Module Code: LD6061
Module Title: Responsible Strategy
Distributed on: TBC
Submission Time
and Date:
Part 1 - Individual assignment to be submitted electronically by 12:00 noon GMT on
[20th January 2025]

Part 2 – Group Presentation to be submitted electronically by 12:00 noon GMT on
[22nd January 2025]
Word Limit: for Part 1 Individual assignment: 2000 words (+/- 10%)
for Part 2 Group Presentation: 10-minute recorded presentation
Weighting The part 1 coursework accounts for [75]% of the total mark for this module
The Part 2 of the assignment (Group Presentation) accounts for [25%] of the total mark
for this module.
Submission of
Assessment

Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA): Please note that your assignment is
submitted electronically and will be submitted online via Turnitin by the given deadline.
You will find a Turnitin link on the module’s eLP site.
It is your responsibility to ensure that your assignment arrives before the submission
deadline stated on the eLP. See the University policy on late submission of work.

Please note that assignments are subject to anonymous marking.


Instructions on Assessment:

For Part 1 Individual assignment you are required to produce a 2000-word (+/-10%) report based on
the following tasks:

Select a company of your own choice or from the list of companies provided on the module eLP. Evaluate
the strategic development of your selected organisation through the corporate social responsibility and
sustainability lens using a range of suitable frameworks introduced and discussed throughout the course of
the module. This will include theories, models and frameworks from the field of strategic management,
business ethics and responsible organisational contexts.

Your assignment must follow the following structure:

1. An introduction.

This section introduces the content of the assignment and the company. It briefly outlines the
organisation’s strategic position within their industry. We recommend that you do not use more than 100
words for this section. [10%]

2. A three-horizons analysis

Using a three-horizons framework discuss the company’s existing, emerging and prospective activities
shaping the future of the organisation and its potential development. Drawing upon the value chain and
resource-based view discuss the company’s sources of competitive advantage. Which of the company’s
competencies and/or dynamic capabilities do contribute the most to its responsible and sustainable
development and future? Use a range of scholarly sources, debates and frameworks to conduct a critical
analysis. (aprox 800 words) [40%]
Assessment Brief

3. Stakeholder Assessment

Evaluate how responsible the strategic direction of the organisation has been from the point of view of its
key stakeholders. Discuss how organisation tackled various corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) acts
it committed over the past 10 years and which stakeholder groups were affected the most by the
company’s misconduct/s. Discuss whether the organisation has done enough to rectify the damages
caused to its key stakeholders and whether and how the company invested to building and strengthening
these relationships for future success. For this part of the analysis, you are welcome to use suitable CSR
and CSI frameworks introduced and discussed throughout the course of the module (approx. 800 words)
[40%]
4. Drawing upon the overall analysis, propose a suitable strategic direction for the company to make it
more responsible, sustainable and ethical both short-term and long-term. (aprox 300 words) [10%]
Assessment Guidance

Full Assessment Guidance will be given in Assignment Lectures (please make sure that you review this
material). You are allowed to choose a company of your choice for your assignment but will also be provided
with an official list of companies on the module eLP. You will conduct a written strategic analysis (structure
outlined above) that informs the reader about the strategic development of the organisation through using a
range of corporate social responsibility and sustainability frameworks and what the company does or can do
to increase and improve its social responsibility to its key stakeholder groups for a more sustained
competitive advantage. The majority of your analysis will be based on the theory and frameworks taught as
part of this module and the expert opinions from authoritative sources (all referenced and cited in the APA
style) that you will use to support your strategic analysis. Your strategic recommendations will contain
various suggestions on more responsible and sustainable future for the business and their key stakeholders.

Format for Submission

The Part 1 of the assessment - Individual Assignment - should be written:

• in Arial, 11pt, left-justified, 1½spacing.
• DO NOT put Your Name (or any Tutor’s Name) anywhere on your assignment.
• Every page should be numbered (in header or footer) and show your student ID.
• Each section should start on a new page.
• DO NOT use appendices. Tables, figures and frameworks used for illustration and explanation
should be placed on the same page or close to where it was referred to in text.
• All academic and other sources must be cited APA format and included ONCE in a single reference
list at the end of the document. Do not cite Northumbria Lectures, Seminars or Workshops.
• Cutting and pasting material directly from sources without citation is Plagiarism.
• Cutting and pasting material directly from sources with citation is Poor Scholarship.
• Short quoted extracts from cited sources are permissible – use double quotation marks”” and citation
that includes the page number of the cited document.
• The vast majority of your assignment word count should use your own words or paraphrase
reputable sources.

