follow the structure  and finish essay, 5.5 pages, min 1500 words. 

MAN00034M

Part A

THE YORK MANAGEMENT SCHOOL

Module: Ethics & Sustainability Reporting

Module Co-ordinator: Matthias Hambach

Assessment: Open

Word count: 1500 words

Release: Spring Term Week 2

Submission: Tuesday 21st April 2020

Weighting 50%

Important information.

A penalty of FIVE marks will be deducted for late submissions that are made up to and including the first hour of the deadline. Submissions that are more than one hour late but within the first 24 hours of the deadline will incur a penalty of TEN marks. After the first 24 hours have passed, 10 marks will be deducted for every 24 hours (or part t

here

of) that the submission is late for a total of 5 days. After 5 days it is treated as a non-submission and given a mark of zero. The consequences of non-submission are serious and can include de-registration from the University.

If you are unable to complete your open assessment by the submission date indicated above because of Exceptional Circumstances you can apply for an extension. If unforeseeable and exceptional circumstances do occur, you must seek support and provide evidence as soon as possible at the time of the occurrence. Applications must be made before the deadline to be considered.

Full details of the Exceptional Circumstances Policy and claim form can be found here:

https://www.york.ac.uk/students/studying/progress/exceptional-circumstances

If you submit your open assessment on time but feel that your performance has been affected by Exceptional Circumstances you may submit an Exceptional Circumstances Affecting Assessment claim form by 11am, [7 days from the published assessment submission deadline]. If you do not submit by the deadline indicated without good reason your claim will not be considered.

Please take proper precautions to safeguard your work and remember to make backup copies of your data. The University provides all its students with storage space on the University server and you should save and back up any work in progress on this server on a regular basis. Computer failure and theft of your equipment or storage media are not considered exceptional circumstances and extensions cannot be granted for work lost for these reasons.

Word count requirements

· The word count for this assignment is 1500.

· You must state on the front of your assignment the number of words used and this will be checked.

· The main text for this assignment must be word-processed in Times New Roman, Font 12, double spacing, minimum 2cm margins all around.

· You must observe the word count specified in this assignment brief. The School has a policy of accepting variations to the recommended word count of plus or minus 10%.

What does this mean for you?

Markers will mark your work up to the word count maximum plus 10% and then will stop marking; therefore all words which are in excess of the word count plus 10% will not be marked.

Where your word count is more than 10% below that specified, it is likely that this will result in a lack of analytical depth or relevant content which will be reflected in the mark assigned.

What is in the word count?

The word count includes:

· the main text, including in-text reference citations and quotations.

The word count does not include:

– Appendices. These may be used to include supporting data which may be too detailed or complex to include as a Table. They are not a device to incorporate material which would otherwise cause you to exceed the word limit. 

– Title page

– Contents page

– Abstract/executive summary

– Tables, figures, legends

– Reference lists

– Acknowledgements

MAN00034M – Ethics and Sustainability Reporting

Part A – Essay – 50%

Question Part A

There is a developing view, in academic circles and among leading practitioners, that many corporate social responsibility approaches do not achieve a position in business that is sufficiently dominant to be transformative of corporate behaviour and performance. This being concerned with the objective of meeting the legitimate expectations of stakeholders.

In this context critically discuss how non-financial reporting initiatives such as triple bottom line-based frameworks (TBL, GRI, ISO 26000), integrated reporting or alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals contribute to businesses achieving true sustainability.

End of Assessment question

Guidance:

· This essay should focus more on systemic issues, such as planetary and ecological boundaries, and their relationship to these reporting initiatives, rather than a detailed examination of one or more of these reporting initiatives.

· A consideration of relevant practitioner views is also indicated.  These should be compared to the theory.

· Your answer should include a reflection on the Stakeholder Systems Model which is advocated by Mason and Simmons (2014).

Indicative References (not exhaustive):

Banerjee, S. B. (2008), Necrocapitalism, Organisation Studies, 29(12): 1541–1563.

Browne, J. and Nuttall, R. (2013), Beyond corporate social responsibility: Integrated external engagement.

http://www.dse.univr.it/documenti/OccorrenzaIns/matdid/matdid320082

, [Accessed 1 November 2019].

Browne, J., Nuttall, R. and Stadlen, T. (2015), Connect: How companies succeed by engaging radically with society, WH Allen.

Hahn, R. (2013), ISO 26000 and the Standardisation of Strategic Management Processes for Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Strategy and the Environment 22,442-455.

ISO. (2011), Social Responsibility, ISO 26000 tells it like it is, ISO Focus+, 2(3) March 2011.

ISO. (2014), GRI

G4

Guidelines and ISO26000: 2010 How to use the GRI4 Guidelines and ISO26000 in conjunction.

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso-gri-26000_2014-01-28

, [Accessed 1 November 2019].

ISO (2016) ‘Discovering ISO26000.’

http://www.iso.org/iso/discovering_iso_26000

, 5-11-16.

ISO. (2018). ISO 26000 and the SDGs. International Standards Organization., pp.1–20. [Online]. Available at: https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/store/en/PUB100401 [Accessed 1 November 2019].

Mason, C. And Simmons, J. (2014), Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility in Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Systems Approach, Journal of Business Ethics 119:77-86.

Milne, M.J. and Gray, R. (2013), W(h)ither the Ecology? Triple Bottom Line, the Global Reporting Initiative, and Corporate Sustainability Reporting, Journal of Business Ethics 118:13-39.

Polman, P. (2014), Business, society and the future of capitalism, McKinsey and Company.

