This task requires you to work both individually and as part of a group to consider the Corporate Social Responsibility performance and stated values of two similar organisations and apply the Giving Voice to Values framework.
There are two parts to this task:
ïƒž Part A – 20% Business Values Assessment Report
ïƒž Part B – 20% Application of the GVV framework – scenario development, script development and online presentation
NOTE all group members must participate in Part A and Part B
Please see below for the details of these Task Requirements.
PART A – BUSINESS VALUES ASSESSMENT REPORT
This activity is based on the exercise on page 226 of ‘Business Ethics’ (Crane & Matten, 2010) – a copy of the relevant pages are available on the course Moodle page.
For this component, you need to work in a group of three to four (3-4) students to consider the values and social performance of two companies. You are required to consider and discuss the companies as a group, but must submit your responses to the questions as individuals.
1. As a group, select two companies that produce social reports and whose values are identified on their websites or in other company documents (that are publicly available). The two companies selected by your group must be either:
(a) From different industries but in the same country; or
(b) From the same industry but different countries.
By Week 5, your group must provide the names of the companies you have selected to research, and the industry and country within which they operate.
2. As a group, research each of your companies to determine their company values, their approaches to social responsibility and their reporting of their social performances.
3. As an individual, you are required to submit responses to the following questions:
i. Identify and describe the two companies you have researched; their core business activities and the countries and/or industries in which they operate. (15 marks)
ii. What differences are evident between the two companies in terms of the range of issues dealt with in their social reports and the depth of coverage on specific issues? Please note – this question does not ask for a description or summary of the content of each company’s reports. Instead, you need to analyse the types of information, the major themes, the presentation, formatting and tone of each report – and explain the ways in which the reports are similar to each other and the ways in which they are different. (15 marks)
iii. To what extent can these differences be explained by the country or industry differences? What other explanations might there be? (15 marks)
iv. Assess the apparent quality of the social accounting approach utilized by each company according to Zadek et al.’s (1997) criteria. (15 marks)
v. Discuss the extent to which the social reports provided by these companies reflect their stated values. (15 marks)
vi. Briefly reflect on your groups’ discussions of these companies. In what ways did the ideas presented by your group confirm your own conclusions, influence your thinking and/or present another perspective to you? (15 marks)
• A score (10 marks) will be allocated for presentation, written expression, spelling, grammar, punctuation and referencing.
Qi - describe the two companies that have been researched. Responses should:
• clearly identify and describe the two companies being researched
• clearly describe the industries and countries in which these companies operate
• Clearly describe any social reporting/performance issues that may be relevant for these companies.
Qii - What differences are evident between the two companies in terms of the range of social, environmental and economic issues dealt with in their reports and the depth of coverage on specific issues? Responses should:
• compare the style, content and presentation of the social reports provided by each company
• critically analyse the strengths and weaknesses of the approaches to social reporting evident in the reports
• comment on the range of issues covered and the depth of the coverage
Qiii - To what extent can these differences be explained by the country or industry differences? What other explanations might there be? Responses should:
• Discuss the differences between industries and/or countries (such as development, culture, attitudes, regulations, market maturity, technologies etc.) that may have contributed to the differences in approaches to social responsibility discussed in Qi
• Demonstrate critical thinking and analysis to provide an insightful explanation of these differences
Qiv- Assess the apparent quality of the social accounting approach utilized by each company according to Zadek et al.’s (1997) criteria. Responses should:
• Provide some brief commentary on the extent to which each of the companies does or does not meet the eight criteria identified by Zadek et al (1997) as the key principles of quality of social reporting, as outlined on P. 216 (Crane & Matten, 2010).
• Identify which key principles are met (and how they are met) by each company’s social reporting
• Identify which principles have not been met
Qv - Discuss the extent to which the social reports reflect the values of your selected companies. Responses should:
• Identify each company’s values (including their Mission Statement, Values, Business Principles etc.) as stated on their websites, reports or in other company documentation
• Critically analyse each company’s social reports in terms of the extent to which their stated values align (or do not align) with their approaches to social responsibility and sustainability (based on the evidence in the reports)
Qvi - Briefly reflect on your groups’ discussions of these companies. In what ways did the ideas presented by your group confirm your own conclusions or present another perspective to you? Responses should:
• Reflect on the group discussions about the social reporting of the two companies selected
• Identify key points of agreement and disagreement with other group members
• Discuss how the different perspectives provided by group members contributed to your own consideration of the performance of these companies
Presentation (expression, structure, referencing, organisation, word count – not including cover sheet and references etc.)