UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

AND
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE OF SINGAPORE

Course : BA (Hons) in Business & Marketing Management

BAMD21905A
Module Code and Title : UGB264 Business Ethics, Responsibility and Sustainability

UOS Module Leader : Gavin Mason

MDIS Module Leader : Daniel Chew Chee San

Assessment : Individual Assignment

Submission Due Date : 25 October 2019

Word Length : 3,000 words (+/- 10% words)

Weighting within Module : 100%

Assignment Submission
Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submitted
through JIRA will be marked. Any other submission including submission to your study
centre in hard copy will be treated as a non-submission.
If your centre supports Turnitin©, a copy of your Turnitin© originality report must be
submitted in conjunction with your assignment.

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
 Task:
Using the specific theories, models and general understanding covered in the module; you
will analyse the prevalent ethical, responsible and sustainable impacts made by firms
operating within ONE of the following industries during the period of 2014-2019; identifying
any global impacts.

 Automotive Industry
 Pharmaceutical
 Construction

Note: This assignment is entirely, secondary information based and as such, you are not
required to conduct any primary research.

Your work must provide referenced organisational examples, drawn from across the
industry as whole and specific firms within it, to support your submission. Discussion
within your work should provide a good balance between the referenced theory(s) and
applied practice.

To aid your thought (in the development of your work) you could consider the following
structure of topic inclusion below:

PART A: For 30% of the marks - Examine and discuss the predominant ‘business’ ethical
approach generally adopted by firms in the industry.

 To develop your response, offer researched practical evidence (a range of holistic

practical examples) which identifies the predominant ethical view/s adopted by the firms
researched. In particular, identify whether a consequential vs non- consequential view is
currently adopted by example firms overall. Include contemporary examples (summary
points) of the impact on and actions of firms regarding their norms (procedures,
processes), behaviours’ (actions) which identify your interpretation of the predominant
ethical view adopted.

PART B: For 30% of the marks - From your research in A, analyse and identify how firms
within the industry are creating/addressing responsible corporate and/or social practices
(depending on the view identified in part A) in comparison to their direct competitor/s.

 To develop your response you should identify the specific hierarchical ethic views
(within the predominant ethical view identified from part A) for example,
objectivism/egoism approach OR social responsible OR utilitarian perspectives. Is there
any difference in the specific hierarchical ethic views adopted in some firms compared to
competitors, or are they all operating from the same ethical perspective?
PART C: For 40% of the marks - From the interpretation in parts A and B, regarding current
ethical associated norms and behavioural practices, make recommendations for firms in the
industry, of how their current or adapted ethical views could be reviewed to ensure future
responsibility to ensure sustainability in relation to a wider, global consideration.

 To develop your response relate to the current ‘cultural’ pillar of ethics (from the module
adopted in the module) and establish a view of where the current ethical position is and
identify if a possible shift in predominant ethical view would aid future sustainability.
Use examples of norms and behaviours’ (and values) by considering the adoption of
theories such as ‘triple bottom line’ and change/development in future ‘cultural’ ethical
approach and change in responsible norms/behaviour.

Assessment submission information:

Your report should be:

 Electronic word document - typed
 1.5 line spacing and Times New Roman; font size 12
 3000 words in length (+/- 10%) excluding cover page and appendices section
 Include a ‘cover page’ with your submission - see Appendices section 1 for the
information required on this page
You must acknowledge your sources of information and supporting evidence, using the
Harvard Referencing system, ONLY.
An electronic copy of the assignment MUST be submitted via the UGB264 module canvas
site for checking with ‘Turnit-In’. An electronic submission link is accessible via the module
canvas site by the hand in date; the electronic link is titled ‘Assessment Submission’.
The marking of all scripts is based on the ‘Undergraduate Generic Assessment Criteria’ (see
Appendix 2 of this document).
You must submit an electronic version ONLY – NO paper hard copies are required.
Students may submit multiple drafts to the electronic submission link prior to your final
submission. This is to enable a learning and development basis of your work and allow you to
monitor your ‘similarity % score’ with in the ‘Turn-it In’ system, for your individual work.
However, the last submission prior to the deadline is deemed a final submission for
assessment marking purposes. (NOTE: allow 24 hours prior to the deadline time if multiple
submissions attempts have been uploaded).

