1. Effectiveness of communication

Semester 2-2016 ASSIGNMENT This assignment is to be completed in" rel="nofollow">in groups of three and comprises twenty per-cent of the marks for this course. There are three questions. (Approx. 2000 words in" rel="nofollow">in total) Assessment Criteria: Student work will generally be assessed in" rel="nofollow">in terms of the followin" rel="nofollow">ing criteria: 1. Effectiveness of communication – i.e. readability, legibility, grammar, spellin" rel="nofollow">ing, neatness, completeness and presentation will be a min" rel="nofollow">inimum threshold requirement for all written work submitted for assessment. Work that is illegible or in" rel="nofollow">incomprehensible and does not meet the min" rel="nofollow">inimum requirement will be awarded a fail grade. 2. Demonstrated understandin" rel="nofollow">ing - This will be evidenced by the student's ability to be dialectical in" rel="nofollow">in the discussion of contentious issues. 3. Evidence of research - This will be evidenced by the references made to the statutes, auditin" rel="nofollow">ing standards, books, journal articles and in" rel="nofollow">inclusion of a bibliography. Note: 1. All written work must conform with the Federation University General Guide for the Presentation of Academic Work. 2. For all written work students must ensure that they submit their own origin" rel="nofollow">inal work. Any act of plagiarism will be severely penalised. Plagiarism is presentin" rel="nofollow">ing someone else work as your own and is a serious offence with serious consequences. As set out in" rel="nofollow">in the University Regulation 6.1.1, students who are caught plagiarisin" rel="nofollow">ing will, for a first offence, be given a zero mark for that task. A second offence will result in" rel="nofollow">in a failin" rel="nofollow">ing grade for the course(s) in" rel="nofollow">involved and any subsequent offence will be referred to the Student Disciplin" rel="nofollow">ine Committee. Student must be aware of the University Regulation 6.1.1 Student Plagiarism. Students must: • fully reference the source(s) of all material, even if you have re-expressed the ideas, facts or descriptions; • acknowledge all direct quotations; and • not submit work that has been researched and written by another person. Question 1. (7 marks) A Whigarian view of history is often said to encapsulate an in" rel="nofollow">inevitable onward and upward process of contin" rel="nofollow">inual progress where later was always better than earlier and was accompanied by a Panglossian optimism in" rel="nofollow">in the belief of human reason to forge a better society where thin" rel="nofollow">ings get better and better through the course of time. Whig historiography is an approach that presents the past as an in" rel="nofollow">inevitable progression towards ever more enlightenment. The term often focuses on the successful chain" rel="nofollow">in of theories and experiments that led to present-day science, while ignorin" rel="nofollow">ing failed theories and dead ends Discuss in" rel="nofollow">in terms of the development of both accountin" rel="nofollow">ing and auditin" rel="nofollow">ing. Question 2. (7 marks) Moral seduction theory posits that people can become morally compromised over time, a process facilitated by unconscious thought processes. Professionals, for in" rel="nofollow">instance, tend to be confident and to view themselves as ethical people in" rel="nofollow">in control of their lives. Eventually this behaviour could become the ‘the new normal’ for people, am adjustment to their defin" rel="nofollow">inition of what is ethical. These cognitive distortions help justify questionable behaviour and reconcile it with their self-image as an ethical person. Boweman, J., & West. J., (2013), Ethics in" rel="nofollow">in Public Management, Fredrickson, H & Ghere, K. editors, 2ed, Routledge:London, p.166. Refer to: Academy of Management Review, 2006, Vol. 31, No. 1, 10–29. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE CASE OF AUDITOR INDEPENDENCE: MORAL SEDUCTION AND STRATEGIC ISSUE CYCLING DON A. MOORE: Carnegie Mellon University PHILIP E. TETLOCK: University of California, Berkeley LLOYD TANLU: Harvard University MAX H. BAZERMAN: Harvard University Discuss the main" rel="nofollow">in issues concernin" rel="nofollow">ing MORAL SEDUCTION AND STRATEGIC ISSUE CYCLING Question 3. (4.5+1.5=6 marks) a) Explain" rel="nofollow">in how unconscious biases impact on auditor Independence? b) Explain" rel="nofollow">in the context surroundin" rel="nofollow">ing the ‘ironic rebound effect’