NB: PLACE ORDER FOR CUSTOMIZED PAPER
Weighting: 100%
Word count: 3000
Task:
Using the specific theories and models covered in the module; you must choose 1 (one) of the following industries (listed below), to critically analyse the business ethical, responsible and sustainable impact being made by firms with in the chosen industry, in relation to their business behaviour, conduct and actions.
Include examples of ethical, responsible and sustainability behaviour, conduct and/or actions which have impacted the industry both nationally and multinational context.
1. The Retail sale of food, beverages and tobacco Industry
2. The Motion picture, video and television programme Industry
Note: This assignment is entirely secondary information based and as such you are not required to conduct any primary research.
To aid you in the written structure of your essay narrative, you could consider the sub tasks below. It must provide examples (source referenced) drawn from the chosen industry as a whole (identifying any specific firms within it to support your analyse).
The discussion should provide a good balance between the identification of theory/s covered in the module (referenced) and applied practical examples to show understanding.
a. Examine and discuss the key challenges relating to corporate responsibility and the ethical views adopted by firms; relating to your chosen industry.
b. From your research of the industry; analyse and explain how firms within your chosen industry are creating sustainable practices in comparison to their competitors and why the firms have opted to applying these practices (include discussion if the practices are newly adopted and not previously existing).
c. Make recommendations for firms in the industry to show they are being more ethical by taking into account multinational considerations (identify any differences in national culture which may affect differing ethical philosophies).
Your report should be electronically typed, double-spaced and up to 3300 words in length (excluding any included appendices).
You must acknowledge your narrative statements/opinions, by supporting your work with in-text references throughout the narrative. This must be through the use of the Harvard referencing system.
An electronic copy of your work must be submitted through the designated assessment hand-in web link which will be located on the UGB264 module Canvas web page.
Only an electronic submission will be accepted for this module, and by the specified deadline.
Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submitted through JIRA will be marked. Any other submission including submission to your study centre in hard copy will be treated as a non-submission.
If your centre supports Turnitin© or alternatively SafeAssign by Blackboard, a copy of your Turnitin© or SafeAssign originality report must be submitted in conjunction with your assignment.
Non-submission through the Jira link, will result in a recorded penalty of a ‘non-submission’ (0% fail).
PLAGIARISM/INFRINGEMENT STATEMENT
All Assessments are subject to the University’s Policy on ‘Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism’. Students found guilty of this by the ‘academic misconduct panel’ may be subject to serve 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
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, and module leader immediately.
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.
ATTENDANCE
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:
If you have any learning difficulties please speak to the module leader as soon as possible.
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
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
Generic Assessment Criteria – Undergraduate
These should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working and related to the assessment criteria for the specific module assignment
Categories
Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature
Pass 86 – 100% 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 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 functional business categories or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
70 – 75% 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 categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse. Good use of practical macro environmental views related to the task and the restaurant industry.
60 – 69% Directly relevant to
the requirements
of the assessment A substantial knowledge of topical material,
showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and
issues therein A good analysis of a range of key challenges;
clear and orderly Generally coherent and logically structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or
theoretical mode(s) May contain some distinctive or independent thinking; may begin to
Formulate an independent position in relation to a practical perspective of the functional areas of business and/or practice. Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable format Critical appraisal of up-to date and/or appropriate literature. Recognition of different perspectives.
Very good use of source material. Uses a range of academic sources
50 – 59% Some attempt to address the requirements of
the assessment:
may drift away
from this in less
focused passages Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant topical (function areas) material, with intermittent evidence of an appreciation of its
significance Some analytical treatment, but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which
lacks clear industry analytical
relationship Some attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency, with issues at stake stated only
vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in simplistic terms (generally descriptive) Sound work which expresses a coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical
Conformity to one or more standard views of key functional areas. Apply more to current industry challenges Competently written, with only minor lapses from
standard grammar, and format Uses a variety of literature which includes some recent strategic texts and/or appropriate literature, though not necessarily including a substantive amount beyond library texts. Competent use of source material.
40 – 49% Some correlation with the requirements of the assessment but there are
instances of irrelevance Basic understanding of
the strategy but addressing a limited range of material Largely descriptive or
narrative, with little evidence of analysis A basic argument is evident, but mainly supported by assertion
and there may be a lack of clarity and coherence Some evidence of a view starting to be formed but mainly derivative. A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader Some up-to-date and/or appropriate literature used. Goes beyond the material tutor has provided. Limited use of sources to support a point.
Fail 35 – 39% Relevance to the requirements of the assessment may be very
intermittent, and may be reduced to its vaguest and least challenging
terms A limited understanding of a narrow range of strategic material. Heavy dependence on
description, and/or on
paraphrase, is common Little evidence of coherent argument: lacks development and may be repetitive or thin Almost wholly derivative: the writer’s contribution rarely goes beyond simplifying paraphrase Numerous deficiencies in
expression and presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic or repetitious style Barely adequate use of literature. Over reliance on material provided by the tutor.
The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
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.