Non-submission through the module Canvas link:

The penalty for anyone who does not submit his or her work through this electronic method
will be recorded as a ‘non-submission’ and receive a mark of 0%.
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

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 or personal tutor
AND module leader or module tutor immediately.
The procedure (details) for Extenuating Circumstances can be accessed via:
 https://docushare.sunderland.ac.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-2995/AQH-F6-
Procedures-for-Extenuating-Circumstances.pdf

*IMPORTANT*
What is ‘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.

Please bear in mind that if you know you will be absent from classes for any length of time you
should inform your module leader and/or programme leader.

Other useful information:

All teaching aids and materials are available on Canvas
Some useful URLs
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
 APPENDICES SECTION
Appendix 1: Assignment FRONT COVER

BUSINESS: (ESR)

UGB264

[insert your FULL NAME used at enrolment]

STUDENT REGISTRATION

NUMBER: [Insert Here]

Module Tutor: [Insert here]

[insert your Final Word count

here]
Appendix 2: Generic Assessment Criteria – Undergraduate Bachelor’s degree - he following should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working

Categories

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

86 – 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
100% unequivocal 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 excellent 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 excellent in the majority of the categories
cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and there may be some evidence of originality

The work examined is of a high standard and there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also clearly
articulated t evidence demonstrating that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied. At this level, it is expected that the standard of the work will be
70 – 75% high in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

Directly relevant to A substantial Good analysis, Generally coherent and May contain some Well written, with Critical appraisal of up-to-
the requirements of knowledge of relevant clear and orderly logically structured, using an distinctive or standard spelling and date and/or appropriate
60 – 69% the assessment material, showing a appropriate mode of independent thinking; grammar, in a literature. Recognition of
clear grasp of argument and/or theoretical may begin to formulate readable style with different perspectives. Very
themes, questions mode(s) an independent position acceptable format good use of source material.
and issues therein in relation to theory Uses a range of sources
Pass

and/or practice.

Some attempt to Adequate knowledge Some analytical Some attempt to construct a Sound work which Competently written, Uses a variety of literature,
address the of a fair range of treatment, but may coherent argument, but may expresses a coherent with only minor lapses which includes some recent
50 – 59% requirements of the relevant material, with be prone to suffer loss of focus and position only in broad from standard texts, and/or appropriate
assessment: may intermittent evidence description, or to consistency, with issues at terms and in uncritical grammar, with literature, though not
drift away from this in of an appreciation of narrative, which stake stated only vaguely, or conformity to one or acceptable format necessarily including a
less focused its significance lacks clear theoretical mode(s) couched more standard views of substantive amount beyond
passages analytical purpose in simplistic terms the topic library texts. Competent use
of source material.

40 – 49% Some correlation Basic understanding Largely descriptive A basic argument is evident, Some evidence of a A simple basic style Some up-to-date and/or
with the of the subject but or narrative, with but mainly supported by view starting to be but with significant appropriate literature used.
requirements of the addressing a limited little evidence of assertion and there may be a formed but mainly deficiencies in Goes beyond the material
assessment but range of material analysis lack of clarity and coherence derivative. expression or format tutor has provided. Limited
there are instances that may pose use of sources to support a
of irrelevance obstacles for the point.
reader
 35 – 39% Relevance to the A limited Heavy dependence Little evidence of coherent Almost wholly derivative: Numerous Barely adequate use of
requirements of the understanding of a on description, argument: lacks development the writer’s contribution deficiencies in literature. Over reliance on
assessment may be narrow range of and/or on and may be repetitive or thin rarely goes beyond expression and material provided by the tutor.
very intermittent, and material paraphrase, is simplifying paraphrase presentation; the
may be reduced to common writer may achieve
its vaguest and least clarity (if at all) only by
challenging terms using a simplistic or
repetitious style

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

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.