Posted: September 10th, 2021

Governance, Ethics, and Sustainability, 2,000 words

Assessment Information

Subject Code: MBA402
Subject Name: Governance, Ethics, and Sustainability
Assessment Title: Sustainability Assessment
Weighting: 40%
Total Marks:
Word Limit:
Due Date:
40
2,000 words
Monday of Week 14, 11:55pm AEST
.
Assessment Description
.
..
You are required to watch the following YouTube clips from the GRI Secretariat:
1. The GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards: The Future of Reporting

2. Introducing the GRI Standards

You must also read a fictional case study based on a company that will be provided to you in due
course.
You must then prepare a sustainability assessment report referring to the Consolidated Set of
GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards 2016: 2024 – Do my homework – Help write my assignment online that specifically addresses:
A. Economic sustainability
i) Disclosure 201-2 Financial implications and other risks and opportunities due to
climate change
ii) Disclosure 205-3 Confirmed incidents of corruption and actions taken
iii) Disclosure 206-1 Legal actions for anti-competitive behaviour, anti-trust,
and monopoly practices
B. Environmental sustainability
i) Disclosure 302-1 Energy consumption within the organisation
ii) Disclosure 304-2 Significant impacts of activities, products, and services on
biodiversity
iii) Disclosure 307-1 Non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations
Assessment Information
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material
in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection
under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a
registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
C. Social sustainability
i) Disclosure 401-1 New employee hires and employee turnover
ii) Disclosure 406-1 Incidents of discrimination and corrective actions taken
iii) Disclosure 413-1 Operations with local community engagement, impact assessments,
and development programs
You will be required to include a minimum of 15 references in your Risk Assessment Report at
least 5 of which must come from academic journals or textbooks.
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further
reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86
098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
Criteria F (Fail)
0%-49%
P (Pass)
50%-64%
CR (Credit)
65%-74%
D (Distinction)
75% – 84%
HD (High Distinction)
85%-100%
Mark
Assessment Content (Subject Specific) OUT OF 30 MARKS
Sustainability Assessment
Economic Sustainability
Sustainability Assessment
Report demonstrates poor
understanding of
management approach
disclosure methodology.
Failure to provide narrative
explanation of topic specific
disclosures. Substandard
effort to make disclosures
based on case study
information.
Demonstrated understanding
of case study organization
disclosure obligations based
on mostly accurately
identified topic specific
disclosures – climate change,
corruption, and anticompetitive
behavior.
Narrative explanation using
management approach
disclosure methodology but
further work required to
improve clarity of disclosure.
Topic specific disclosures –
climate change, corruption,
and anti-competitive
behavior – accurately
identified from the case
study and appropriately
disclosed in Sustainability
Assessment Report with
reasonably clear narrative
explanation using
management approach
disclosure methodology.
Comprehensive
understanding of case study
organization disclosure
obligations based on
accurately identified topic
specific disclosures – climate
change, corruption, and anticompetitive
behavior.
Clear narrative explanation
using management approach
disclosure methodology.
Sustainability Assessment
Report demonstrates advanced
level understanding of
management approach
disclosure methodology. Highly
detailed narrative explanation
of topic specific disclosures –
climate change, corruption, and
anti-competitive behavior –
together with accurate and total
disclosure based on case study
information.
/10
Sustainability Assessment
Environmental Sustainability
Lack of understanding of
disclosure requirements of
case study organization.
Insufficient narrative
explanation or
commentary of topic
specific disclosures –
energy consumption,
biodiversity, environmental
law breaches.
Get research paper samples and course-specific study resources under   homework for you course hero writing service – Manage ment approach
disclosure methodology
not followed.
Methodology of the
management approach to
disclosure appropriately used
to prepare logical narrative
explanations of topic specific
disclosures – energy
consumption, biodiversity,
environmental law breaches.
Narrative explanations are
reasonably clear but some
important details from case
study that should be included
have been overlooked.
Sustainability Assessment
Report indicates general
awareness and solid
understanding of purpose of
disclosure and required
methodology. Relevant
details from case study are
included within narrative
explanation of topic specific
disclosures – energy
consumption, biodiversity,
environmental law breaches.
Methodology of the
management approach to
disclosure used well to
prepare detailed narrative
explanations of topic specific
disclosures – energy
consumption, biodiversity,
environmental law breaches.
Narrative explanations are
clear and incorporate vast
majority of relevant details
from case study.
Effective adoption of
management approach
disclosure methodology to
provide complete topic specific
disclosures – energy
consumption, biodiversity,
environmental law breaches –
relevant to case study
organization. Articulate and
highly detailed narrative
explanations included in
Sustainability Assessment
Report.
/10
Sustainability Assessment
Social Sustainability
Sustainability Assessment
Report demonstrates poor
understanding of
management approach
disclosure methodology.
Failure to provide narrative
explanation of topic
specific disclosures.
Substandard effort to
