Description
Select three peer review scholarly sources At least one source that presents an opposing viewpoint, a position that an opponent of your argument might make Specifically, you must address the following rubric criteria for each of your three sources: Identify the source by including the author, the title, and the database information.Summarize the source. (Explain the main idea, the details or evidence that support the main idea, and the description of if your source supports your argument or an opposing viewpoint.)Explain why the source is credible. The C.R.A.A.P.O. test will help (Attached). 4.Explain how the source supports at least one key point or opposing viewpoint from your argument. Your assignment must be written in MLA or APA format. Use double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1
1-7 Assignment: From Issue to Persuasion
Part 1
I major in business and through research and my personal experiences various issues
elicit varying views from all the stakeholders. Leadership especially in business organizations is
highly complex and requires adequate data and resources to make decisions and implement
strategies that ensure balance and avoid any harm to all stakeholders for instance, employees,
owners, customers, financiers, the government, and others. One of the major issues faced by
business management is the choice between profits versus social responsibility. On one hand,
some avenues say that businesses’ main responsibility is to provide goods and services and only
focus on making profits. As such, all the decisions made by the top management should focus on
reducing costs, becoming efficient, producing more products, and maintaining a growing revenue
trajectory. On the other hand, regardless of the products or services they provide, social
responsibility as a business has acted as an orientation for leadership across a range of industrial
sectors. Companies of every type, from large corporations to tiny ventures, have voluntarily
chosen this approach, which goes beyond just following legislative obligations. According to my
observations, companies whose activities are closely associated with environmental concerns and
the goal of environmentally friendly growth tend to raise ethical questions more often. The
ethical environment demands more examination and a more considered process for making
decisions since the effects of decisions go far beyond short-term financial gains to include wider
social and ecological ramifications.
The second issue that I believe challenges business leaders is employee background
screening and monitoring, especially considering the importance of data privacy and
confidentiality. On one hand, background checks help companies to detect possible dangers,
2
such as those with a history of violence or criminal activity, and assist in guaranteeing a safe
workplace. Employers make better hiring decisions with more knowledge, particularly when it
comes to roles requiring access to corporate assets or sensitive data. Employers may better
adhere to legal and regulatory obligations by conducting background checks, particularly in
sectors where some businesses have mandates for background checks. On the other hand,
because background checks may contain personal information unrelated to the employment, they
might violate someone’s privacy. There is a chance that some background checks may unfairly
target certain demographic groups, which might lead to discrimination. Minority populations, for
instance, could be more prone to have unfavorable experiences with police enforcement.
Background investigations may not provide all the details about a candidate.
Part 2
In my persuasive essay, I will write about the first issue which is the choice between
profits and social responsibility and in this case, I will argue that business leaders and owners
should do more than make profits. In this light, I would provide details to prove that participating
in social responsibility benefits the business unlike what is believed to be, an additional
unnecessary expense. This topic is very useful for my audience which in this case includes
business leaders, policy makers, and stakeholders who determine the paths corporations take. I
have discovered that socially conscious businesses usually carry out voluntary initiatives that are
valued highly by the pertinent community and are not specifically mandated by legislation. This
highlights that businesses are more inclined to deal with ethical dilemmas if their operations have
a direct bearing on the environment, sustainable growth, and, ultimately, the well-being and
health of others which often face tough choices about how to strike a balance between the need
to maximize profits and their responsibilities to the environment and public health.
1
2-5 Assignment: Writing Notes
In my persuasive essay, I will write about the first issue which is the choice between
profits and social responsibility and in this case, I will argue that business leaders and owners
should do more than make profits. The perspectives to my argument are that a business leader
may choose to focus on profits solely or place additional emphasis on the social responsibility
for the company such as community initiatives, or the leader may invest in the triple bottom line
which involves the social environmental, and profits in equal measure. As a business major, this
topic is very sensitive as most business managers’ critical role is to ensure corporate and
business sustainability. The success of the manager is based on the profit margins which may
also be impacted by the programs and initiatives they invest in for sustainable development
which increases the overall expenses. This means that the topic of the choice of strategic
development on the investment on profitability over social and environmental development is
very important to business leaders.
The audience for my persuasive essay as mentioned above includes business leaders and
entrepreneurs. One of the challenges in supporting this augment and convincing them is the fact
that telling them to invest more resources in social development as well as environmental
sustainability increases their expenditure over the short and long term. Increased expenses reduce
the profitability of the company and as such may not be agreeable to business owners. Secondly,
competition is also a key element in determining the profitability of businesses. Convincing
managers to invest their limited funds to support the community while the competition is
investing to improve their products and marketing campaigns will be challenging as, in the shortrun, better products and extensive marketing campaigns lead to better revenues as well as
profitability.
2
The main goal of this essay is to convince corporate managers to invest more in the triple bottom
line rather than only focusing on profits. To achieve this goal I will need to provide compelling
evidence and case studies to prove that companies that invest in sustainability have better
chances at profits and financial stability over the long term. However, the key points that will
help support my argument include the triple bottom line helps the company to improve its
reputation, minimize compliance risks, acquire and retention of talent, and most importantly the
focus on sustainability may help the business to attract funding if there are limited liability
companies or looking towards an IPO. I will also argue that the triple bottom line is more
financially sustainable in the long term as compared to focusing on cost reduction, marketing,
and product development to increase return on investment per unit sold.
