File attached - Research Essay:
The role of sustainability frameworks in developing
corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies
Assessment 2 Research Essay: The role of sustainability frameworks in developing corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies CSE1SPX –Sustainability Practices 2 © Didasko 2022. All rights reserved. Before you begin Learning outcomes Learning outcome 2: Explain policy development processes, practices and current sustainability theoretical frameworks. Learning outcome 4: Explain the corporate social responsibility (CSR) required by business and the degree of responsibility they must take for their actions. This is an individual assignment. Students are not permitted to work in a group when writing this assignment. Weighting This assessment is a major assessment and is worth 30% Copying and Plagiarism This is an individual assignment. Students are not permitted to work in a group when writing this assignment. Plagiarism is the submission of another person’s work in a manner that gives the impression that the work is their own. La Trobe University treats plagiarism seriously. When detected, penalties are strictly imposed. Further information can be found on https://www.latrobe.edu.au/mylatrobe/why-you-should-care-about- academic-integrity/ Submission Guidelines Your assignment submission should be typed, not written/drawn by hand. Submit the electronic copy of your assignment through the subject Learning Portal (LP). Submission after the deadline will incur a penalty of 5% of the available assignment mark per day capped at 5 days. No assignment will be accepted after 5 days. If you have encountered difficulties that lead to late submission or no submission, you should apply for an extension 3 days before the assessment is due https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/forms/request-an-extension or special consideration 3 days after the assessment was due, see link for eligibility https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/forms/special-consideration https://www.latrobe.edu.au/mylatrobe/why-you-should-care-about-academic-integrity/ https://www.latrobe.edu.au/mylatrobe/why-you-should-care-about-academic-integrity/ https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/forms/request-an-extension https://www.latrobe.edu.au/students/admin/forms/special-consideration © Didasko 2022. All rights reserved. 3 Background - Rationale A business has a legal and ethical responsibility to act in a responsible way. The term corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate citizenship are often used to describe the broad social, economic and environmental responsibilities a business has. Organisations need to examine day-to-day operations for opportunities to improve the conservation of resources. This means not only considering the immediate impact of business operations, but the long-term impact that its systems and processes have on the world. A sustainability policy needs a scope, framework, and clearly defined actions, among other elements, but how do the frameworks, standards and legal requirements all fit together? This assessment task will give you the opportunity to review a framework, evaluate how it helps the companies’ CSR and critically analyse some limitations companies face when using these frameworks. 4 © Didasko 2022. All rights reserved. Task From a given company, select a sustainability framework, analyse its relationship to the company CSR’s policies providing examples; and review its advantages and limitations according to the company actions. Instructions 1. From the list below, select a framework that you consider TELSTRA uses: • GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) • TBL (Triple bottom line) • CERES • Natural Step. 2. Define the key elements of the framework, including its advantages/benefits. If students identify a company framework different from the four above, the discussion can be based on that framework. 3. Provide evidence that links TELSTRA’s CSR to this framework. As part of your response, explain how the framework may have influenced the CSR policies TELSTRA has with at least one example that justifies your answer. 4. Discuss the framework limitations Ensure you: - Provide a clear Introduction that begins with an opening statement that provides context and leads to the thesis/argument. This might include any necessary background information or contextual information that will help to provide a focus for your essay. Then, a thesis statement and after an essay plan. - In the Body (Paragraphs) of the essay, address: o What is the sustainability framework used by the company and what are its key elements and advantages? o How is the framework linked to the company’s CSR policies and its influence on them? You must provide at least one example of the company’s policies to support your answer. o Are there any limitations the company faces using this framework? - Provide a clear Conclusion restating your key arguments and point of view. - Make sure you integrate theories in your paper (E.g.: define some relevant concepts/theories like CSR, the framework, etc). - Full 'in-text' referencing and a Reference list using the Harvard referencing style. - A minimum of 7 references are required, with at least 4 academic references (e.g., journal articles or book chapters). More references can be added to enhance the quality of the critical reflection. o Sources like Wikipedia and Investopedia are not considered academic references and should not be used in academic writing. © Didasko 2022. All rights reserved. 