ASSESSMENT 4
COURSE: Bachelor of Business / Bachelor of Accounting
Unit: Corporate Responsibility and Ethics
Unit Code:
CRSE108
Type of Assessment:
Assessment 4 – Individual Business Report
Length/Duration:
2000 words
Course Learning
Outcomes addressed:
2, 3, 6, 7
Unit Learning
Outcomes addressed:
1, 2, 3, 4
Submission Date:
Exam Week
Assessment Task: Business reports are practical learning tasks where students apply the theories they have been studying to real world situations.
Students are required to collect information (primary and/or secondary) and prepare a report applying their research to make recommendations that address the business scenario.
This report should consist of the following parts: Executive Summary, Introduction, Objectives, Methodologies, Information Analysis, Findings, Recommendations, References, and Appendices.
Total Mark:
100 marks
Weighting:
40%
Students are advised that any submissions past the due date without an approved extension or without approved extenuating circumstances incurs a 5% penalty per calendar day, calculated from the total mark
E.g. a task marked out of 40 will incur a 2 mark penalty per calendar day.
More information, please refer to (Documents Student Policies and Forms POLICY –
Assessment Policy & Procedures – Login Required)
ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:
This is the major assessment of this unit and each individual student is required to prepare and submit a comprehensive business report addressing a chosen company’s status on corporate social responsibility and governance.
Choose an ASX Top-100 company and report on the company’s CSR activities and Governance structure, applying analytical frameworks from the Corporate Responsibility & Ethics Course, including Carroll’s Pyramid and Wartick and Cochrane’s Typology. Your analysis should critically analyse the company’s response to key stakeholder expectations and highlight any gaps between espoused and realised performance on CSR.
Students are strongly advised to discuss their chosen company with the lecturer and start working on the report early in the trimester. Getting and following advice from the lecturer in a consistent manner is necessary in order to do well in this assignment.
This assignment will emphasise Corporate Social Responsibility issues and possible resolution. Each part of the report must be based on appropriate desk research and synthesis with the theory of the course. It is expected that students will demonstrate the following skills:
i) Evidence of substantial desk research with appropriate references, ii) Representation of theoretical frameworks, iii) Synthesis between desk research and theoretical frameworks, iv) Assessment of management behaviour and its implications.
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION:
The report and supporting materials (if any) must be submitted online in Moodle. All materials MUST be submitted electronically in Microsoft Office format. Other formats may not be readable by markers. Please be aware that any assessments submitted in other formats will be considered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented in Microsoft Office format.
No paper based or hardcopy submission will be accepted.
Our Academic Learning Support (ALS) team would be happy to help you with understanding the task and all other assessment-related matters. For assistance please speak to our Academic Learning Skills Coordinators, Barbara Karena in Sydney (Barbara.Karena@kent.edu.au) or Ryan Honner in Melbourne (Ryan.Honner@kent.edu.au). They can help you with understanding the task, draft checking, structure, referencing and other assignment-related matter.
For online help and support please click the following link and navigate Academic Learning Support in Moodle.
http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/course/view.php?id=5
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSIGNMENTS
Assignments should usually incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion, and will be fully referenced including a reference list.
The work must be fully referenced with in-text citations and a reference list at the end. We strongly recommend you to refer to the Academic Learning Skills materials available in the Moodle. For details please click the link http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/course/view.php?id=5 and download the file “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and demonstrate.
We recommend a minimum of FIVE references, unless instructed differently by your lecturer. Unless specifically instructed otherwise by your lecturer, any paper with less than FIVE references may be failed. Work that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the “Harvard Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.

Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count – as a general rule you may go over or under by 10% than the stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
High quality work must be fully referenced with in-text citations and a reference list at the end. We
recommend you work with your Academic Learning Support (ALS) site (http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/course/view.php?id=5) available in Moodle to ensure that you reference correctly.
References are assessed for their quality. You should draw on quality academic sources, such as books, chapters from edited books, journals etc. Your textbook can be used as a reference, but not the lecturer notes. We want to see evidence that you are capable of conducting your own research. Also, in order to help markers determine students’ understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number/s if shown in the original. Before preparing your assignment or own contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video by clicking on the following link: Plagiarism: How to avoid it
PLAGIARISM: HOW TO AVOID IT
You can search for peer-reviewed journal articles, which you can find in the online journal databases and which can be accessed from the library homepage. Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about a topic, but should not be overused – these should constitute no more than 10% of your total list of references/sources. Additional information and literature can be used where these are produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes such as the NHMRC, or international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departments produce peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly very current. The content of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non- peer reviewed websites: Why can't I just Google? (thanks to La Trobe University for this video).
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSIGNMENTS
Assignments should usually incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion, and will be fully referenced including a reference list.
The work must be fully referenced with in-text citations and a reference list at the end. We strongly recommend you to refer to the Academic Learning Skills materials available in the Moodle. For details please click the link http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/course/view.php?id=5 and download the file “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and demonstrate.
