This document provides an overview of the assessment tasks for the ACC03043 Corporate Governance unit. It includes three assessment tasks: two written reports worth 30% each and a final examination worth 40%. The reports assess students' knowledge, skills, and ability to meet various learning outcomes related to corporate governance. The first report involves providing recommendations to a board of directors on the roles of directors and issues related to executive pay. The second report involves evaluating CEO pay practices and making recommendations to improve governance in that area. The examination completes the assessment of students' grasp of the subject matter.

1. ACC03043 Assessment Session 2 2015
Overview of Assessment
Assessment in this unit comprises three tasks:
· Assessment Task 1 – 30%
· Assessment Task 2 – 30%
· Examination – 40%
Assessment to Meet National Threshold Learning Outcomes
The Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) has issued in
collaboration with the Office of Learning and Teaching (OLT)
previously the Australian Learning and Teaching Council
(ALTC) the Learning and Teaching Academic Standards for
Business, Management and Economics. The Learning and
Teaching Academic Standards Statement for Accounting was
issued in December 2010 and can be accessed from the
following web link.
http://www.abdc.edu.au/download.php?id=325154,282,1
The unit ACC03043 Corporate Governance is covered by this
Standard and this unit is offered at the Master Degree Advanced
standard. This is equivalent to the Australian Qualification
Framework (AQF) Level 9 award requirements. In this unit we
will be focusing on four primary threshold learning outcomes
and these will be assessed in the various assessment tasks. The
following learning outcomes for ACC03043 have been adapted
from the national standards for the Accounting Discipline to
apply to Corporate Governance.
The foundation learning outcome is KNOWLEDGE. In this unit
you will need to demonstrate knowledge of a significant amount
of information relating to corporate governance and related
areas of management theory and practice. The Master graduate
needs to meet the following national standard for Knowledge:
Integrate advanced theoretical and technical corporate
governance knowledge which includes a selection of
accounting, auditing and assurance, finance, economics,

2. quantitative methods, information systems, commercial law,
corporation law and taxation law.
The secondary learning outcome is the development of
APPLICATION SKILLS. In this unit you will be required to
demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge about corporate
governance in a range of corporate governance settings. The
Master graduate needs to meet the following national standard
of Application Skills:
Critically apply advanced theoretical and technical corporate
governance knowledge and skills to solve emerging and or
advanced corporate governance problems.
The tertiary learning outcome is the development and exercise
of professional JUDGEMENT. In this unit you will be required
to demonstrate the ability to make professional judgements
about corporate governance matters in a range of professional
settings. The Master graduate needs to meet the following
national standard for Judgement:
Exercise judgement under minimal supervision to solve
emerging and/or advanced corporate governance problems in
complex contexts using social, ethical, economic, regulatory
and global perspectives.
The final learning outcome assessed in this unit is the
development of skills in COMMUNICATION. In this unit you
will be required to demonstrate the ability to prepare written
reports that communicate complex corporate governance issues
and advice to both professionals and non-professionals in the
corporate governance field. The Master graduate needs to meet
the following national standard for Communication.
Justify and communicate corporate governance advice and ideas
in complex collaborative contexts involving both professionals
and non-professionals in the corporate governance field.

3. As you work on your assessment tasks make sure you consider
and seek to demonstrate that you can meet the standard for each
of the above national threshold learning outcomes for Master
graduates.
(Assignment 1 details commence on the next page)
Assessment Task 1
Due Date: 5.00pm Monday 20 July 2015 (Beginning
of Week 5)
Length: 2,400 words total (+/- 10%), comprising 1,200 words
for each of the 2 parts in the question. Reference list and cover
sheet details are not included in this word-limit total.
Weighting: 30% of total unit marks - 15% for each part
Part 1 (15%)
Assessment Criteria:
· Demonstration of knowledge of the issues and evidence of
wide reading to support your analysis
· Demonstration of your ability to apply the knowledge to
identify keys issues leading to your recommendations
· Evidence of sound reasoning and the exercise of professional
judgement to support your recommendations
· Development and statement of concise recommendations for
presentation to the Chairman and shareholders
· Overall structure and professional presentation of the report to
the Chairman and shareholders
· High quality written communication of concepts and terms in
ordinary English as not all shareholders can be assumed to be
professionally competent in corporate governance

