| Assignment Brief | |
| BMM6492 Corporate Sustainability | |
| Component number | Assignment 1 |
| Assignment type | 01 Group pitch presentation |
| Learning outcomes for this assessment (Please see module Handbook for all learning outcomes) | Discuss the business case for sustainability Analyse the environmental, social and economic strategies in corporate sustainability Appraise the problems in measuring corporate environmental, social and economic impacts and performance |
| Weighting: | 40% |
| Word Count or Equivalent | 10 Minutes (Excluding Q&A) |
| Submission deadline: | This Month (before 12 PM) |
| Post date: | This Week 2026 |
Completing Your Assignment
You are sustainability consultants that have been asked to attend an industry conference to discuss corporate sustainability and present the business case for corporations to adopt sustainable policy and practice.
TASK: You are required to work in a small group (3-4students) where you will select an industry or a company of your choice and develop a pitch that presents an overview of sustainability, corporate sustainability and the rationale for businesses to adopt sustainable policy and practice.
In building your pitch and argument, you will be expected to identify business strategies relating to the three pillars of sustainability as well as acknowledge and discuss problems in measuring impacts and reporting on performance.
You must be sure to include academic references as well as supportive evidence from organisational bodies such as the United Nations.
Is there a time limit?
10 minutes presentation (excluding Q & A)
How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?
1. Demonstrate a good understanding of sustainability and its significance/relevance today
2. Critically reflect upon the term ‘corporate sustainability’, acknowledging challenges as well as opportunities and what this means for business
3. Discuss strategies for achieving corporate sustainability with examples
4. Develop a strong argument throughout that would persuade businesses to amend policy and practice
5. Present with confidence, clarity and evidenced based examples
How will my assignment be marked?
Your assignment will be marked based on the marking criteria below. Make sure you read thoroughly to see how you can accumulate marks.
What resources will I use to complete my assignment?
Essential reading
Sarda, R. and Pogutz, S. (2018) Corporate Sustainability in the 21st Century: Increasing the Resilience of Social-Ecological Systems. Abingdon, Routledge
Further reading
Brockett, A. & Rezaee, Z. (2012) Business sustainability and accountability, Chichester: Wiley.
Epstein, M.J. (2014) Making sustainability work: best practices in managing and measuring corporate social, environmental and economic impacts, Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.
Soyka, P.A. (2012) Creating a sustainable organisation: approaches to enhancing corporate value through sustainability, London: Prentice-Hall.
Journals
Academy of Management Journal
Business Strategy and the Environment
Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management.
Environmental Data Services UK (ENDS)
Greener Management International
Journal of Business Ethics
Journal of Sustainability and Green Business
Our friendly team are based at the Library helpdesk and are here to help you make the most of the library.
Website: https://library.leedstrinity.ac.uk/home
| Exceptional First 90-100 | Outstanding First 80-89 | First 70-79 | 2 (i) 60-69 | 2 (ii) 50-59 | Third 40-49 | Fail 30-39 | Abject Fail 0-29 | |
| Presentation Style (20%) | Professional and sophisticated presentation with exceptional clarity and coherence. Excellent, controlled, confident delivery, pace, and audience engagement. | Professional and fluent presentation with great clarity and coherence. Confident delivery, pace and audience engagement. | Fluent and accurate presentation with great clarity and coherence. Mostly confident delivery, pace and audience engagement. | Clear and coherent presentation. Good delivery, pace and audience engagement | Some lapses of clarity in presentation. Some expression is ineffective. Satisfactory delivery, pace and audience engagement | Adequate, but awkward expression throughout presentation with little clarity. Poor delivery, pace and audience engagement | Inadequate and unclear presentation. Impaired communication. Error-strewn. | Grossly inadequate and unclear presentation. Severely impaired communication. Error-strewn. |
| Knowledge & Understanding (30%) | Polished grasp of sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business. Astute and authoritative approach to complexity. | Comprehensive and confident grasp of sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business with strong sense of subject complexity. | Thorough understanding of sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business and well applied in the pitch presentation. | Secure, general understanding of sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business; reasonable application within the pitch presentation. | Sound knowledge of the sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business relevant to the pitch presentation. | Limited knowledge of the sustainability, the sustainable development goals or their relevance to business; shows basic understanding. Some awareness of the context of the pitch presentation. | Faulty understanding of the sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business. Irrelevant or mostly absent content. | No understanding of sustainability, the sustainable development goals and their relevance to business. Irrelevant or absent content. |
| Analysis and Conclusions (20%) | Original and searching analysis, critical appraisal corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues with judicious conclusions. | Searching analysis of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues with pertinent conclusions drawn. | Insightful analysis of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues throughout with appropriate conclusions drawn. | Strong analysis of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues. Some general conclusions drawn. | Some conclusions drawn based on some reasonable comparisons and examples of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues. | Basic analysis. Remains descriptive, little evaluation or comparison of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues. Few clear conclusions. | Insufficient evaluation or attempt to make comparisons of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues. Conclusions illogical insufficient. | No evaluation or attempt to make comparisons of corporate sustainability frameworks, strategies and issues. Conclusions illogical or absent. |
| Structure, Argument (20%) | Effective and integrated over-arching argument relating to the business case for sustainability, clear, insightful synthesis of material. Highly creative understanding of topic. | Effective overall argument relating to the business case for sustainability with clear and insightful connections between claims. Creative understanding of topic. | Clear and logical focus and direction relating to the business case for sustainability with valuable connections made between claims. Good level of creativity. | Well-focused on the business case for sustainability with some clear connections made between claims and some overall direction. Some creativity. | Addresses the business case for sustainability with some direction and makes some connections between claims or different parts of artefact/assignment. | Argument relating to the business case for sustainability is weak and difficult to detect. Connections made between statements limited | Lack of argument relating to the business case for sustainability. Faulty connection between statements. | No argument. Many faulty connection between statements. |
| Sources & Evidence, Adherence to Referencing Conventions (10%) | Extensive and evaluative use of evidential support for argument. Flawless referencing or technical skills using extensive academic sources. | Extensive use of evidence with some evaluation. Flawless referencing or technical skills using a wide range of academic sources. | Clear support of argument with well selected evidence. Excellent referencing or technical skills using a range of academic sources. | Draws on relevant independent sources and evidence to support claims. Consistent and accurate referencing or technical skills using some academic sources. | Makes simple use of evidence from recommended sources. Largely consistent accurate referencing. or technical skills with limited academic sources. | Relies on superficial statements with little supporting evidence. Limited referencing/ adherence to convention or technical skills. Lack of academic sources. | Lack of evidence or relevant sources. Inadequate referencing or technical skills. | No evidence or relevant sources. Inadequate or no referencing or technical skills. |
The post BMM6492 Corporate Sustainability appeared first on Universal Assignment.