We recommend a minimum of FIVE references, unless instructed differently by your lecturer. Unless specifically instructed otherwise by your lecturer, any paper with less than FIVE references may be failed. Work that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the “Harvard Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.
Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count – as a general rule you may go over or under by 10% than the stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
High quality work must be fully referenced with in-text citations and a reference list at the end. We
recommend you work with your Academic Learning Support (ALS) site
(http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/course/view.php?id=5) available in Moodle to ensure that you reference correctly.
References are assessed for their quality. You should draw on quality academic sources, such as books, chapters from edited books, journals etc. Your textbook can be used as a reference, but not the lecturer notes. We want to see evidence that you are capable of conducting your own research. Also, in order to help markers determine students’ understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number/s if shown in the original. Before preparing your assignment or own contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video by clicking on the following link: Plagiarism: How to avoid it
PLAGIARISM: HOW TO AVOID IT
You can search for peer-reviewed journal articles, which you can find in the online journal databases and which can be accessed from the library homepage. Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about a topic, but should not be overused – these should constitute no more than 10% of your total list of references/sources. Additional information and literature can be used where these are produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes such as the NHMRC, or international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departments produce peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly very current. The content of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non- peer reviewed websites: Why can't I just Google? (thanks to La Trobe University for thisvideo).
MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC): Business Report
Marking
Criteria
Fail (0-9.9) Pass (10-12.5) Credit (13-14.5) Distinction (15-16.5) High Distinction (17-20)
Research
/20 Little evidence of research. Sources are missing, inappropriate, poorly integrated or lacking credibility. Lacks clear link of sources to arguments. Basic and sound research. Basic use of sources to support ideas, generally well-integrated, most sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/application. Research is generally thorough. Good use of sources to support ideas, mostly well integrated, sources are credible. May be weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/ application. Thorough research is indicated. Very good use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. May be minor
weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/application. Thorough research is indicated. Professional use of sources to support ideas, well integrated, sources are credible. Very minor, if any,
weaknesses with paraphrasing or integration/application.
Representation of theoretical
frameworks
/20 No reference to relevant theoretical frameworks; the discussion is superficial and no related to the case of the chosen company. A relevant theoretical framework is discussed; analysed to reasonable depth in relation to the case of the chosen company. Relevant frameworks are discussed; analysed to reasonable depth in relation to the case of the chosen company. Relevant frameworks are discussed; analysed to reasonable depth in relation to the case of the chosen company. Relevant frameworks are discussed thoroughly and in concurrence to the case of the chosen company.
Synthesis between desk
research and theories
/20 Lacks coherence; the topic is poorly addressed; the discussion is descriptive and poorly sequenced. Is generally coherent. Concepts are generally applied appropriately; the topic is addressed to some degree; analysed in reasonable depth with some description. There are some weaknesses with flow. Is coherent and flows well. Concepts are mostly clearly applied and are supported with evidence from relevant external research; the topic is addressed quite thoroughly; analysed in considerable depth. There may be some weaknesses with flow. Is very coherent. Concepts are appropriately applied and are supported with evidence from relevant external research. Topic is addressed thoroughly. There may be minor weaknesses with flow. Professional work.
Supporting evidence and
research is of an outstanding quality. Synthesis is very coherent and flows well; topic is addressed thoroughly; analysed in great depth. Very minor, if any, inconsistencies and weaknesses with flow.
Referencing
/20 No referencing is evident or, if done, is inconsistent and technically incorrect. No or minimal reference list, mixed styles. Basic and sound attempt to reference sources; may be some inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Reference list is generally complete with 1 or 2 references missing. Good attempt to reference sources; inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Few inaccuracies in reference list and all references listed. Very good attempt to reference sources; very minor inconsistencies and technical errors in style. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed. Professional level of referencing and acknowledgment; no errors of style evident. Thorough and consistent reference list and all references listed.
0 - 4.9 5 - 6.5 7 - 7.5 8 - 8.5 9 - 10
Structure
/10 The report is not appropriately formatted; more than two of the required sections are missing. The report format is generally correct; the information under the sections does not completely correspond to the requirements.
Recommendations are missing. The report format is almost correct; the information under the sections corresponds to
almost all the requirements.
Recommendations are missing or do not suggest specific actions. The report format is correct; all sections are included; the information under the sections corresponds to the requirements
Recommendations do not suggest specific actions and do not derive from the discussion.
The report format is correct; all sections are included; the information under the sections corresponds to the
requirements
Recommendations do suggest specific actions and derive from the discussion.
Language
/10 Poor standard of writing. Word limit may not be adhered to. Basic and sound standard of writing; some errors in
punctuation, grammar and
spelling Good standard of writing; few errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Very good standard of writing; very few or minor errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling. Professional standard of writing; no errors in punctuation, grammar and spelling.