5 o The Reference List should go on a separate page and organised in alphabetical order. - Visit the Student Hub Student Hub (latrobe-didasko.com) for assistance with Academic writing, Essay writing and Referencing Essentials. Requirements • 1000 words (+/- 10%) is acceptable, and it includes in-text references. The Reference list in not included in the word count. • Submit your report in a single Microsoft Word document. Name the file xxx_cse1spx_Assessment 2.docx (where xxx is your student number). • On completion, submit the assessment via the CSE1SPX Assessment 2 Upload link on the LP system. Feedback General feedback with comments will be provided on the LP closer to the end of the first week of submission, while the marking moderation is taking place. Final marks will be provided 2-3 weeks after submission date once the assessment results are released. https://student.latrobe-didasko.com/orientation/ 6 © Didasko 2021. All rights reserved. 6 CSE1SPX Assessment 2: Marking Rubric Criteria Fail (N 0-49%) Pass (D 50-59%) Good (C 60-69%) Very Good (B 70-79%) Excellent (A 80-100%) Critical Thinking and application of theory Weighting 40% /12 Does not compare and contrast key perspectives. Unable to organise elements/variables in a given framework. Response does not integrate contrasting perspectives on the issues. Demonstrates almost no knowledge about the framework and its advantages. Provides no connection between the framework and the company. A discussion about the framework limitations is not included. Poor comparison and contrast of key perspectives with limited theoretical application. Poor organisation of elements/variables in a given framework. Response does not integrate contrasting perspectives. Demonstrates little understanding about the framework and its advantages. Provides sparse connection between the framework and the company. A discussion about the framework limitations is not clear. Identifies, compares and contrasts perspectives in a wider context with limited theoretical application. Organises component elements/variables in a given framework. Formulates a response that integrates perspectives with limited contrast. Classifies perspectives employing and integrating some theory. Explores relationships between component elements/variables. Integrates contrasting perspectives to develop insights. Good framework description and advantages. Clear link between framework and the company with clear example. Good discussion about the framework limitations. Classifies multiple perspectives employing and integrating theory very well. Explores relationships between component elements/variables. Integrates perspectives to develop insights. Excellent framework description and advantages well described. Excellent link between framework and the company with clear example. Excellent discussion about the framework limitations. Structure, Argument and Context Weighting 30% /9 Paragraph structure is not clear, well ordered, or logical. Generates a series of statements or claims without connecting these to form a clear, logical argument. Introduction and/or conclusion are missing or incomplete or do not reflect relevance for the paper. Poor logic in structure of paragraphs. Poor development and focus of argument(s) related to the question. Introduction and conclusion are not clear or incomplete. Uses somewhat logical structure of paragraphs but with errors. Generates few developed and focused argument(s) related to the question. Basic Introduction and conclusion. Uses logically developed structure matched to the task. Generates developed and focused argument(s) related to the question. Well elaborated Introduction and conclusion. Excellent, logically developed structure matched to the task. Generates a highly developed, focused and sustained argument(s) related to the question. Excellent Introduction and conclusion. Grammar and Vocabulary Weighting 20% /6 The task largely reverts to the use of non-discipline specific vocabulary with grammatical errors that interfere with meaning. Demonstrates limited disciplinary based vocabulary that adheres to the basic rules of grammar, with a number of errors. Employs a developing disciplinary based vocabulary that adheres to the basic rules of grammar. Employs a competent discipline-based vocabulary relevant to the context and adheres to grammatical convention. Excellent, logically developed paragraph structure matched to the task. Employs excellent discipline- based vocabulary relevant to the context and adheres to grammatical conventions, with few or no spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. Referencing Weighting 10% /3 Shows unfamiliarity with, and inconsistent application of the conventions of academic referencing with inadequate sources. Citations are largely absent throughout the paper. Less than 7 references including 4 academic references. Poor or lack of in text reference and/or reference list, non-academic references, or reliance on website references. Employs a basic academic referencing convention appropriate to the discipline, with limited sources. The paper may have a few citation errors, with Harvard referencing, 7 references including 4 academic references. Employs