3 assignments

Page 1 of 6

UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

AND

MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE

IN TASHKENT

Course :BA (Hons) in Business & Marketing Management

BA (Hons) in Business & Financial Management

BA (Hons) in Business & Management

Module Code and Title : Business Ethics, Sustainability &Responsibility (UGB264)

Module Leader : Dr. Darwin Joseph

UK Module leader : Mr Gavin Mason

Assessment : Individual Assignment

Submission Due Date : 07 Jan 2022

Word Length : No more than 3000 words

Weighting within Module : 100%

Task:

• Select two real-life global organisations from the banking sector. These companies must be from the same country.

• Compare and contrast the business ethics, responsibility and sustainability programs and practices in these two organisations. These organisations should not be start-ups or

government-sector type entities.

• All information related to any real-life organisations within the assessment submission, must be sourced from documentary secondary data sources i.e. primary research is not required for the purpose of this assessment

You are to address the following areas in your chosen organisations. As much as possible, you

are to make references to ethical and moral theories and principles.

• Examine their contemporary business ethics philosophies & practices, and the impact on their stakeholders.

Page 2 of 6

• Analyse the key challenges to their business ethics, sustainability and responsibility. (You must consider their country context in your analysis.)

• Provide recommendations to these two companies separately on what more they can do to improve or enhance their business ethics, sustainability and responsibility.

Your report should be typed, 1.5-spaced and no more than 3000 words in length, excluding

Appendices. You must acknowledge your sources of information and evidence, using the

Harvard referencing system. An electronic copy of the assignment should be submitted to the

UGB264 module site on Canvas.

An opportunity for formative feedback will be communicated and offered during the course of the

module delivery.

The Assessment Criteria is based on the University’s Generic Marking.

YOU MUST SUBMIT IN PAPER COPY AND ELECTRONICALLY BY THE

DEADLINE:

1. Electronically through Canvas (UGB 264 module page) for checking with ‘Turnitin’ a. A link will be available in the assessment folder b. Students may submit drafts prior to submission and generate reports. The

last submission prior to the deadline is deemed to be the final submission

for assessment purposes

Non-submission through Turnitin:

The penalty for students who do not submit their work through Turnitin is that their

mark is withheld and the assessment board may deem the work to have failed.

PLAGIARISM/INFRINGEMENT STATEMENT

All Assessments are subject to the University’s Policy on 'Cheating, Collusion and

Plagiarism'. Students found guilty of this are subject to severe penalties.

This is an INDIVIDUAL piece of work - If there is evidence that the work is not wholly

attributable to you, the University's policy on 'Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism' will

be applied

Link to University Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy

• https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155

Page 3 of 6

3)EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES

If you are affected by any extenuating circumstances and cannot submit your work, for

example, illness or severe personal difficulties, you must inform your programme leader,

personal tutor, module leader or module tutor immediately.

IMPORTANT – ‘FIT TO SIT’:

Any student who presents themselves at an examination and takes that examination, or who submits a

piece of coursework, or attends and takes part in a presentation, practical session or any other form of

assessment cannot then put in a later request for extenuating circumstances. They will be deeming

themselves 'Fit-to-Sit' if they thereby engage in the assessment and no allowance will be made for any

difficulties, they later wish to claim affected their results.

Extenuating circumstances procedure:

1. The MODULE LEADER has the authority to grant an extension to the deadline for the

submission of an assignment of up to 72 HOURS provided they are satisfied that a

genuine reason exists

• Programme Leader & Personal tutor can support you with this

2. More serious mitigation requires a FORMAL APPLICATION

• See the Programme Leader before submitting formal mitigation to determine if it would be approved or require further evidence

i. Mitigation applications are considered by a standing panel three times per year. Each case is considered individually.

• IF SUCCESSFUL students are automatically deferred and require you to submit at the next available opportunity

i. You should submit a mitigation form, available from reception. Mitigation forms must be accompanied by appropriate supporting

evidence, such as a sick note from your GP

ii. If your mitigation is accepted, you will be deferred in that assessment. This means that you must re-sit the assessment at the next opportunity

and your mark will not be capped.

