LSBF
Module Carbon Management and Entrepreneurship
Assignment
Title Sustainability and business: Business fad or strategic priority?
Assignment
Type Individual Report
Word Limit 3,500-4,000
Weighting 100%
Plagiarism When submitting work for assessment, students should be aware of the LSBF guidance and regulations concerning plagiarism. All submissions should be your own original work.
You must submit an electronic copy of your work. Your submission will be electronically checked.
Harvard
Referencing & Special
Instructions
The Harvard Referencing System must be used. The Wikipedia website must not be referenced in your work.
You are allowed to upload only ONE attachment (e.g. an Excel sheet) in addition to your original assignment, unless there is a requirement for more than one document in the assignment brief.
You must upload your assignment in PDF or Word document format. Your paper will not be graded if it is submitted in any other format.
If you submit your assignment as a PDF version, please include the exact word count of the assignment on the title page.
Learning
Outcomes On successful completion of this assignment you will be able to:
1. Understand the drivers for Carbon Management, the emissions targets and reporting requirements at an international and national level.
2. Identify the key steps in a robust and successful Carbon Management strategy and be able to define Carbon Foot printing.
3. Evaluate the use of Carbon Impact Assessments in decision making and recognize the use of Project Accounting within international ?greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and reporting.
4. Apply knowledge to develop, implement & monitor an action plan in order to achieve a measurable reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, including identification of KPIs & the characteristics of successful change management.
5. Understand and analyze the concept of carbon offsetting, the role that offsetting plays within a robust Carbon Management strategy and be able to apply selection criteria for purchasing offsets.
Scenario Sustainable business is about keeping the balance between social, economic, and environmental concerns in corporate decision-making; taking care of the natural resources the company depends upon; giving back to
the communities in which companies operate; and advocating long-term value creation for shareholders (Sanders and Wood, 2015). Your Task
Critically discuss this statement, taking into consideration the following:
1. Critically evaluate the concept of sustainability and explain its relevance to business (20%) (LO1, 2)
2. Critically analyse the importance of ecosystem services (20%) (LO3)
3. Critically discuss the concept of sustainable corporate governance (20%) (LO2)
4. Critically discuss the importance of sustainability performance measurement (20%) (LO4, 5)
5. Critically evaluate the role of marketing, supply chain management, and operations management in sustainability (20%) (LO2, 4)
Guidelines Please read all questions and information provided carefully. Answers should be an appropriate length, keeping in mind the question requirements and total word count allowance.
Tutors will cease reading and grading assessments at the point that the assigned word count has been exceeded by more than 10%. Any content appearing after the word count has been exceeded will not be graded. If students submit less than the suggested word count (in excess of 10% less), grading will be undertaken on the basis of quality and assessment criteria. In all likelihood, such assignments will lack some components or will not cover issues sufficiently, so reduced grades can be expected.
Word count includes all materials after the Title Page and/or Table of Contents and before References and/or Bibliography and/or Appendices. All materials includes tables, charts, illustrations, screen shots, photographs, etc.
Appendices should be kept to a minimum, and should only contain reference materials that illustrate and support arguments presented in the in the main body. Any other materials included in appendices, except where specifically requested in the coursework instructions, will not be marked.
Students are responsible for including the word count on the title page of their submissions. Those who do not include word count or who state the incorrect number of words may be penalised.
In addition, your assignment should demonstrate the following qualities:
A critical appreciation of relevant literature and its use to support your argument, substantiate calculations, and address other aspects of the assignment.
Taking ownership of the content, being prepared to debate and argue a personal position, and providing evidence of evaluative skills. A submission made up of extracts from published sources which is descriptive or simply theoretical regurgitation is not acceptable. Your submission must have interpretation and consideration of the challenges and issues of applying theory to practice.
Logical flow of ideas and treatment; appropriate selection of real-world factors related to the companies under scrutiny.
Evidence of additional personal research, and the ability to analyse material from a variety of appropriate, relevant perspectives.
Presentation, structure, appropriateness of methodology, breaking into section headings/subheadings, tidiness.
Marks will be awarded for proper referencing and originality of work. Also note that plagiarism is a serious offence and your submission will be electronically checked.
Your report must be handed in electronically no later than the given date of submission.
Grading Criteria
Grading
Criteria 70%+
(Distinction) 60-69% (Merit) 50-59% (Pass) 0-49% (Fail)
Generic skills: communication and presentation. Comprehensive and correctly structured assessment. Style of
writing is very fluent and develops a coherent and logical argument. Excellent referencing. Well structured report which follows appropriate format but some aspects of layout and referencing could be improved. Style of writing is fairly fluent.
Good referencing. Good report in most aspects but suffers from variations in quality and the layout contains some inadequacies. Style
of writing is satisfactory. Referencing needs improving. Very poor report which is incorrectly structured and contains major errors and omissions. Style of writing is descriptive, lacks coherence and fluency.
Poor referencing.
Knowledge & Understanding Demonstrates excellent knowledge of theory and provides critical theoretical underpinning. Very good interpretations and summarising of main themes. Wide range of knowledge demonstrated and evidence of good understanding of the topic.
Ability to interpret and summarise succinctly. Good range of knowledge demonstrated but with some room for improvement. Some understanding displayed of the topic.
Summary and
interpretation are satisfactory. Very poor range of knowledge, research and interpretation of information that is subjective and lacks conceptual coherence. There is no clear identification, understanding or interpretation of main themes.
Analysis Excellent use of theoretical and conceptual models to guide analysis linked with a critical discussion of main themes.
Has demonstrated
an ability to discriminate in the use of more abstract concepts and techniques. Very good use of the theoretical and conceptual models with good critical discussion. Has applied a range of analytical skills with greater independence and understanding of more abstract data or concepts. Use of theory and concepts limited in scope and depth but relevant. Application could be improved and there is a tendency towards description rather than application of concepts. Very poor use of theory and very little application of core concepts.
Very little or limited analysis and
evaluation in relation to fundamental principles and concepts.
Synthesis/ Creativity/ Application Logical presentation of themes with appropriate examples being demonstrated. Very good demonstration of synthesis. Models have been clearly applied to the argument. Very good account of main themes with sound application. Good attempt at applying models to the argument. Fairly good attempt at synthesising the salient points. Good account of main themes with some attempt at application. Limited evidence of synthesis. Very poor account of main themes with little or no application. No links between models and argument.
Evaluation Shows clear evidence of in-depth critical reflection and evaluation of the argument by providing a robust defence of the opinions presented in the assessment. Shows evidence of
critical reflection and evaluation and a fairly cohesive defence of the argument Shows some
evidence of critical
reflection but could have been developed. Shows little or no evidence of critical
reflection and needs to be much more developed. There is no defence of the opinions presented.