BUSI49957 Assessment task- Write a 2500-word individual report critically evaluating the sustainability performance of an organisation of your choice. You may select a private or public or third sector organisation for this task.

Key Details

Brief	Write a 2500-word individual report critically evaluating the sustainability performance of an organisation of your choice. You may select a private or public or third sector organisation for this task.
Format	Report (Individual)
Word Count	2500 (maximum, not + or – 10%)
Due date	Hand-in date: March 16th 2025, by 11pm Submit coursework electronically in NOW by using the Dropbox facility within the module learning room. Please submit written work in PDF Format and include the NBS Academic Coursework Front Cover.
Weighting	90% of the total module mark

BUSI49957 Assessment task (suggest maximum one page)

Write a 2500-word individual report critically evaluating the sustainability performance of an organisation of your choice. You may select a private or public or third sector organisation for this task.

There are four parts to this assessment. Please make sure you address every part (detailed guidance is available on the module handbook).

PART 1. Introduction

PART 2. A brief overview of the organisation and its approach to sustainability

PART 3. Critical evaluation of its sustainability initiatives (using two specific frameworks, see below)

PART 4. Conclusion and recommendation

Guidance for completing this assessment

To complete this assignment, start by selecting an organisation with publicly available Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG), or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), or sustainability reports, ideally one with a strong sustainability focus or sufficient data for analysis. The latest sustainability report published by Marks and Spencer is provided here as an example.

Begin by conducting desk research, reviewing the organisation’s latest ESG/CSR/sustainability report, their website, and any relevant academic or industry sources. These reports are usually lengthy and typically highlight environmental efforts (e.g., carbon emissions, renewable energy), social initiatives (e.g., diversity, community impact), and governance practices (e.g., transparency, anti-corruption).

Your assignment must utilise the following two frameworks discussed in class:

1.United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs)
2.Zadek, Pruzan and Evans’s (2013) eight quality principles against which one can evaluate the quality of ESG/CSR/sustainability reporting.

[Full reference: Zadek, S., Evans, R., & Pruzan, P. (2013). Building corporate accountability: Emerging practice in social and ethical accounting and auditing. London: Routledge]

• For the UN SDGs, identify which goals the organisation addresses (e.g., SDG 13: Climate Action, SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production) and evaluate their measurable contributions and alignment with global priorities.
• For Zadek, Pruzan, and Evans’s eight quality principles, critically evaluate the organisation’s reporting quality, looking at principles such as inclusivity (engagement with

stakeholders), completeness (coverage of relevant topics), transparency (clarity of information), and external verification. You need to offer some recommendations or improvement suggestions for the organisation based on your critical evaluation of their ESG/CSR/sustainability report.

• In your evaluation, use evidence from the report to evaluate the organisation’s sustainability practices, strengths, and weaknesses while applying the two frameworks. Summarise your findings and propose improvements or recommendations for the organisation (e.g., improved stakeholder engagement, independent auditing). These suggestions should be grounded in your evaluation rather than added arbitrarily. Ensure that you include complete and correctly formatted references. This approach will enable you to deliver a comprehensive, concept- driven evaluation of the organisation’s sustainability efforts.

BUSI49957 Learning Outcomes Assessed

LO2: Critically analyse relevant theories which inform responsible and sustainable businesses, from a multidisciplinary perspective
LO3: Develop a plan that demonstrates responsible stakeholder engagement and managing diversity creatively
LO4: Through critical reflection, prioritise stakeholder interests in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility
LO5: Critically evaluate different approaches to ethical management/ leadership and decision making
LO6: Using the lens of responsible and sustainable management, critically analyse organisational value and supply chains

How does this assessment relate to future employment?

Word count

The individual report is not to exceed 2500 number words (Not +/- 10%).

The purpose of the word count is to support your writing development by encouraging a focus on clarity and conciseness, provide experience of writing to a specified word limit,

which is common practice in professional and research environments, and support equity in grading work from different individuals.

You are required to include the word count on the NBS Coursework Front Cover (available on the NOW module learning room) for all of your coursework, as an accurate statement of the words used. If you are found to have exceeded the word count in order to gain an unfair advantage, then your tutor can adjust your grade downwards depending on the amount of additional work submitted.

If the additional work is up to 500 words, the overall grade for the piece of work will be reduced by 1 grade point (e.g. UG 2.1-Mid to 2.1-Low; PG Commendation-Mid to Commendation-Low);

If the additional work exceeds 500 words, the overall grade for the piece of work will be reduced by 3 grade points (e.g. 2.1-Mid to 2.2 Mid; PG Commendation-Mid to Pass-Mid).

These penalties will be applied even if the reduced grade is below a pass grade.

You are advised to submit work that is as close to the maximum word count as is practical to enable you to demonstrate that you have met all the learning outcomes.

Are You Looking The Solution of BUSI49957 Assessment 2

Order Non Plagiarized Assignment

Style, structure and presentation

The individual report should be formal, with four sections outlined above. You must include list of references and any appendices at the end (numbered and with a title). Please avoid making forced references and only cite the sources you have genuinely consulted, as your work will be checked for accuracy during the assessment process. Headings to be numbered throughout. Diagrams and figures can be included in the text if applicable or as appendices.

Your report should be clear, easy to understand, no typos/grammar/spelling mistakes, and, present information in the most appropriate way.

Style guidelines:

• Use 1.5 line spacing for the body of the report.
• The Reference List is single-spaced. Left aligned text is also easier to read.
• Use a business-like font like Verdana, size 12.
• Number each of your pages, and include your student number in the footer of the page.
• Use the automatic table for contents available in Word.

If English is not your first language, we strongly recommend that you spend time proofreading your work and book an appointment with the Academic English team or NTU Library. This will help to ensure that you do not lose marks through unclear or poorly expressed language, and will present a more polished, professional look to your work.

