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 cu
ent 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
equest-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
equest-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
oad 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
enefits. 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
eflection.
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 Ru
ic
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
etween 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
esponse that integrates
perspectives with limited
contrast.
Classifies perspectives
employing and integrating
some theory. Explores
elationships 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)
elated to the question.
Introduction and conclusion are
not clear or incomplete.
Uses somewhat logical
structure of paragraphs but with
e
ors. 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)
elated 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
e
ors that interfere with
meaning.
Demonstrates limited
disciplinary based vocabulary
that adheres to the basic rules
of grammar, with a number of
e
ors.
Employs a developing
disciplinary based vocabulary
that adheres to the basic rules
of grammar.
Employs a competent
discipline-based vocabulary
elevant to the context and
adheres to grammatical
convention.
Excellent, logically developed
paragraph structure matched to the
task. Employs excellent discipline-
ased vocabulary relevant to the
context and adheres to grammatical
conventions, with few or no spelling,
punctuation or grammatical e
ors.
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
eferences including 4 academic references. Poor or lack of in text
eference 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
e
ors, with Harvard referencing, 7 references including 4 academic
eferences.
Employs