This manual is for PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 2, start to submission. Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility asks you to analyze an ethical issue involving a business, often corporate social responsibility: the ethical issues and how they relate, the stakeholders and their primary interests, how a normative ethical theory applies, and an evaluation of Milton Friedman's view that a business's responsibility is to increase its profits within the rules, including its deficiencies. The grade turns on balanced evaluation. Dismissing Friedman or adopting him uncritically both score lower than weighing his argument against the stakeholders' interests. Below is the method our tutors use, a structure that maps to the criteria, and an annotated sample excerpt. Prefer to hand it off? A premium original sample for this exact assessment comes back in 24 to 48 hours, revised free until it meets the guide. Capella's catalog lists the course as PHI-FPX2000, and some courserooms print PHI2000; both point to this same Assessment 2. In current courserooms this assessment typically appears as "Business Ethics and Corporate Responsibility".
One honesty note before the manual: Capella revises courses and scoring guides over time, so always write to the exact scoring guide attached to your assessment in the courseroom. The course identity above is verified on capella.edu; the method and structure below are our tutors' approach to it, not Capella's official rubric text.
How PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 2 is scored
FlexPath does not use letter grades. Each criterion in the scoring guide lands on one of four levels, and the level descriptions are the real writing brief:
| Level | What it means on a business ethics paper |
|---|---|
| Distinguished | The issue is defined, stakeholders and interests are identified, a normative theory is applied accurately, Friedman's view is explained fairly and evaluated, and the conclusion is reasoned. |
| Proficient | All parts are accurate, but the evaluation of Friedman is brief. |
| Basic | The paper describes the issue with little theory. |
| Non-performance | The stakeholder analysis, the theory or the Friedman evaluation is missing. |
Use the case or company your courseroom provides, and cite Friedman's 1970 essay if you discuss it directly.
The PHI FPX 2000 Assessment 2 method, step by step
-
Define the issue
The ethical question the business faces.
-
Identify stakeholders
Shareholders, employees, customers, community, and what each wants.
-
Apply a normative theory
Utilitarianism, Kantian ethics or stakeholder theory, applied to the case.
-
Explain Friedman fairly
His argument in "The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits."
-
Evaluate it
Strengths and deficiencies when applied to this case.
-
Conclude
What the business should do and why.
A structure that maps to the criteria
Word counts are planning targets our tutors use, not Capella rules; follow the length and format your scoring guide states.
| Section | What it must do | Guide |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | The case and the question. | ~50 words |
| Ethical issues and relationships | The issues defined. | ~100 words |
| Stakeholders' primary interests | Who wants what. | ~100 words |
| Normative ethical theory | Applied to the case. | ~100 words |
| Friedman's view and its deficiencies, conclusion | Evaluation, then references. | ~150 words |
Annotated sample excerpt
An original model excerpt from our team, written to show the register that reaches the top of the guide. Learn the moves, then write your own version.
Friedman's strongest point is that managers spend other people's money when they pursue social goals, so shareholders should decide how their returns are used for charity.1 His view is weaker where markets fail to price harm: a factory that pollutes a river may break no law and still impose costs on a town that never agreed to bear them, and his argument offers that town little.2 Applied to this case, the shareholder view would justify cutting the safety budget if it raised profits legally, which shows why most business ethicists add stakeholder obligations to it rather than replacing it.3
- 1States the argument's strongest point fairly.
- 2Identifies a specific deficiency with an example.
- 3Applies the evaluation to the case and draws a balanced conclusion.
The full premium sample for your exact assessment, written fresh to your scoring guide and topic, is free to request. Study it, revise it into your own voice, and submit work you understand.
The five mistakes that cost Distinguished
- Caricaturing Friedman. Explain his argument fairly.
- No stakeholder analysis. Identify interests.
- Theory named, not applied. Use it on the case.
- One-sided conclusion. Weigh both sides.
- No sources. Cite Friedman and course readings.
Pre-submission checklist
- Ethical issue defined
- Stakeholders and interests
- Normative theory applied
- Friedman explained fairly
- Deficiencies evaluated
- Reasoned conclusion and sources
Want the business ethics paper written?
Send the scoring guide and any materials from your courseroom. Our team returns a premium original business ethics paper in 24 to 48 hours, revised free until it meets the guide.