make disclosures based
on case study information.
Demonstrated understanding
of case study organization
disclosure obligations based
on mostly accurately
identified topic specific
disclosures – attrition,
discrimination, and
community engagement.
Narrative explanation using
management approach
disclosure methodology but
further work required to
improve clarity of disclosure.
Topic specific disclosures –
attrition, discrimination, and
community engagement –
accurately identified from the
case study and appropriately
disclosed in Sustainability
Assessment Report with
reasonably clear narrative
explanation using
management approach
disclosure methodology.
Comprehensive
understanding of case study
organization disclosure
obligations based on
accurately identified topic
specific disclosures –
attrition, discrimination, and
community engagement.
Clear narrative explanation
using management
approach disclosure
methodology.
Sustainability Assessment
Report demonstrates
advanced level understanding
of management approach
disclosure methodology.
Highly detailed narrative
explanation of topic specific
disclosures – attrition,
discrimination, and community
engagement – together with
accurate and total disclosure
based on case study
information.
/10
Structure Format and Presentation OUT OF 10 MARKS
COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further
reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86
098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.
Assessment Marking Rubric
Answer clearly and logically
presented
Serious lack of organization.
Body paragraphs do not refer
back to or relate to main
arguments. Writing is
formulaic, i.e. “in
conclusion,” “another
example is….”
Writing style could be more
effective. Organization is hard
to follow; there is little
progression of ideas. Little or
no transitions between
paragraphs. Need to more
effectively weave main
arguments throughout and
relate body paragraphs.
Paragraphs are generally well
organized. Better transitions
needed. The progression of
ideas could be more
thoughtful. Paragraphs relate
back to main arguments to
prove argument.
Ideas & arguments are well
structured. Thoughtful
progression of ideas and
details. Sound transitions
between paragraphs. Major
arguments are effectively
made.
Ideas & arguments are
effectively structured. Thoughtful
progression of ideas and details.
Excellent transitions between
paragraphs. Concluding
comments leave the reader
thinking. Major arguments are
effectively woven throughout
everybody paragraph, with ideas
always related back to main
arguments.
/2
Appropriate theory and
research used to answer
question posed
The critique does not have
appropriate structure and lacks
direction. No significant
observations made from
appropriate theory and
research. Poor writing and
expression of arguments.
Reasonable critique which
examines the relevant issues
and makes reasonable
observations made from
appropriate theory and
research. Reasonable writing
and expression of arguments.
Good critique examines the
relevant issues and makes
good observations from
appropriate theory and
research. Good writing and
expression of arguments.
A very good critique
considered all the relevant
issues and made important
observations made from
appropriate theory and
research. Very good writing
and expression of arguments.
Fully considered all the relevant
issues and made significant
observations made from
appropriate theory and
research. Excellent writing and
expression of arguments.
/2
Correct academic writing style
used, including correct
spelling, grammar and
punctuation
Needs more sentence variety.
Little or no thought given to
diction. Tone or language is
conversational. Contains much
informal language. Uses “I” or
“you.” Contains many
examples of unclear or
awkward phrasing.
Needs more sentence variety.
Attention needed with diction.
Contains informal language or
conversational tone, or uses “I”
or “you.” Unclear or awkward
sentence phrasing.
Sentence variety is adequate.
Tone is appropriate. Diction is
clear, but could be more
effective. Language is
academic, and writing is clear
and effective. Very little or no
unclear or awkward phrasing.
Sentence variety is effective and
good. Tone is appropriate and
consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is
appropriate and effective.
Language is academic. Writing
is clear, and concise.
Sentence variety is effective and
sophisticated. Tone is
appropriate and consistent.
Diction/ vocabulary is
sophisticated and effective.
Language is academic. Writing
is clear, concise, and strong.
/2
Format of answer consistent
with question requirements and
KBS guidelines
No efforts made to follow
submission and editing,
spacing, etc requirements.
Meets most editing, spacing,
fonts, and other editing
requirements. Some
requirements not met.
Meets editing, spacing, fonts,
and other editing
requirements.
Meets almost all editing,
spacing, fonts, and other
editing requirements.
Meets all editing, spacing, fonts,
and other editing requirements.
/2
In-text referencing and
reference list follows Harvard
style and consistent with KBS
guidelines
Inappropriate referencing.
Not in-line with requirements
of Harvard style and
consistent with KBS
guidelines.
Reasonably appropriate
referencing, generally in-line
with requirements of Harvard
style and consistent with KBS
guidelines.
Good referencing, largely inline
with requirements of
Harvard style and consistent
with KBS guidelines.
Very good referencing, 100%
in-line with requirements of
Harvard style and consistent
with KBS guidelines.
Excellent/appropriate
referencing, 100% in-line with
requirements of Harvard style
and consistent with KBS
guidelines.
/1
Word count is within + / – 10%
of requirement
Word count is within + / –
more than 15% of
requirement
Word count is within + / –
15% of requirement
Word count is within + / – 10%
of requirement
Word count is within + / – 5%
of requirement
Word count is within
+ / – 0% of
requirement
/1
Comments: /30
/10
/40

Order | Check Discount