4. ‘As part of their role as members of a unitary board, non-
executive directors should constructively challenge and help
develop proposals on strategy.
Non-executive directors should scrutinise the performance of
management in meeting agreed goals and objectives and monitor
the reporting of performance. They should satisfy themselves
on the integrity of financial information and that financial
controls and systems of risk management are robust and
defensible. They are responsible for determining appropriate
levels of remuneration of executive directors and have a prime
role in appointing and, where necessary, removing executive
directors, and in succession planning.’
Financial Reporting Council, The UK Corporate Governance
Code, September 2014, p.9
https://www.frc.org.uk/Our-Work/Codes-Standards/Corporate-
governance/UK-Corporate-Governance-Code.aspx
‘Suncorp’s surprise announcement last month that directors
would need to own more than $200,000 of the company’s stock
is likely to spark a trend as new data reveals directors with
“skin in the game” generally outperform – by a lot.’
Adele Ferguson, ‘Report finds companies with directors holding
stock had better returns’, Sydney Morning Herald, 26 November
2013.
http://www.smh.com.au/action/printArticle?id=4953431
Required
Assume you have been engaged as a corporate governance
consultant to a board of directors of a public company listed on
the stock exchange. Your assignment is to prepare a report to
be submitted to the Chairman of the board explaining and
discussing the roles, duties and responsibilities of the
company’s directors. Your report should contain specific
recommendations on the roles of non-executive directors and
the management of their relationship with executive directors
and shareholders. The Chairman has specifically indicated that
she intends to make your report available to shareholders of the

5. company and that the document will be published on the
company’s web site.
Part 2 (15%)
Assessment Criteria:
· Demonstration of knowledge of the issues and evidence of
wide reading to support your analysis
· Demonstration of your ability to apply the knowledge to
identify keys issues leading to your recommendations
· Evidence of sound reasoning and the exercise of professional
judgement to support your recommendations
· Development and statement of concise recommendations for
presentation to the AICD
· Overall structure and professional presentation of the report to
the AICD
· High quality written communication of concepts and terms
using language for an audience that is assumed to be
professionally competent in corporate governance
‘Chief executives with multi-million dollar pay packets are not
necessarily working in the best interests of shareholders, new
research has found, and there may be a case to cap their pay.
A new paper called ‘When Less is More: The Benefits of Limits
on Executive Pay’, asks whether limits on executive pay
cheques harm or benefit shareholders.
The paper by University of Melbourne senior research fellow Dr
Peter Cebon and University of California, Berkeley, professor
of finance Benjamin Hermalin , suggests that giving CEOs $10
million bonuses encourages them to make short-term decisions
rather than work closely with the board and in the best interests
of shareholders.’
https://www.australianshareholders.com.au/news/big-ceo-
bonuses-encourage-short-term-decisions
‘Cheniere Energy’s Charif Souki has emerged as the highest
paid US executive in 2013, receiving $US142 million ($153).’

6. Laura Marcinek, Caleb Melby and Zain Shauk, ‘Top Paid US
CEO get $153m, despite company never posting an annual
profit’, Sydney Morning Herald, 1 May 2014
http://www.smh.com.au/action/printArticle?id=5390138
‘BlackBerry’s new interim chief executive John Chen will get
$US3million in salary and bonuses, as well as stock valued at
about $85million that will vest over the next five years.’
Hugo Miller, ‘New BlackBerry CEO John Chen get $93 million
pay package’, Sydney Morning Herald, 8 November 2013
http://www.smh.com.au/action/printAticle?id=30003050
Required
Assume you have been employed as a corporate governance
consultant by the Australian Institute of Company Directors
(AICD). The AICD is concerned that the alleged excessive
remuneration paid to CEOs is undermining the perceived quality
and reputation of company boards, and further is creating
conflict between boards and shareholders. Your assignment is
to prepare a report to be submitted to the AICD evaluating the
evidence that CEOs and executive remuneration is not aligned
with corporate performance. In your report the AICD has asked
you to make recommendations for improving the current
corporate governance practices relating to setting, reporting and
approving CEO and executive remuneration.
(Assessment Task 2 details commence on the next page)
Assessment Task 2
Due Date: 5.00pm Monday 24 August 2015
(Beginning of Week 10)
Length: 2,400 words total (+/- 10%), comprising 1,200 words
for each of the 2 parts in the question. Reference list and cover
sheet details are not included in this word-limit total.

