1500-2000 words- Business and Society

Assessment Overview:

The purpose of this assessment is to further apply the knowledge gained in Weeks 1-4 of this unit by presenting your view(s) on how the business-society relationship has changed over time. In particular, you are to investigate and discuss the concept of “Shared Value” first put forward by Porter and Kramer in 2011.

This task is assessing your ability to demonstrate that you meet the criteria for the following unit learning outcomes (ULO’s):

1. Research and demonstrate an awareness of important issues and trends highlighting the business-society interface

2. Explore the nature of business and economic processes using social analysis and considering various stakeholder perspectives and priorities

4. Explore and critique contemporary, cross-cultural and cross-functional initiatives

*The completion of this assessment task will subsequently prepare you for Assessment 2, the Group Report, where you will apply the concept of Shared Value through the completion of a group case-study.

Student Instructions:

Read: Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). CREATING SHARED VALUE. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62-77.

Topic: Explain how Creating Shared Value (CSV) differs from Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and discuss whether you believe a CSV approach to business can help solve major socio-economic and environmental challenges such as Climate Change, Obesity, Gender inequality, etc..

Please use standard essay formatting and incorporate the Harvard referencing system.

Word Count: 1500-2000 words

Value: 20%

Key points for consideration:

• Definition/Explanation of CSV
  • Porter and Kramer (2011)
• Definition/Explanation of CSR
• Discussion of different approaches to business
  • History of CSR and context for development of CSV
    • Rise of large MNC’s (Power/Influence)
    • Recent socio-economic and environmental disasters, such as the BP Oil Spill, Samarco/BHP Billiton Dam Collapse, etc…
  • Evidence for/against the CSV “business case”.
  • Impact on, and role of, various stakeholder (e.g. Social Enterprises, Government, NGO’s, Consumers, Employees, Community Groups, etc.)
  • Appropriate examples/case studies
  • Inclusion of relevant Management theory and references

Rubric

Business & Society - EssayBusiness & Society - EssayCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a learning outcomePresentation (5 marks)Structure, style, grammar, fluency and effective communication of issues, findings and conclusions5.0 to >4.0 PtsHigh Disctinction• Superior skill demonstrated in use of correct referencing style (Harvard) • Proficient in paraphrasing key comments and sparing use of direct quotations • Report set out in an expert and scholarly manner • Scholarly use of correct language • Adheres to word limit, answers all parts of the topic question.4.0 to >3.5 PtsDistinction• High level of skill demonstrated in use of correct referencing style (Harvard) • Paraphrased key comments and used direct quotations very sparingly • Report set out in a professional manner • Adheres to word limit, answers all parts of the topic question.3.5 to >3.0 PtsCredit• Reasonable skill in use of correct referencing style (Harvard) • Direct quotations used sparingly • Report set out in a good and acceptable manner • Correct use of language • Adheres to word limit, answers all parts of the topic question.3.0 to >2.5 PtsPass• Some inaccuracies in use of correct referencing style (Harvard) • Quotations used frequently • Report set out in fair manner • Reasonably correct use of language • Adheres to word limit, answers all parts of the topic question.2.5 to >0 PtsFail• Referencing is either insufficient or contains significant inaccuracies • Quotations over-used and/or used when irrelevant • Presentation poorly set out • Poor use of language, grammar and spelling • Does not adheres to word limit and/or answer all parts of the topic question.5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeUnderstanding (7.5 marks)Demonstrated understanding of concepts and issues relevant to the discussion topic7.5 to >6.0 PtsHigh Disctinction• Logical argument developed in a scholarly fashion and supported by evidence • Conclusion draws argument together in an influential and scholarly manner • Considerable evidence used to expertly support arguments6.0 to >5.2 PtsDistinction• Logically developed argument which is clearly supported by evidence • Comprehensive conclusion • Considerable evidence used to competently support arguments5.2 to >4.4 PtsCredit• Logically developed argument which is supported by evidence • Effective conclusion • Evidence used to competently support arguments4.4 to >3.75 PtsPass• Argument is not well developed and supported • Conclusion evident • Evidence used to support somearguments3.75 to >0 PtsFail• Argument, if evidenced, not developed or supported • Poor, if any conclusion • Little or no evidence used to support arguments7.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeScholarship (7.5 marks)Evidence of ability to research, analyse and critique issues relevant to the discussion topic Academically rigorous use of supporting references and course content7.5 to >6.0 PtsHigh Disctinction• Scholarly demonstration of critical analysis of theories and models • Critical use of sources • Highly proficient and scholarly use of a wide range of relevant sources of knowledge or data • Scholarly application of relevant theories and models6.0 to >5.2 PtsDistinction• Considerable demonstration of critical analysis of theories and models • Critical use of sources • Scholarly use of a wide range of sources of knowledge • Competent application of relevant theories and models5.2 to >4.4 PtsCredit• Critical analysis of theories and models demonstrated generally • Mostly critical use of sources • Used a wide range of sources, most of which were relevant • Application of theories and models relevant to the set task4.4 to >3.75 PtsPass• Critical analysis of theories and models somewhat demonstrated • Uncritical use of sources • Limited use of sources of knowledge • Application of some theories and models to the set task3.75 to >0 PtsFail• Critical analysis poorly demonstrated if at all • Uncritical use of (few) sources • Very limited use and/or insufficient ranges of sources used • Little of theories and models to the set task7.5 pts
Total points: 20.0