SIB7505-A Corporate Social Responsibility Assessment Case Study Semester 2, 2025 | UoB

SIB7505-A Assessment Case Study

Students are required to complete a 2000-word individual essay as an assessment for this module. This assignment will constitute 100% of the final module mark. The assignment will test the students’ critical understanding of theoretical perspectives on ethics and various techniques and practices employed in today’s organisation to tackle social and environmental responsibility challenges. The students will also need to show their skills in applying this theoretical knowledge to the analysis and resolution of ethical business problems.

SIB7505-A Assignment Brief

Explore the following link and investigate the ethically problematic situation(s) of any of the following three (3) companies provided below. You may also choose to support your discussion with unique experiences/case(s) (if applicable) from your country of origin or any other emerging economy where your chosen company has a strong presence.

Companies:

1. Amazo
2. Asd
3. Nestle

SIB7505-A Task:

Write a reflective formal report, responding to the following concerns/questions:

• Briefly describe the ethically problematic situation(s) of your chosen company.
• Explain why this situation is ethically problematic and what ethical issues/dimensions are involved in it.
• Has the organisation done anything to resolve the situation? Has it been effective, and is it ethical?
• Propose your approach to resolving the situation and explain why and how your approach will work in practice.

1.Describing the ethically problematic situation(s) of your chosen company

To help in identifying an appropriate situation, students may simply try to consider the regular activities of their chosen organisation. Many ethical problems are not apparent as such until you start examining them closely. The situation needs to be clearly and very specifically defined. Make sure that the subject matter is narrow and can be explained in about 200 words.

2. Explain why this situation is ethically problematic and what ethical issues/dimensions are involved in it.

Students are to engage in critical analysis and ensure that they can clearly explain why the specific situation they describe is ethically problematic. In other words, what exactly is the problem? Does the problem have several different ethical dimensions? It is important for students to discuss and evaluate the problematic dimensions of the identified organisational issue, applying one or more well-established CSR-related theories (such as the consequentialist theory, non-consequentialist theory, stakeholder theory and others). Students should be aware that the application of different theories of ethics may not necessarily yield the same conclusions (e.g., the outcomes may be appropriate, but the means of achieving them may not be).

3. Did the organisation do anything to resolve the situation? Was it effective and ethical?

This relates to the chosen organisation’s management analysis of the described unethical issue. Students should describe and evaluate how the management of the organisation addressed, is planning to address or did not address the selected organisational issue. These students need to discuss assessment should provide sufficient details related to which specific management decisions were taken (or will be taken) and related to the specific aspects of the organisational issue and/or stakeholders. The assessment of management’s actions should be critical and well supported by the relevant academic and practitioner literature. Students are strongly advised to use a variety of theoretical perspectives on ethics, CSR, stakeholders, and sustainability to conduct their evaluation. Students are expected to make use of different categories of perspectives, such as but not limited to broad theories of ethics and ethical decision-making (consequentialist, non-consequentialist, and others), perspectives on the efficacy of specific management tools and techniques that can be used to foster ethical and responsible conduct in organisations.

4. Recommendations for resolving the organisational issue

Based on the previous analyses that ought to have been conducted and incorporating students’ learning related to different stakeholders’ ethical and responsibility issues, students should provide specific recommendations for the selected organisation to resolve the organisational issue already identified. It is crucial that students consider carefully and explain how their recommendations may be practically applicable. Recommendations provided must be supported by sufficient literature, including related data where applicable.

THE STRUCTURE (A suggested format of the report should be as follows)

• The following provides specific guidance on writing the reflective report. The report should contain the following:
   
  Executive Summary (challenges and objectives, CSR analytical methods applied, limitations, and findings of the report – about 200 words only, no bullet points; no repetition of the introduction).
• Table of Contents
• Introduction (around 200 words)
• An overview of the selected organisational issue and discussed problem(s) (around 200 words).
• Ethical analysis of the selected organisational issue.
• Management’s analysis of the selected organisational issue.
• Proposed recommendations for resolving the organisational issue.
• A brief conclusion section that summarises the key aspects of the report (around 200 words)
• The reference list.

Final Notes for the Assessment.

AVOID using any Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs like ChatGPT and others to get your work done. Our Turnitin system can detect such practices, and your report will be flagged for an academic misconduct case immediately. Summarising and rehashing facts published about the company is discouraged, except where factual restatement is an integral part of evaluation. Information obtained from Wikipedia or Investopedia and or related non-peer-reviewed/subjective sources is highly discouraged. Your report should be concise, incisive, and literate and include appropriate supporting tables, charts, and exhibits/figures where applicable. There must be clear and convincing evidence of consultation of academic literature – you are expected to draw in detail and substantively on peer-reviewed academic literature, including peer-reviewed journal articles. Websites should be few and used very cautiously, and all data consulted and cited in the body of the report should be appropriately referenced under the University of Bradford’s referencing guide (see module handbook for further guidance on referencing format/style).

Rubric Management UG

Generic Marking Scheme for Corporate Social Responsibility (SIB7505-A_2023-24_SEM2)

Criteria	Ratings
KNOWLEDGE (20%)
	70% and over Excellent statement	60-69% Very good statement		50-59% Reasonably good		40-49% Some basic details		Less than 40% Insufficient details
	and details of relevant	and details of relevant		statement and details of		of relevant module		of relevant module
	module concepts and	module concepts and		relevant module concepts		concepts and		concepts and theory
	theory	theory		and theory		theory
APPLICATION
(20%)
	70% and over	60-69%		50-59%	40-49%		Less than 40%
	Excellent coverage	Obvious and subtle		Identifies obvious	Identifies obvious		Fails to identify key
	of issues, excellent	issues dealt with, very		issues only, good	issues only, weak		issues, poor or no
	application of theory	good application of		application of theory	application of theory		attempt at application
		theory					of theory
EVALUATION
(20%)
	70% and over	60-69%	50-59%		40-49%		Less than 40%
	Excellent evaluation,	Good evaluation,	Reasonable		Weak evaluation,		Poor/no attempt at
	critical judgment and	critical judgment	evaluation, critical		critical judgment and		evaluation, critical
	problem solving	and problem solving	judgment and problem		problem solving		judgment, or problem
			solving				solving

Criteria	Ratings
RESEARCH (20%)
	70% and over Excellent referencing, bibliography, and research	60-69% Clear referencing, evidence of some detailed research		50-59% Adequate referencing, evidence of some further research		40-49% Weak referencing, evidence of basic research only		Less than 40% Very poor referencing, no research apparent
COMMUNICATION
(20%)
	70% and over	60-69%	50-59%		40-49%		Less than 40%
	Excellent spelling,	Good spelling and	Reasonable spelling		Significant errors in		Inadequate spelling,
	grammar, structure,	grammar, well	and grammar,		spelling, grammar,		grammar, messy and
	and presentation	organised structure	satisfactory		careless structure		careless presentation
			presentation