For Part 2 of the assignment, which is a Group Presentation, you are required to prepare a group
presentation.

In a group of (3-5 people) you are required to prepare a 10-minute recorded presentation. As management
consultants you have been hired by a company that has been struggling to integrate CSR into its business
functions and operations. You will be required to conduct research into your selected organisation and
prepare a plan of how the organisation can develop and integrate or improve its CSR in one of its business
functions. Recommendations provided would help the organisation to become a more socially responsible
and sustainable business.

Your team will produce a 10-minute recorded presentation (i.e. a powerpoint with a recorded voiceover
submitted as a recorded video file) and should include:

Assessment Brief
1. An introduction to the team and each member’s specific responsibilities for this task.
2. An introduction to the company outlining its key business specialisation, industry and strategic
developments.
3. An overview of the organisation’s approach to CSR with specific examples related to a specific
business function.
4. A plan with recommendations outlining the steps the organisation can/should take to become more
socially responsible, ethical and sustainable.
5. A reference list that includes all the sources used in conducting your research and presentation.

Assessment Guidance
Your group PowerPoint presentation would need to be recorded and uploaded by each member of the team
onto the module blackboard Part 2 submission point before the submission deadline stated above and on the
module eLP.

Your group presentation will be based on the research conducted from academic sources (articles,
textbooks, conference papers), government reports, newspaper articles, practitioner literature and your
selected company’s website. You can also refer to the suitable content covered in lectures and seminars
especially around responsible decision making, the triple bottom line, CSR and CSI and other suitable
frameworks. You should also consider how the company meets its sustainability agenda.

We recommend that for this part of the assignment you read business related newspapers and magazines
such as Financial Times, the Economist, the Times, the Harvard Business Review and a range of academic
articles published over the past 10 years.
Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives
Module Level Objectives:
Knowledge & Understanding:
MLO1: Appreciate and critically evaluate strategic opportunities and challenges within a complex global
business context.

MLO2: Evaluate the wider impact of strategic business decisions on social, economic and environmental
contexts.

Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:

MLO3: Make theoretically and empirically informed arguments about the nature of responsible business.


Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity) (PVA):

MLO4: Reflect on your interpersonal communication skills and with ability to work within multi-cultural teams.
Programme (Level) Learning Outcomes that this module contributes to:
Knowledge and Understanding (K&U):

Assessment Brief
6.1.1 Appraise knowledge of contemporary professional practice in business and management informed by
theory and research.

6.1.2 Appraise knowledge of business and management to complex problems in or related to professional
practice in order to identify justifiable, sustainable and responsible solutions.


Intellectual / Professional Skills & Abilities (IPSA):

6.2.1 Evaluate effective interpersonal communication skills and the ability to work in multi-cultural teams.
Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural Awareness, Ethics, Curiosity) (PVA):

6.1.3 Appraise an awareness of the cultural and ethical contexts in which international business operates.

Assessment Brief
Module Specific Assessment Criteria and Rubric
Marking Rubric for Part 1 Individual Assignment (75% weighting)

Grade

Nominal %
Integer Range

Poor

0-29%


Inadequate

30-39%


Adequate

40-49%


Good

50-59%


Very Good

60-69%

Excellent

70-79%

Outstanding

80-89%


Exemplary

90-100%
Introduction

10%
weighting
(10 marks)
No introduction
to the report.
Completely
insufficient
overview of the
company and its
position within
the industry
The introduction
is not effective.
Insufficient
overview of the
company and its
position within
the industry
Adequately
effective
introduction to
the report. The
overview of the
company and its
position within
their industry is
adequate.
Good
introduction to
the report,
which includes
a good
overview of
the company
and its position
within the
industry
Very good
introduction to
the report,
which includes
a very good
overview of the
company and
its position
within the
industry
Excellent
introduction to
the report,
which
includes an
excellent
overview of
the company’s
position within
the industry
Outstandingly
effective
introduction
to the report,
which
includes an
outstanding
overview of
the
company’s
position
within the
industry
Exemplary
introduction to
the report
which includes
an exemplary
overview of
the company
and its position
within the
industry
Critical three-
horizons
analysis

40%
weighting
(40 marks)

Little or no
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible
future.
Inadequate
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible
future.
Adequate
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible
future. Adequate
Good critical
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible
future. Good
Very good
critical analysis
of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible
Excellent
critical
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage
and
Outstanding
critical
analysis of
the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing
to the
company’s
competitive
Exemplary
critical
analysis of the
company’s
existing,
emerging and
prospective
activities,
competencies
and dynamic
capabilities
contributing to
the company’s
competitive
advantage and
responsible

Assessment Brief



Completely
insufficient use
of value chain
and resource-
based view
theories.


