Subject: Corporate Governance & Risk
Assignment Title: Corporate Governance Scandals
Word count: Approximately 2000

Learning outcomes assessed in this assignment:
• Define governance and explain its function in the effective management and control of organisations and of the resources for which they are accountable
• Evaluate the role of those charged with Corporate Governance in identifying and assessing risk
• Explain and evaluate the role of those charged with Corporate Governance in controlling and mitigating risk
• Demonstrate the application of professional values and judgement through an ethical framework that is in the best interests of society and business, and in compliance with relevant laws and regulations.

Assignment Brief:
In recent years many corporate governance failures are at the root of huge public scandals in the corporate sector.
Requirement:
Identify a corporation involved in a major public scandal; provide a detailed background of the entity, analyse the details of the scandal and evaluate the role played by those charged with governance.

Presentation details:
Microsoft Word, Times New Roman, Font Size 12, 1.5 line spacing
Approximately 2,000 words
Marking Scheme:

Main body of assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………70 Marks
(Identification and discussion of company background………..20 marks)
(Analysis of the scandalous event(s)……………………………25 marks)
(Evaluation of the role of those charged with governance……..25 marks)

Introducion……………………………………………………………………………………………………..10 Marks

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………………..10 Marks

Appropriate and professional presentation of original work, correctly referenced using the Harvard Referencing System……………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 Marks
(Total 100 Marks)

*My chosen corporation for this assignment is Parmalat, an Italy’s food company which involve in a massive financial scandal.
Corporate Governance & Risk Management Marking Scheme:
Outstanding work which is both illuminating and insightful. Language is fluent and authoritative demonstrating a comprehensive knowledge, and convincing command of the subject matter. Accurate and concise application of standards and additional sources of work where appropriate. Exceptionally clear and appropriately articulated examples provided to support students answer. Excellent structure. 80%+
Evidence of a very good understanding of the standard and sound application to particular business scenarios when required. Competent critical analysis with the ability to develop a clear and compelling argument. Sufficiently developed examples where required to help illustrate students work. 70- 79 %
Good understanding of the underlying concepts and a good attempt at applying the standard to the business scenarios. Good logic and structure to answer. Examples provided to illustrate answer. 60- 69%
Evidence of some reading from lectures, hand-outs, recommended texts though often descriptive in nature. Reasonable use of most major points though missing some key elements of the standard. Confused or unclear in parts. Examples provided where required but underdeveloped. 50 – 59%
Some relevant material but inadequate or incomplete treatment of same. Minimal or missing examples. 40 – 49%
Serious lack of relevance; signs of lack of involvement with course material; serious confusion. <40%
TO ORDER FOR THIS QUESTION OR A SIMILAR ONE, CLICK THE ORDER NOW BUTTON AND ON THE ORDER FORM, FILL ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS THEN TRACE THE DISCOUNT CODE,
TYPE IT ON THE DISCOUNT BOX AND CLICK ON ‘USE CODE’ TO EFFECT YOUR DISCOUNT. THANK YOU