MBA402 Governance, Ethics and Sustainability
Assessment 3 Information
| Subject Code: | MBA402 |
| Subject Name: | Governance, Ethics and Sustainability |
| Assessment Title: | Risk and Sustainability Report |
| Assessment Type: | Individual Written Report |
| Word Count: | 2,000 words (+/- 10%) |
| Weighting: | 40 % |
| Total Marks: | 40 |
| Submission: | Online via MyKBS |
| Due Date: | Week 13 |
Your Task
Write a report to a company board summarising your views on corporate governance, sustainability, and risk management practices.
Assessment Description
Preparing well written reports for an audience as sophisticated as a corporate board on fundamental topics such as corporate governance, sustainability, and risk management practices is an important capability for business managers.
The Learning Outcomes you will demonstrate in performing this assessment include:
| LO1: | Evaluate the success (or lack thereof) of an organisation’s governance responsibilities |
| LO4: | Analyse the sustainability initiatives practiced within organisations and determine their effectiveness in meeting corporate and ethical objectives |
| LO5: | Apply corporate sustainability practices in a real‐world example and examine their appropriateness in a variety of contexts |
Assessment Instructions
- Read the Case Study document which will be made available to you on Monday, Week 10 in MyKBS under the Assessments tab.
- Prepare a short, written report answering the questions in the Case Study.
- Include at least five academic references from academic journals and textbooks, as well as full details of informational sources you consulted as part of your assignment research.
Please refer to the assessment marking guide to assist you in completing all the assessment criteria.
Important Study Information
Academic Integrity Policy
KBS values academic integrity. All students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism and other academic offences under the Academic Integrity and Conduct Policy.
What is academic integrity and misconduct?
What are the penalties for academic misconduct?
What are the late penalties?
How can I appeal my grade?
Click here for answers to these questions: http://www.kbs.edu.au/current-students/student-policies/.
MBA401 People,Culture and Contemporary Leadership Assignment
Word Limits for Written Assessments
Submissions that exceed the word limit by more than 10% will cease to be marked from the point at which that limit is exceeded.
Study Assistance
Students may seek study assistance from their local Academic Learning Advisor or refer to the resources on the MyKBS Academic Success Centre page. Click here for this information.
Assessment Marking Guide
| Criteria | F (Fail) 0% – 49% | P (Pass) 50% – 64% | C (Credit) 65%-74% | D (Distinction) 75%-84% | HD (High Distinction) 85%-100% | Mark |
| Discussion of Corporate Governance Practices | Answer discusses fewer than three corporate governance practices. The practices are poorly explained and/or not relevant to the case study. Discussion is not supported by examples. | Answer discusses at least two corporate governance practices relevant to the case study company. No attempt to link these principles to case study facts. Discussion is minimally supported with examples. No awareness of the differing ASX requirements for companies facing different circumstances. | Answer discusses three corporate governance practices relevant to the case study company. Linkages between these principles and case study facts is not persuasive. Discussion is supported with limited examples and research. Shows slight awareness of the differing ASX requirements for companies facing different circumstances. | Answer discusses three or more corporate governance practices highly relevant to the case study, with strong linkages between the principles discussed and the case study facts. Answer is supported by examples and research. Answer discusses the two- tier requirements laid out in the ASX CGC document, as it provides advice to the case study company. | Outstanding discussion of good corporate governance practices for an entity that may or may not be transitioning to ASX listing. All principles discussed are persuasively linked to the case study facts. Answer is supported by extensive examples and research. Answer intelligently outlines the two-tier requirements laid out in the ASX CGC document, in providing advice to the case study company. | /15 |
| Discussion of Sustainability Reporting | Poor/insufficient discussion of the significance, benefits, and challenges of producing a sustainability report. Discussion is not supported by examples. | Limited discussion of the significance, benefits, and challenges of producing a sustainability report. A few examples support the discussion. | Satisfactory discussion of the significance, benefits, and challenges of producing a sustainability report. Discussion is general and does not address the land remediation industry. Discussion is supported by examples. | Strong discussion of the significance, benefits, and challenges of producing a sustainability report, especially for a business within the land/water remediation industry. Discussion is supported by examples and research. | Outstanding discussion of the significance, benefits, and challenges of producing a sustainability report, especially for a business within the land/water remediation industry. Discussion is supported by contemporary examples and research. | /10 |
| Discussion of Risk Management Practices | Poor/insufficient discussion of the benefits and challenges of sound risk management practices, with no supporting examples. | Limited discussion of the benefits and challenges of sound risk management practices. Discussion is somewhat supported by examples. | Satisfactory discussion of the benefits and challenges of sound risk management practices. Discussion is supported by industry-relevant examples. | Good discussion of the benefits and challenges of sound risk management practices, for a land/water remediation business. Discussion is supported by examples and research. | Outstanding discussion of the benefits and challenges of sound risk management practices, especially for a land/ water remediation business. Discussion is supported by contemporary examples and research. | /7 |
Assessment Marking Guide cont.
| Criteria | F (Fail) 0% – 49% | P (Pass) 50% – 64% | C (Credit) 65%-74% | D (Distinction) 75%-84% | HD (High Distinction) 85%-100% | Mark |
| The answer is clearly and logically presented | Very poorly organized. Body paragraphs do not refer to or relate to the main arguments. Poor quality writing and apparent lack of care. | The writing style could be more effective. Poor organization and progression of ideas. Transitions between paragraphs are weak or non-existent. Need to weave main arguments more effectively throughout. | Paragraphs are internally coherent. Better transitions required between paragraphs. The progression of ideas could be more thoughtful. Some weaving together of argument across paragraphs. | Ideas and arguments are well structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Sound transitions between paragraphs. Major arguments are effectively made. Conclusions are well- supported by evidence and show good thinking. | Ideas and arguments are effectively structured. Thoughtful progression of ideas and details. Excellent transitions between paragraphs. Concluding comments are soundly evidenced and show quality thinking. | /4 |
| Correct academic writing style used, such as spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Referencing meets Harvard and KBS guidelines. | Poorly written. Does not effectively communicate intended message. Not following Harvard referencing or KBS formatting guidelines. | Limited sentence variety. Tone or language is conversational. Some examples of unclear or awkward phrasing. Some errors and/or inconsistent application of Harvard referencing conventions. | Adequate sentence variety. Tone Is appropriate. Language is academic, and writing is clear and effective. Little or no unclear or awkward phrasing. A few errors and/or inconsistent application of Harvard referencing conventions. | Sentence variety is effective and good. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Language is academic. Writing is clear and concise. Minimal errors and/or inconsistent application of Harvard referencing convention. | Sentence variety is sophisticated and effective. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Vocabulary is extensive. Language is academic. Writing is clear, concise, and strong. Harvard referencing conventions are applied without errors. | /4 |
| Comments: | /40 |