Completely
insufficient use
of value chain
and resource-
based view
theories.
use of value
chain and
resource-based
view theories.
use of value
chain and
resource-
based view
theories.
future. Very
good use of
value chain and
resource-based
view theories.
responsible
future.
Excellent use
of value chain
and resource-
based view
theories.
advantage
and
responsible
future.
Outstanding
use of value
chain and
resource-
based view
theories.
future.
Exemplary use
of value chain
and resource-
based view
theories.
Stakeholder
Assessment

40%
weighting
(40 marks)

Little or no
evaluation of the
strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point of
view of its key
stakeholders.
Little or no
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. Little or no
examples of
rectification and
use of related
theory and
frameworks.
Inadequate
evaluation of the
strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point of
view of its key
stakeholders.
Insufficient
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. Insufficient
examples of
rectification and
application of
related theories
and frameworks.
Adequate
evaluation of the
strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point of
view of its key
stakeholders.
Adequate
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. Adequate
examples of
rectification and
application of
related theories
and frameworks.
Good
evaluation of
the strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point
of view of its
key
stakeholders.
Good
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. Good
examples of
rectification
and
application of
related
theories and
frameworks.
Very good
evaluation of
the strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point
of view of its
key
stakeholders.
Very good
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. Very good
examples of
rectification and
application of
related theories
and
frameworks.
Excellent
evaluation of
the strategic
direction of
the
organisation
from the point
of view of its
key
stakeholders.
Excellent
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its
CSI acts.
Excellent
examples of
rectification
and
application of
related
theories and
frameworks.
Outstanding
evaluation of
the strategic
direction of
the
organisation
from the point
of view of its
key
stakeholders.
Outstanding
discussion of
the
company’s
approach to
tackling its
CSI acts. The
analysis is
supported
with rich
examples of
rectification.
Outstanding
application of
related
theories and
frameworks.
Exemplary
evaluation of
the strategic
direction of the
organisation
from the point
of view of its
key
stakeholders.
Exemplary
discussion of
the company’s
approach to
tackling its CSI
acts. The
analysis is rich
and critically
conducted with
plenty of
examples of
rectification.
Outstanding
application of
related
theories and
frameworks.

Assessment Brief



Recommenda-
tions and
conclusions

10%
weighting
(10 marks)
Little or no
evidence of
recommendatio
ns and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections. Little
or no evidence
of related theory
being used to
inform the
recommendatio
ns.
Insufficient
recommendatio
ns and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections.
Insufficient use
of related theory
to inform the
recommendatio
ns.
Adequate
recommendatio
ns and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections.
Adequate use of
related theory to
inform
recommendatio
ns.
Good
Adequate
recommendati
ons and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections. Good
use of related
theory to
inform
recommendati
ons.
Very good
recommendatio
ns and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections. Very
good use of
related theory
to inform
recommendatio
ns.
Excellent
recommendati
ons and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections.
Excellent use
of related
theory to
inform
recommendati
ons.
Outstanding
recommendat
ions and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections.
Outstanding
use of related
theory to
inform
recommendat
ions.
Exemplary
recommendati
ons and
conclusions
being drawn
from the
analysis in
previous
sections.
Exemplary use
of related
theory to
inform
recommendati
ons.


Marking Rubric for Part 2 group Presentation (25% weighting)

Grade

Nominal %
Integer Range

Poor

0-29%


Inadequate

30-39%


Adequate

40-49%


Good

50-59%


Very Good
60-69%

Excellent

70-79%

Outstanding

80-89%


Exemplary

90-100%

25%
weighting
(25 marks)
Presentation is
poor and
unprofessional.
Little evidence of
research or
analysis. No or
little evidence of
the use of related
theory and
frameworks.
Little or no
evidence of a plan
with clear, robust
and relevant
recommendations.

Presentation is
unprofessional
with minimal
research and
analysis
conducted into the
organisation. One
or two academic
sources used but
lacks sufficient
analysis.
A plan lacks
sufficient, clear,
robust and
relevant
recommendations.
Presentation
requires
improvement.
Some research
has been carried
out but lacks
depth and more
academic and
practitioner
sources.
Recommendation
s are basic or
superficial.



