CS Instructions

Analyzing Case Studies
(Page 1 of 6)

In analyzing case studies, you need to know which six-member group you are in and also your philosopher identity within the group. Your particular assignment for the week will depend upon your philosopher identity.

These instructions for analyzing case studies include six parts:
               I. Initial Explanation
             II. Information about Grading
            III. More Details about Assignments
            IV. Sample Analysis of a Case Study
             V. Work Assignments for Case Studies--Weeks 8-11, 14-15
            VI. Checklist for Work Assignments

I. Initial Explanation

For each case study, there will be an assigned problem in business ethics to solve.

Assignment	Degree of Difficulty	Tasks
Interest Identifier	1	Identify the parties involved in the situation and then describe how each party views its own interests
Fact Finder	1	Describe any relevant facts occurring in the case study that are helpful in understanding and solving the problem; describe any inferences that follow from the facts alone
Problem Solver	3	List some possible solutions to the problem; then pick the best solution and justify the it in terms of the interests of the parties, the relevant facts, and a moral point of view
Critic	2	Point out any weaknesses in the first draft of the solution in terms of evidence, arguments, or the moral point of view

Your group will have a separate discussion group listing. Each week the group consists of two interest identifiers, two fact finders, and one problem solver, and one critic. Positions rotate through the group. Thus, over six weeks, each student serves twice as an interest identifier, twice as a fact finder, once as a problem solver, and once as a critic.

    Time Constraints of the Weekly Schedule:
        1. Interest identifiers have the first three days to post their identifications;
        2. Fact finders have the first three days to post their facts;
        3. The problem solver should post a first draft of the solution no later than the fifth day;
        4. The critic should post the critique no later than the seventh day; and
        5. The problem solver should post a final draft of the solution no later than the ninth day.

Although the paragraph above lays out absolute time constraints, messages within the group should circulate continuously throughout the week. Maximum discussion of the case study is desirable. Ideally, interest identifiers and fact finders should provide suggestions and/or feedback to the problem solver and critic rather than considering their group activity for the week finished by the third day.

Next Page

Click on the Information icon below to return to the Basic Information page.