms of:
• Thorough explanation and analysis of all aspects of the topic as described below
• The application and analysis of appropriate theoretical models and research from applied corporate law and corporate governance
• Development of logical and well supported arguments
• Clarity of expression, structure and referencing
The criterion-referenced assessment grid provides more information on the specific levels of achievement for this assignment.
CRITERIA & WEIGHT* VERY GOOD – EXCELLENT (70-100%) ACCEPTABLE – GOOD
Discussion of all aspects of essay question (50%) Clearly and concisely addresses all aspects from topic description.
Discussion is sharply focused on relevant and key details.
Assumptions are clearly
Includes industry examples in appropriate and compelling manner, with sharp focus on relevant details of examples. Adequately addresses all aspects from topic description but could be more sharply focused (e.g., too much detail in some places and not enough in others).
Industry examples are given and reasonably appropriate, but explanation could be more sharply focused. Does not address all aspects from the topic description, or gives only cursory mention to some aspects and focuses on 1-2 aspects.
No industry examples, irrelevant examples, or lacks focus in application.
Explanation and application of relevant theories, concepts, or models (25%) Clear, concise, accurate explanation of relevant theories concepts or models.
Integrates and synthesises academic literature in manner based on sound logic and reasoning.
Clearly applies theory/models to topic in manner supported by strong evidence or logical reasoning. Explanation of relevant theory models or concepts is mostly clear, but may discuss some irrelevant issues or have minor inconsistencies in reasoning.
Attempts to integrate and synthesize literature but minor errors in reasoning and logic.
Attempts to apply theories/ models to topic but some gaps in reasoning. Research review and theoretical analysis is cursory, highly unorganised, or describes disconnected bits of information with no actual insight or analysis.
Very limited or no attempt to integrate and synthesise ideas and research.
No attempt to apply theory/ models or numerous and substantial errors in reasoning and logic.
References and In-text Citations (10%) Meets or exceeds minimum requirement for academic references (at least 6 academic, peer-reviewed journal articles not provided in class).
Academic references are mostly high quality (i.e., peer-reviewed, contemporary or seminal paper, strong fit to topic).
May include additional, highly relevant and high quality non-academic sources (e.g., practitioner-focused articles).
Consistent and accurate use of appropriate referencing style. Meets or exceeds minimum requirement for academic references of mostly acceptable quality (i.e., peer-reviewed but may be outdated or have inappropriate or weak fit to topic).
May include some high quality academic sources.
May include additional non-academic sources that are mostly irrelevant or mixed quality.
Consistent attempt to use appropriate referencing style throughout, with several minor errors. Does not meet minimum requirements for academic references or references mostly non-academic or low-quality.
No references included or no attempt to use appropriate referencing style.
Introduction and Conclusion
(5%) Separate introduction and conclusion that are clear, concise, and engaging summaries of the major points of the paper. Separate introduction and conclusion but lacks focus, engagement, or summary. Or one is high quality but other is inadequate. Both introduction and conclusion are absent or both are inadequate.
Structure and Organisation (10%) Sequence and structure are logical and easy to follow; good overall organisation and focus. Good connections between different themes or sections; clear and concise focus throughout. Structured well enough to make sense; could be better organised and more tightly focused upon the main thesis. Lacks coherent organisation and structure. Difficult to follow reasoning. Describes disconnected bits of information or many direct quotes with limited insight or context.
Language Use (10%) Language is generally sound and clear throughout. Spelling, grammar, punctuation are good with very few and minor errors. Clear enough to be understood; minor and few instances confused or unclear expression. Spelling, punctuation, grammar acceptable but could be improved. Mostly unclear or confused expression. Major errors with spelling, grammar, punctuation.
*Note: Weighting of criteria is approximate. Failure to adequately complete one of the criteria (e.g., failure to include relevant theory) may result in a substantially lower or even failing mark.