Good
presentation.
Good level and
range of
research
undertaken
although may
not be analysed
in full.
Good and
logical
recommendation
s proposed.
Very good
presentation.
Wide range of
research
undertaken
including both
academic and
practitioner
sources.
Recommendation
s are logical and
well connected to
the analysis
undertaken.
Excellent and
professionally
conducted
presentation.
Wide range of
research
undertaken that
is critically
conducted and
linked to
recommendatio
ns.
Recommendati
ons based on
the research
undertaken and
Outstanding
and
professionally
conducted
presentation.
Extensive
research
undertaken
including a
comprehensive
range of
relevant
academic and
practitioner
literature.
Sophisticated
Presentation is
highly
professional,
exemplary and
executed in an
original and
innovative
format.
Extensive
research
undertaken that
demonstrates a
sound
understanding
of the subject
studied. A

Assessment Brief



demonstrate
innovative
thinking.

innovative
recommendati
ons proposed
that derive
from a critically
conducted
research and
analysis


comprehensive
academic and
practitioner
literature used
for the critically
conducted
analysis
connected to
innovative,
original and
ground-breaking
recommendatio
ns.




Assessment Brief




ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

You are advised to read the guidance for students regarding assessment policies. They are available online:

https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/about-us/university-services/student-library-and-academic-services/quality-
and-teaching-excellence/assessment/assessment-regulations-and-policies


Academic Misconduct

The Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards (ARTA) contain the Regulations and procedures
applying to cheating, plagiarism, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of
academic misconduct.

The full policy is available:

https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/teaching-excellence/pl,-d-,005-v005-academic-misconduct-
policy.pdf?modified=20230315105545

You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of
academic misconduct, as referred to in the Academic Misconduct procedure of the assessment regulations,
are taken very seriously. Assignments in which evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic
misconduct is found may receive a mark of zero.


Late submission of work

Where coursework is submitted without approval, after the published hand-in deadline, the following
penalties will apply. For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in
deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment (i.e.100%) shall be
deducted from the assessment mark.

For clarity: a late piece of work that would have scored 65%, 55% or 45% had it been handed in on time will
be awarded 55%, 45% or 35% respectively as 10% of the total available marks will have been deducted.

The Penalty does not apply to Pass/Fail Modules, i.e. there will be no penalty for late submission if
assessments on Pass/Fail are submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline.

Coursework submitted more than 1 day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval
will be marked as zero but will be eligible for referral. The reassessment should where appropriate, and as
determined by the Module Leader, be the same method (e.g. essay) but maybe with a different task (e.g.
different essay title) or with the same task (e.g. the same essay title) as indicated in the Module handbook.
In modules where there is more than one assessment component, Students are not required to complete all
assessment components if an overall Pass Mark (40% UG, 50% PGT) has been achieved.
The only permitted exception will be in cases where the University is prevented from doing so by a PSRB
requirement. In the case of PSRB requirements, a variation order will be required from the regulations.
In modules, where there is more than one assessment component and an overall pass mark has not been
achieved, Students will be eligible for a referral* in the individual failed module and/or not attempted
component(s) of assessment.
These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis.
The full policy can be found at:
https://northumbria-cdn.azureedge.net/-/media/teaching-excellence/pl,-d-,008-v005-late-submission-of-work-
and-extension-requests-policy-stc.pdf?modified=20230401131943
Assessment Brief
Word limits
The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment and the assignment cover sheet. The
word count does not include:
• Title and
Contents page
• Reference list • Appendices
• Appropriate tables,
figures and
illustrations • Glossary • Bibliography
• Quotes from
interviews and
focus groups.
If the assignment is within +10% of the stated word limit no penalty will apply.
Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense
analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARTA this will be regarded as academic
misconduct.
For those assessments where students are required to keep to the word limit, it is proposed that they should
be informed that the marker will stop reading at the point when they judge that the word limit exceeds the
recommended word count by more than 10%. The marker will indicate the point at which they stop reading
on the text.
Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices) and it must be
made available within 24hours of them requesting it be submitted.
The full Word Limit Policy is available here
Time limits and penalties for presentations
The time allocated for the presentation must be adhered to. At the end of this time, the presentation will be
stopped and will be marked based on what has been delivered within the time limit.
Group Work
The group work policy can be found here