ACC1105 Audit, Assurance and Corporate Governance

Audit, Assurance and Corporate Governance

Assignment Guidelines

Deadline: 12^th May 2020

Corporate Governance codes are all over the world and the approach adopted by UK is known as a framework approach. The principles of Cadbury report and its successors have not been enforced by legislation on either companies listed on the London Stock Exchange or any entities. Listed companies are required to abide by the UK Corporate Governance code or to state in their accounts why they don’t comply.

TASK:

Prepare a report (3,000 +/- 10%) words on The practice of Corporate Governance.  The report should address  the following:           

        i.            Research on the history with the latest developments of Corporate Governance and its application to Companies particularly in the UK, USA and Bahrain

      ii.            The organization of Good Corporate Governance in Companies with the principle based approach and legal approach

    iii.            The effect of Non-compliance with the Code of Good Governance Practice with real life examples specially frauds, etc.

    iv.            Company and parties involved in implementing Corporate Governance

      v.            What is the impact of lack of proper Corporate Governance on the stakeholder?

    vi.            Role of External auditors

  vii.            The Role of Directors and Audit Committee in Good Corporate Governance practice

viii.            Emerging new changes in Corporate Governance Code (if any)

Research for Report

Possible Resources include the following:

a.      Company Corporate Websites

b.      Google Search, Yahoo Quotes, Investopedia.com

c.       GDN, DT, BBC News, CNN News and Gulf News etc.

d.      Published journal papers on Corporate Governance

e.       Financial Times

General Instructions & Format:

1)      The word limit for this assignment is 3,000 words (+/- 10%) without tables, content page and bibliography

2)      The assignment must be submitted on time (a soft copy to be uploaded on Turnitin) to be considered for evaluation.

Turnitin details are as follows:

Class ID:

Password:

3)      Assignments submitted after the deadline will be penalised by deducting 5% of the overall mark for each day up-to 6 days; assignments will not be graded or accepted after 6 days.

4)      If you face any problem, please make sure to contact your lecturer before the due date.

5)      You are expected to support your work with sources from the literature and use Harvard referencing style as appropriate, in text and in the list of references at the end of your assignment.

6)      Format:

a.       Font: Times New Roman

b.      Use double spacing and sufficient margins (3-4 cm)

c.       Headings & subheadings font size: 14 points; the rest of the text: 12 points

d.      All pages should be numbered; include a table of content

•        The written report will be marked based on the attached grading scheme.  Please refer to grading scheme as attached.

•        The overall assignment will count for 40% of your final grade for this module.

•        Fill in the BIBF Assignment Coversheet, scan it or capture it as a picture (to ensure that it does not affect the similarity % counted by Turnitin) and paste it in the first page of your assignment.

•        All students are required to sign the coversheet.

•        By signing the coversheet and uploading your work on Turnitin, you confirm that:

–          The work is your own, and that you have not copied another’s work or allowed anyone to copy your work, and that you have referenced the work of others in an appropriate way.

–          You have read and understood the BIBF guidelines on Plagiarism and abided with the necessary practice

•        Students who are suspected to have encountered any form of academic dishonesty will face further investigation.

·          Detailed understanding of the subject area

·          Extensive background study

·          Highly focussed answer and well structured

·          Logically presented and defended arguments

·          No factual/computational errors

·          Original interpretation

·          New links between topics are developed

·          New approach to a problem

·          Excellent presentation with very accurate communication

·          Complete command of subject and other relevant areas

·          Ideas/arguments are highly original

·          Complete command of subject

·          Ideas/arguments are highly original

·          Command of subject but with minor gaps in knowledge

·          Ideas/arguments are mostly original

·          Command of subject but with some gaps in knowledge

·          Ideas/arguments are mostly original

·          Understands most but not all of the subject area

·          Evidence of  background study

·          Focussed answer with good structure

·          Arguments presented coherently

·          Mostly free of  factual/computational errors

·          Some limited original interpretation

·          Well known  links between topics are described

·          Problems addressed by existing methods/approaches

·          Good presentation with accurate communication

·          Command of subject but with gaps in knowledge

·          Some ideas/arguments are original

·          Strong factual knowledge and understanding

·          Ideas/arguments are well presented but few are original

·          Strong factual knowledge with minor weaknesses in understanding

·          Most but not all ideas/arguments are well presented and few are original

·          Understands the main elements of the subject area

·          Limited evidence of  background study

·          Answer focussed on question but also with some irrelevant  material and weaknesses in structure

·          Arguments presented but lack coherence

·          Has several  factual/computational errors

·          No original interpretation

·          Only major  links between topics are described

·          Limited problem solving

·          Some weaknesses in presentation and accuracy

·          Strong factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding

·          Ideas/arguments are limited but are well presented

·          Moderate factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding

·          Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation

·          Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding

·          Ideas/arguments are limited with weaknesses in logic/presentation

·          Weaknesses in understanding of  the subject area

·          Limited evidence of  background study

·          Answer only poorly focussed on question and with some irrelevant material and poor structure

·          Arguments presented but lack coherence

·          Several  factual/computational errors

·          No original interpretation

·          Only major  links between topics are described

·          Limited problem solving

·          Many weaknesses in presentation and accuracy

·          For PGT – Insufficient to fulfil the associated learning outcomes

·          Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding

·          A few ideas/arguments are presented but with weaknesses

·          Limited factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding

·          Very few ideas/arguments are presented

·          Limited factual knowledge with many weaknesses in understanding

·          Very few ideas/arguments are presented and with errors in logic/presentation

·          No evidence of relevant knowledge or understanding

·          No evidence of  background study

·          Answer relies on irrelevant material and lacks a coherent structure

·          No arguments presented or arguments are not relevant to the assessment

·          Many factual/computational errors

·          No attempt at interpretation

·          No links between topics are described

·          No attempt to solve  problems or to address the assessment brief

·          The presentation is very weak containing many inaccuracies

·          No evidence of knowledge/understanding

·          Only limited evidence of an attempt to answer the question

·          No evidence of knowledge/understanding

·          Very limited evidence of an attempt to answer the question

·          No evidence of knowledge/understanding and/or evidence of misunderstanding

·          No attempt to answer/address the question