BUSI49957 Grading matrix

Your work will be graded utilising the grading matrix below. This provides a standard benchmark which all assessments are graded against. Your final grade will depend on the extent to which you have meet the grading criteria.

Copy and paste a copy of the online grading matrix below. Assessment criteria must be aligned to the University’s Grade Based Assessment descriptors (See QH Supplement 15A: The Grade Based Marking Descriptors). The descriptors represent a set of common characteristics expected of work at each of the different grade bands and should be contextualised to disciplines and tasks in accordance with NBS guidance and parameters.

NBS Feedback Form for Postgraduate Coursework
Module	Responsible & Sustainable Management (BUSI49957)		Student Number and Name
Assessment Element (as stated in the assessment brief)	Element 1 Element 2		Tutor name (s)		Dr Md Nazmul Hasan
Assessment submission date	March 16th 2025, by 11pm		Date Feedback Uploaded		Please refer to the Dropbox folder for the date on which your feedback was uploaded.
MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSED
a) Critically analyse relevant theories which inform responsible and sustainable businesses, from a multidisciplinary perspective b) Develop a plan that demonstrates responsible stakeholder engagement and managing diversity creatively c) Through critical reflection, prioritise stakeholder interests in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility			d) Critically evaluate different approaches to ethical management/ leadership and decision making e) Using the lens of responsible and sustainable management, critically analyse organisational value and supply chains
Element Grade The overall grade for the work is based on a holistic assessment and is determined by how well the criteria have been met ove rall and not the sum of the individual aspects of the work. In the matrix below, grades awarded against each criterion indicate that the relevant aspect of the work can be more readily associated with that category than any other. Allocation of a grade does not indicate that work exactly matches the associated description.
						Exceptional Distinction
			High Pass	High Commendation		High Distinction
Mid Fail			Mid Pass	Mid Commendation		Mid Distinction
Low Fail		Marginal Fail	Pass	Commendation		Distinction
Zero If a zero grade, select the appropriate comment below:
NS – No work submitted or submitted > 5 working days after deadline			NK – Work submitted and is in moderation
NE – Work is not yet submitted, and student has an Extension			NN – Student did not attend for an exam

Component, learning outcomes and weighting	Fail	Marginal Fail	Pass	Commendation	Distinction
1. Introduction	Introduction is not	Introduction is provided	Introduction is clear but	Introduction is well-	Exceptionally written
(10% mark)	provided or inaccurate	but very poor and does	very basic with good,	written as it provides a	introduction which
	information of the	not adequately address	albeit minimal	good analysis of the	covers the scope of the
	organisation with no	the requirements of the	information about the	company’s background	report and clearly
	evidence of research	brief or does so with	organisation’s	and highlights the scope	communicates the
		significant errors and	background. Some	of the report. There is	elements of the report.
		omissions about the	evidence of research but	some evidence of	Excellent discussion and
		organisation	minimal.	research on the company	analysis of the
				using the analysed	company’s background
				report.	information with
					evidence of extensive
					research on the
					organisation using both
					internal and external
					sources of information.
2. Overview of the	No or very limited	Some overview presented	A sufficient overview of	Provides a good overview	Offers a detailed analysis
organisation and its	evidence of	but insufficient and/or	the type and nature of	of the organisation,	of the organisation,
approach to	understanding the scope	marred with errors and	the organisation.	including its core	linking its mission,
sustainability	of the organisation,	omissions of key	Demonstrated basic	mission, structure, and	structure, and operations
(25% mark)	showing lack of	information. A very weak	understanding of its	operations.	with sustainability goals.
	knowledge of its	attempt with limited	approach to	Demonstrates a solid	The submission reflects
	approach to sustainability	information on the remit of the organisation’s operations.	sustainability.	understanding of the organisation’s sustainability strategy,	a nuanced understanding of sustainability embedded across all
				outlining specific	organisational levels.
				practices, policies, and
				goals.

3. Critical evaluation of	Lacks critical evaluation,	Shows a limited attempt at	Provides an adequate	Demonstrates a strong,	Offers a comprehensive,
its sustainability	providing little to no	evaluation, offering a basic	evaluation of the	well-reasoned evaluation	nuanced evaluation of
initiatives	understanding of the	description of initiatives	organisation’s	of the organisation’s	the organisation’s
(50% mark)	organisation’s	with little depth or critical	sustainability initiatives,	sustainability initiatives,	sustainability initiatives,
	sustainability initiatives.	insight. Key points are	showing a reasonable	with clear critical insight	with selected theory-
	Analysis is missing or	underdeveloped, lacking	level of understanding.	using the selected	informed critical
	highly superficial, with	clarity.	Some critical insight is	concepts. Effectively	analysis. Highlights both
	minimal evidence or		present, though analysis	analyses key initiatives,	strengths and areas for
	insight.		often lacks depth and nuance.	providing depth and relevant examples from	improvement, demonstrating solid
				the report to support	understanding and
				arguments.	insight into the
					effectiveness and impact
					of each initiative.
4. Conclusion	Conclusion is omitted or	Conclusion is insufficient.	The conclusion is	The conclusion is well	The conclusion is very
(15% mark)	are at a superficial level,	Limited conclusions	sufficient, but although	written – logical, clear	clear and convincing,
	bearing little relation to	presented with very little	consistent with the main	and consistent, drawing	meaningful and critical.
	the main body of the	justification, if any, or	content they are rather	upon the prior analysis,	It is well-grounded in
	text.	show no link to the analysis within the assignment.	weak and superficial.	forming a highly relevant end to the work.	prior analysis.
What you did well in this coursework. ·
What you can do to improve your future coursework. ·