Scherer, A. G. and Palazzo, G. (2010), The New political Role of Business in a Globalised World: a review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance and democracy, Journal of Management Studies.

Schwartz, B. and Tilling, K (2009), ‘ISO-lating’ Corporate Responsibility in the Organisational Context: A Dissenting Interpretation of IS0 26000, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 16, 289-299.

Searcy, C. Defining True Sustainability. MIT Sloan Management Review. [Online]. Available at:

https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/defining-true-sustainability/

[Accessed 1 November 2019].

Whiteman, G. Walker, B. and Perego, P. (2013), Planetary Boundaries: Ecological Foundations for Corporate Sustainability, Journal of Management Studies, 50:2.

Williams, A., Kennedy, S., Philipp, F., Whiteman, G., 2017. Systems thinking: A review of sustainability management research. Journal of Cleaner Production.

Assessment Formatting Guidance:

·

Follow Harvard referencing system

.

· Include section headings and page numbers.

· Follow formatting guidelines set out on Page 2.

· Do not use lecture slides, Wikipedia or Investopedia (or similar) as sources.

· Use simple, neutral language to express yourself. No need to use sophisticated words.

· Paragraphs should never be longer than 1 page (and even that is long). Guide on paragraphing can be found here.

· Do not use the Synonyms feature of MS Word. It is usually not providing good suggestions.

· Carefully proofread your assignment before submitting to avoid obvious mistakes. Please use spell check.

· Familiarise yourself with the assessment criteria attached below.

· You are advised to include academic references in your assignment to support your arguments and analysis.

THE YORK MANAGEMENT SCHOOL

Student number:

Module title: Ethics & Sustainability Reporting Part A

Generic criteria

Module specific learning outcomes

G1

Presentation

S1

Explain, with reference to business and society relations, how sustainable development, CSR and stakeholder theory, set the framework for SER in practical and theoretical terms.

G2

Theory and literature review

S2

Critically evaluate the historical development of the different techniques developed and used to measure and audit social and environmental performance.

G3

Analysis and problem solving

S3

Explain the origins and development of SER in theory and in practice, in particular in the context of globalisation.

G4

Structure and argument

S4

Evaluate the market-related and socially-related arguments in favour of SER, and the impact of SER on corporate performance, with interpretation from practical cases.

G5

Conclusions

S5

Evaluate the relationship between SER and financial reporting, and investigate investors’ and other stakeholders’ responses to SER.

G6

Correctness of referencing

S6

Evaluate the role of regulation in SER.

Comments on assessment criteria

Suggestions for improvement

Date:

Marker:

Page 5 of 7

Generic Assessment Marking Criteria

You will be marked according to five criteria:

● Quality of Presentation

● Understanding and use of Theory

● Quality of Analysis

● Structure and Argument

● Conclusions

The examiners will be looking for the following elements for each of these criteria.

Presentation

● All material is thoroughly and correctly referenced.

● Citations are given in the Harvard format, unless specifically specified otherwise in the assignment brief.

● Direct quotations from sources are referenced with page numbers.

● Appropriate use has been made of tables, diagrams, graphs and pictures.

● The use of formatting (line spacing, font, justified margins etc.) is consistent throughout.

● The text is clear and readable, without typographic errors and spelling mistakes.

● The assignment is within the maximum word length suggested.

● The bibliography contains only the works cited in the assignment, is presented in author alphabetical order and is complete, accurate, and consistently formatted.

Theory

● Evidence of wider reading i.e. not relying on a textbook or single text source, but engaging with specialist texts, journal articles and reports.

● A demonstration of an understanding and awareness of a range of theoretical positions or technical options.

● The ability to place a particular text’s argument within a range of positions evident in the literature and to recognise its strengths and limitations as an explanatory framework.

● Direct quotes, paraphrasing or other evidence of active engagement with theory and/or technique is apparent throughout the assignment.

Analysis

● The assignment demonstrates an ability to understand different perspectives i.e. the student can evaluate different options, engage critically with theory and practice and can justify their analysis above other available solutions or viewpoints.

● The analysis results from the use of judgement and discernment in selecting theory and applying it to the situation or problem.

● The selection of techniques and viewpoints are justified by the problem or issue outlined.

● Reflection and observation are integrated in the analysis in an appropriate way i.e. a supported argument illustrated with observation rather than a statement of opinion.

Structure and Argument

● An essay assignment will normally include an introduction, several sub-titled sections in the main body, a conclusion and a bibliography. Alternative formats may be specified by the assignment brief and, if so, have been used.

● A coherent argument is evident, which clearly links the different elements of the assignment together and leads the reader through to a justifiable conclusion.

● The argument is logically constructed with each section building on the insights of preceding sections i.e. different perspectives are not simply thrown together without an understanding of how they contribute to the overall argument presented.

● Theory is integrated into the analytical and/or practical elements of the assignment where appropriate

● Meaning is not obscured by poor grammar, paragraph or sentence construction.

Conclusions

● The conclusion summarises the whole of the assignment and not just the analysis i.e. conclusions relate questions posed, adequacy of the theory, empirical issues explored and reflect on the student’s approach to the work.

● The conclusions refer to the argument presented to that point and do not introduce new ideas or arguments “at the last moment”.

● The conclusion demonstrates the ability of the student to justify their theoretical and analytical approach.

● Conclusions have been drawn and follow, and are justified by, the analysis in the main body of the assignment. Where required, practical recommendations are feasible and follow on from the conclusions, addressing the issues identified.

Page 7 of 7