Please bear in mind that if you know you will be absent from classes for any length of time you

should inform your tutors.

For information or to discuss an issue you are having, please contact the Programme

leader or Personal tutor in the first instance.

Other Important Information:

All teaching aids and materials are available on Canvas

Useful URLs

Page 4 of 6

Note: as URLs for some individual documents may change from year to year, some of the links are to

folders within the Academic Quality Handbook which contain the relevant documents and which will

not change.

University Academic Regulations

https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-2780

University Policy on Academic Integrity and Misconduct

https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-8155

University Policy on Extenuating Circumstances

https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-2995/AQH-F6-Procedures-

for-Extenuating-Circumstances.pdf

University Policies on Complaints, Appeals and Student Discipline

https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-2784

Page 5 of 6

Categories

Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature

P a

ss

86 –

100%

The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is

also ample excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be

exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

76-85% The work examined is outstanding and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent

evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be outstanding in the

majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

70 – 75%

The work examined is excellent and is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence

showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the

categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

60 – 69%

Directly relevant to

the requirements of

the assessment

A substantial

knowledge of

relevant material,

showing a clear

grasp of themes,

questions and issues

therein

Good analysis,

clear and orderly

Generally coherent and

logically structured, using an

appropriate mode of

argument and/or theoretical

mode(s)

May contain some

distinctive or

independent thinking;

may begin to formulate

an independent

position in relation to

theory and/or practice.

Well written, with

standard spelling and

grammar, in a

readable style with

acceptable format

Critical appraisal of up-to-

date and/or appropriate

literature. Recognition of

different perspectives. Very

good use of source material.

Uses a range of sources

50 – 59%

Some attempt to

address the

requirements of the

assessment: may

drift away from this

in less focused

passages

Adequate knowledge

of a fair range of

relevant material,

with intermittent

evidence of an

appreciation of its

significance

Some analytical

treatment, but

may be prone to

description, or to

narrative, which

lacks clear

analytical purpose

Some attempt to construct a

coherent argument, but may

suffer loss of focus and

consistency, with issues at

stake stated only vaguely, or

theoretical mode(s) couched

in simplistic terms

Sound work which

expresses a coherent

position only in broad

terms and in uncritical

conformity to one or

more standard views of

the topic

Competently written,

with only minor

lapses from standard

grammar, with

acceptable format

Uses a variety of literature

which includes some recent

texts and/or appropriate

literature, though not

necessarily including a

substantive amount beyond

library texts. Competent use

of source material.

40 – 49% Some correlation

with the

requirements of the

assessment but

there is a significant

Basic understanding

of the subject but

addressing a limited

range of material

Largely descriptive

or narrative, with

little evidence of

analysis

A basic argument is evident,

but mainly supported by

assertion and there may be

a lack of clarity and

coherence

Some evidence of a

view starting to be

formed but mainly

derivative.

A simple basic style

but with significant

deficiencies in

expression or format

that may pose

Some up-to-date and/or

appropriate literature used.

Goes beyond the material

tutor has provided. Limited

use of sources to support a

Page 6 of 6

degree of

irrelevance

obstacles for the

reader

point. Weak use of source

material. F

a il

35 – 39% Relevance to the

requirements of the

assessment may be

very intermittent,

and may be reduced

to its vaguest and

least challenging

terms

A limited

understanding of a

narrow range of

material

Heavy dependence

on description,

and/or on

paraphrase, is

common

Little evidence of coherent

argument: lacks

development and may be

repetitive or thin

Almost wholly

derivative: the writer’s

contribution rarely goes

beyond simplifying

paraphrase

Numerous

deficiencies in

expression and

presentation; the

writer may achieve

clarity (if at all) only

by using a simplistic

or repetitious style

Barely adequate use of

literature. Over reliance on

material provided by the

tutor.

The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.

30 – 34%

The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of

the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.

15-29% The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few

of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.

0-14% The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to

show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.