UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

AND
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE
IN TASHKENT

Course :BA (Hons) in Business & Marketing Management

BA (Hons) in Business & Financial Management
BA (Hons) in Business & Management

Module Code and Title : Business Ethics, Sustainability &Responsibility (UGB264)

Module Leader : Mr.Daniel Chew

UK Module leader : Mr Gavin Mason

Assessment : Individual Assignment

Submission Due Date : XX January 2020

Word Length : 3000 (+/- 10%) words

Weighting within Module : 100%

Task:

Select two real-life global organisations in different industries that you are familiar with.
Compare and contrast the business ethics, responsibility and sustainability programs and
practices in these two organisations. These organisations should not be start-ups or
government-sector type entities. They can be commercial, private or non-profit organisations.

You are to address these following areas in your chosen organisations. As much as possible,
you are to make references to the ethical and moral theories and principles.

 Examine their present business ethics philosophies & practises, and the impact to their
stakeholders.

 Analyse the key challenges to their business ethics, sustainability and responsibility.

Page 1 of 6
 Provide recommendations on what more they can do to improve or enhance their business
ethics, sustainability and responsibility.

Your report should be typed, 1.5-spaced and no more than 3000 words in length excluding
Appendices. You must acknowledge your sources of information and evidence, using the
Harvard referencing system. An electronic copy of the assignment should be submitted to the
UGB264 module site on Canvas.

The Assessment Criteria is based on the University’s Generic Marking.

YOU MUST SUBMIT IN PAPER COPY AND ELECTRONICALLY BY THE

DEADLINE:

1. Electronically through Canvas (UGB 264 module page) for checking with ‘Turnitin’
a. A link will be available in the assessment folder
b. Students may submit drafts prior to submission and generate reports. The
last submission prior to the deadline is deemed to be the final submission
for assessment purposes

2. In hard copy through the St Peter’s Library –

o All students must submit a Turnitin receipt with the paper copy

Non-submission through Turn –it in:

The penalty for students who do not submit their work through Turnitin is that their
mark is withheld and the assessment board may deem the work to have failed.

PLAGIARISM/INFRINGEMENT STATEMENT

All Assessments are subject to the University’s Policy on 'Cheating, Collusion and
Plagiarism'. Students found guilty of this are subject to severe penalties.

This is an INDIVIDUAL piece of work - If there is evidence that the work is not wholly
attributable to you, the University's policy on 'Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism' will
be applied

Link to University Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy

 https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155

3)EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES

If you are affected by any extenuating circumstances and cannot submit your work, for example
illness or severe personal difficulties, you must inform your programme leader, personal tutor,
module leader or module tutor immediately.

Page 2 of 6
IMPORTANT – ‘FIT TO SIT’:

Any student who presents themselves at an examination and takes that examination, or who submits a
piece of coursework, or attends and takes part in a presentation, practical session, or any other form of
assessment cannot then put in a later request for extenuating circumstances. They will be deeming
themselves 'Fit to Sit' if they thereby engage in the assessment and no allowance will be made for any
difficulties, they later wish to claim affected their results.
Extenuating circumstances procedure:

1. The MODULE LEADER has the authority to grant an extension to the deadline for the
submission of an assignment of up to 72 HOURS provided they are satisfied that a
genuine reason exists
 Programme Leader & Personal tutor can support you with this

2. More serious mitigation requires a FORMAL APPLICATION

 See the Programme Leader prior to submitting formal mitigation to determine
if it would be approved or require further evidence
i. Mitigation applications are considered by a standing panel three times
per year. Each case is considered individually.

 IF SUCCESSFUL students are automatically deferred and require you to

submit at the next available opportunity
i. You should submit a mitigation form, available from reception.
Mitigation forms must be accompanied by appropriate supporting
evidence, such as a sick note from your GP
ii. If your mitigation is accepted, you will be deferred in that assessment.
This means that you must re-sit the assessment at the next opportunity
and your mark will not be capped.

Please bear in mind that if you know you will be absent from classes for any length of time you
should inform your tutors.

For information or to discuss an issue you are having, please contact the Programme
leader or Personal tutor in the first instance.

Other Important Information:

All teaching aids and materials are available on Canvas
Useful URLs
Note: as URLs for some individual documents may change from year to year, some of the links are to
folders within the Academic Quality Handbook which contain the relevant documents and which will
not change.
University Academic Regulations
https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-2780
University Policy on Academic Integrity and Misconduct
https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155

Page 3 of 6
University Policy on Extenuating Circumstances
https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-2995/AQH-F6-Procedures-
for-Extenuating-Circumstances.pdf
University Policies on Complaints, Appeals and Student Discipline
https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-2784

Page 4 of 6
 Categories

Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature

86 – The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is
100% also ample excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be
exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

76-85% The work examined is outstanding and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent
evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be outstanding in the
majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

The work examined is excellent and is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence
showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the
70 – 75% categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

Directly relevant to A substantial Good analysis, Generally coherent and May contain some Well written, with Critical appraisal of up-to-
the requirements of knowledge of clear and orderly logically structured, using an distinctive or standard spelling and date and/or appropriate
60 – 69% the assessment relevant material, appropriate mode of independent thinking; grammar, in a literature. Recognition of
showing a clear argument and/or theoretical may begin to formulate readable style with different perspectives. Very
grasp of themes, mode(s) an independent acceptable format good use of source material.
Pass

questions and issues position in relation to Uses a range of sources

therein theory and/or practice.

Some attempt to Adequate knowledge Some analytical Some attempt to construct a Sound work which Competently written, Uses a variety of literature
address the of a fair range of treatment, but coherent argument, but may expresses a coherent with only minor which includes some recent
50 – 59% requirements of the relevant material, may be prone to suffer loss of focus and position only in broad lapses from standard texts and/or appropriate
assessment: may with intermittent description, or to consistency, with issues at terms and in uncritical grammar, with literature, though not
drift away from this evidence of an narrative, which stake stated only vaguely, or conformity to one or acceptable format necessarily including a
in less focused appreciation of its lacks clear theoretical mode(s) couched more standard views of substantive amount beyond
passages significance analytical purpose in simplistic terms the topic library texts. Competent use
of source material.

40 – 49% Some correlation Basic understanding Largely descriptive A basic argument is evident, Some evidence of a A simple basic style Some up-to-date and/or
with the of the subject but or narrative, with but mainly supported by view starting to be but with significant appropriate literature used.
requirements of the addressing a limited little evidence of assertion and there may be formed but mainly deficiencies in Goes beyond the material
assessment but range of material analysis a lack of clarity and derivative. expression or format tutor has provided. Limited
there is a significant coherence that may pose use of sources to support a

Page 5 of 6
 degree of obstacles for the point. Weak use of source
irrelevance reader material.

35 – 39% Relevance to the A limited Heavy dependence Little evidence of coherent Almost wholly Numerous Barely adequate use of
requirements of the understanding of a on description, argument: lacks derivative: the writer’s deficiencies in literature. Over reliance on
assessment may be narrow range of and/or on development and may be contribution rarely goes expression and
very intermittent, material paraphrase, is repetitive or thin beyond simplifying presentation; the material provided by the
and may be reduced common paraphrase writer may achieve tutor.
to its vaguest and clarity (if at all) only
least challenging by using a simplistic
terms or repetitious style

The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
Fail

30 – 34% The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of
the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.

15-29% The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few
of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.

0-14% The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to
show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.

Page 6 of 6