The first source I will use to support my argument is “Strategic Decision Making for the
Triple Bottom Line” written by Annaleena Parhankangas, Jason Coupet, Eric Welch, and Darold
T. Barnum to explain how the company will benefit after including this concept in their overall
decision-making processes. Secondly, I will also use the article titled “Relationships among
triple bottom line elements: Focus on integrating sustainable business practices” written by
Sitalakshmi Venkatraman, Raveendranath Ravi Nayak to explain the benefits of integrating all
three elements in the company’s overall strategic focus. I will also use this article to explain how
the three elements are interrelated and explain how easy and inexpensive it is to include them to
improve the company’s sustainable development and continuously improve its profits. Finally,
there are various strategies I have lined up to help me effectively integrate evidence. First, I will
use data on the profitability of companies that have implemented the pointers in my argument
which is critical in improving the quality of my argument. Also, I plan to use credible and
current sources that have current trends in the concept, credible and verifiable data.
3
References
McWilliams, A., Parhankangas, A., Coupet, J., Welch, E., & Barnum, D. T. (2016). Strategic
decision-making for the triple bottom line. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(3),
193-204.
Venkatraman, S., & Nayak, R. R. (2015). Relationships among triple bottom line elements:
Focus on integrating sustainable business practices. Journal of Global
Responsibility, 6(2), 195-214.
The C.R.A.A.P.O. Test Worksheet
The following questions will help you determine whether your source is reliable. First, answer each of
the questions for each category below. Once you have responded to each question in a category, assign
the category a numerical score between 1 and 10 with 1 meaning the source does not meet the
category’s criteria at all and 10 meaning the source meets the category’s criteria excellently. Then add
up the scores to determine whether the source passes the (C.R.A.A.P.O.) test!
Source Title:
Category 1: Currency
• When was the source published?
• Has the information been revised or updated since?
• Is the information current or out-of-date?
Category 1 Score:
Scoring Notes:
0–3: The information in the source is no longer fully accepted by professionals in the field; the
information is no longer accurate today; the information is old enough that it is no longer convincing
(especially the statistics and the financial data). If the source is in a rapidly changing field (technology,
medicine, etc.), the source was published more than ten years ago.
4–6: The theoretical content of the source is still accurate, but the statistics or financial data are no
longer relevant or updated enough to be convincing. If the source is in a rapidly changing field
(technology, medicine, etc.), the source was published within the last six to ten years. There have been
significant changes in the field since the source was published.
7–10: The information in the source is still accepted by professionals in the field; the information is still
accurate today; the information is recent enough to still be relevant (especially the statistics and the
financial data). If the source is in a rapidly changing field (technology, medicine, etc.), the source was
published within the last five years.
Category 2: Relevance
•
•
•
Category 2 Score:
Does the information relate to your project?
Have you looked at a variety of other sources? Do other sources meet your needs more
effectively?
Who is the intended audience of the source?
Scoring Notes:
0–3: The source is on the general topic but does not directly support any key points. The source is
written for an audience that is not relevant to this assignment (for example, it is written for elementary
school students or people in another country).
4–6: The source indirectly supports a key point and may include one or two helpful pieces of evidence.
The source is written for an audience that is partly relevant to this assignment.
7–10: The source directly supports a key point and includes specific pieces of evidence that can be used
in the essay. The source is written for an audience that is relevant to this assignment.
Category 3: Accuracy
• Do evidence and references support the information?
• Has the information been peer-reviewed?
• Is the source professional in appearance and free of errors?
Category 3 Score:
Scoring Notes:
0–3: The source includes no sources or poor sources (blogs, Wikis, etc.). Citations are missing or are
confusing. The source includes citation errors. The grammar, spelling, or punctuation are confusing or
inconsistent. The source is not formatted professionally and/or contains advertisements.
4–6: The source cites evidence from popular sources (newspapers, organization’s websites, etc.).
Citations are present. The source is easy to read and has a neat appearance.
7–10: The source cites evidence from peer-reviewed sources. The source includes enough evidence to
support its main points. The source uses a formal documentation style accurately. Grammar,
punctuation, spelling, and citation conventions are adhered to.
Category 4: Authority
Category 4 Score:
• Who is the author?
• What are the author’s credentials or organizational affiliations?
• Does a reputable organization publish the source?
Scoring notes:
0–3: No author is listed, or the author has little knowledge on the topic. The source is published by an
unknown or questionable organization (one that is known to hold a bias; one that is known for
inaccurate information, etc.).
4–6: The author is listed and has some knowledge of the topic, but the author is not an expert in the
field. A reputable organization or institution published the source.
7–10: The author is an expert in the field. The source is published in a scholarly publication that has
undergone the peer-review process.
Category 5: Purpose and Objectivity
Category 5 Score:
What
is
the
author’s
purpose?
To
inform?
Persuade?
Entertain?
•
• Is the information fact or opinion?
• Does the point of view seem to be objective or biased?
Scoring Notes:
0–3: The author’s purpose is to entertain. The author’s purpose is irrelevant to your purposes (for
example, they explain a process, and you need data to help convince readers). The information
presented includes only opinions. The author does not consider multiple viewpoints. The author has an
underlying agenda.
4–6: The author’s purpose may be to inform or to persuade. The author includes some facts and
evidence but relies heavily on opinion. The author does not have overt biases, but some implicit biases
are detected. Multiple viewpoints are considered but not thoroughly, fairly, and accurately.
7–10: The author’s purpose may be to inform or to persuade. The author relies on logic, facts, and
evidence and writes from an objective viewpoint. The author has no detectable biases. The author
considers multiple viewpoints fairly and accurately.
TOTAL SCORE:
Understanding Your Score:
Below 30: Unacceptable
30–34: Questionable
35–39: Average
40–44: Good
45–50: Excellent
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