7. Weighting: 30% of total unit marks - 15% for each part
Part 1 (15%)
Assessment Criteria:
· Demonstration of knowledge of the issues and evidence of
wide reading to support your analysis
· Demonstration of your ability to apply the knowledge to
identify keys issues leading to your recommendations
· Evidence of sound reasoning and the exercise of professional
judgement to support your recommendations
· Development and statement of concise recommendations for
presentation to the Chairman
· Overall structure and professional presentation of your report
to the Chairman
· High quality written communication of concepts and terms as
the Chairman can be assumed to be professionally competent in
corporate governance
‘The US Securities and Exchange Commission slapped
Australian mining company BHP Billiton with a $25 million
fine for practices tied to gifts offered to foreign government
officials during the 2008 Summer Olympic Games in Beijing.
BHP agreed to pay the fine to settle the charges, the SEC said.
The mining company invited 176 government officials and
employees of state-owned enterprises to attend the Beijing
Games at BHP’s expense, the SEC said in its complaint. The
sponsored guests were primarily from countries in Africa and
Asia and received hospitality packages, that were valued at
$12,000 to $16,000 a package, the commission said.
The SEC said BHP failed to provide employees with specific
training on how to evaluate the bribery risk of an invitation …
It didn’t have procedures to ensure meaningful preparation,
review and approval of requests … in violation of the internal
control provisions of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.’
Dow Jones Institutional News, ‘SEC Fines BHP Billiton
$25Million’, 20 May 2015

8. http://www.asx.com.au/prices/market-news-
detailHome.htm?an=DJDN000020150520eb5k001yo
Required
Assume you have been employed as a corporate governance
consultant by the Chairman of BHP Billiton Ltd. Your
assignment is to prepare a report for the Chairman
recommending best practice corporate governance guidelines for
the company to adopt so that it can manage and prevent any
future issues of alleged corporate malpractice or other actions
that could be classified as corrupt practices by executives or
directors of the company.
Part 2 (15%)
Assessment Criteria:
· Demonstration of knowledge of the issues and evidence of
wide reading to support your analysis
· Demonstration of your ability to apply the knowledge to
identify keys issues leading to your recommendations
· Evidence of sound reasoning and the exercise of professional
judgement to support your recommendations
· Development and statement of concise recommendations for
presentation to the AII
· Overall structure and professional presentation of your report
to the AII
· High quality written communication of concepts and terms in
ordinary English as the report will be published on the AII web
site and not all readers can be assumed to be professionally
competent in corporate governance
‘FIFA, an enterprise worth billions, has plenty of legitimate
resources to fight off the corruption allegations – some $400
million a year from sponsorship alone. So, as the US
government follows the money allegedly coming in through
illegitimate channels, fans should follow the money FIFA gets
from corporate sponsors, which enables its unsavoury business

9. as usual. The deaths of thousands of migrant workers building
World Cup stadiums and other rampant labor abuse have done
little to move soccer’s giant marketing partners – Visa, Coca-
Cola and McDonald’s – so perhaps an international criminal
investigation might do the trick. …
According to Transparency International poll of 35,000 people
from 30 different countries, 69.2 per cent of soccer fans have no
faith in FIFA. In the last year, some big-name sponsors have
started to take notice, with Emirates, Johnson and Johnson and
Sony ending partnerships with Blatter’s group.’
Kavitha A. Davidson, ‘FIFA’s Corporate Sponsors Abet
Soccer’s Corruption’, Bloomberg View, 27 May 2015
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-27/fifa-s-
corporate-sponsors-abet-soccer-s-corruption
Required
Assume you have been employed as a corporate governance
consultant by the Association of Institutional Investors (AII).
The AII is concerned with the risks associated with investments
in corporations sponsoring FIFA. In order to minimise this risk
the AII wants to know how the corporate governance of FIFA
should be reformed to meet contemporary standards of best
practice in corporate governance. Your assignment is to prepare
a report to be published on the AII web site recommending the
corporate governance changes required to be made by FIFA so
that AII members can continue to invest in FIFAs’ corporate
sponsors without exposure to investment risk associated with
FIFA’s current alleged corporate governance deficiencies.
(End of assessment details)

10. 8