ACCT2229 Accounting for Sustainable Management
ACCT2229 Accounting for Sustainable Management
Assignment Three: Business Report
Assume that the CEO is satisfied with your report (Assignment One) and within Assignment One you have recommended Evolution Mining to produce sustainability reports to external stakeholders. To follow up, the CEO commission your business to complete a business report.
(Note: Evolution Mining is a real-life entity. All of your research, analysis, discussions and recommendations relating to this case study should be based on real-world information and condition. Submissions of your case study on companies other than the selected case company will result in zero marks.)
Assuming the CEO is satisfied with both of your reports (Assignment One and Two), you are now required to formulate a Sustainability Balanced Scorecard (SBSC) to explicitly translate Evolution Mining’s strategy into a set of financial and non-financial performance measures, covering a range of perspectives. You are asked to present and discuss a suitable SBSC, using a business report format. In completing your business report, please address the following requirements:
- Consider the mission, vision and five-year objectives of Evolution Mining in relation to sustainability. Identify three available approaches to the development of a sustainability strategy map and sustainable Balanced Scorecard (Topic 9). Choose and apply one of the three approaches for Evolution Mining and explain your choice with reference to Evolution Mining’s specific situation.
- Briefly outline what a “strategy map” is and then develop a sustainability strategy map for Evolution Mining. You need to specifically focus on its sustainability objectives and motivate your objectives’ formulation concerning Evolution Mining. The strategy map should be constructed in line with your sustainability consideration in Requirement 1 above.
- Based on your chosen approach (Requirement 1) and the sustainability strategy map (Requirement 2), please prepare a SBSC to Evolution Mining. Please show your classification of the strategic objectives (Requirement 2) into the perspectives of your SBSC and justify your classification with specific reference to Evolution Mining’s
- For each sustainability objective in SBSC (Requirement 3), identify one or more suitable/reasonable lead and lag indicators through which you would advise to measure the fulfilment of the objective. Justify your choice of indicators. That is, how do you know that the chosen indicators can drive, capture and measure the targeted objectives?
- Identify and explain the eventual impacts of the indicators you have chosen (Requirement 4) with reference to the sustainability objectives of your suggested SBSC onto Evolution Mining’s decision making.
In the report, you should provide at least the following figures: a sustainability strategy map and a SBSC for Evolution Mining.
By 11.59 pm, Sunday 17 October (late submission attracts 3 marks per day deduction; late submissions after five days will be awarded zero marks).
Maximum 2,000 words (not including executive summary, table of contents, references and appendices). Word count includes every word in the body of text (from your Introduction section to the end of Conclusion section, including figures, tables, headings, etc). Every 100 words above the word limit attracts 0.5 marks deduction of available marks.
12 for body text; 12 and/or above for headings; choose ‘justify’ to apply to the whole document margins.
Electronic copy, via Canvas with in-built Turnitin report.
Your submission should include:
- Cover page includes the course name, assignment name, your name, student number, lecturer’s name, and word count (excluding executive summary, table of contents, references and appendices).
- Executive Summary
- Table of contents
- Introduction (including purpose, scope, limitations and assumptions)
- Discussion (addressing the CEO’s requirements. Use separate headings to address each of the requirements)
- List of References
Name protocol of your electronic copy:
Before submission, rename your file as per following naming protocol:
- your last name;
- your first name; and
- your student number.
For example: Butler Amy 1234567
Suggestions and expectations from the Course Coordinator: Assignment Three
Assignment Three has a focus on a strategic tool of management accounting: a Sustainable Balanced Scorecard (SBSC). To successfully complete this assignment, your readings should start with, but not be limited to, the Component Three materials (Topics 7, 8, and 9) of the course. You also need to search for materials that are outside of recommended texts.
Consider Evolution Mining’s mission, vision and five-year objectives as a start point. Does Evolution Mining have its mission and vision? If not, you will need to formulate them incorporating the core value of sustainability. If yes, do Evolution Mining’s vision and mission reflect sustainability as a core value? You may decide to adopt the current company vision and mission or reformulate them. If you plan to formulate the mission and/or vision to better incorporate the core value of sustainability, try to make the vision and/or vision in one sentence each. Avoid lengthy mission and vision that are comprised with multiple sentences.
The five-year objectives should be measurable. A maximum of five objectives is recommended. Each of these objectives should have sustainability flavour.
Avoid lengthy discussions on mission, vision and five-year objectives – they serve as a good starting point that brings the strategy map and SBSC.
Based on your consideration of the mission, vision and five-year objectives, you now can plan your sustainability strategy map and SBSC for Evolution Mining.
Your recommendations about the organisation’s sustainability strategy map and SBSC are expected to be directed by one approach that you have learnt in Topic 9. To justify your approach, you are suggested to outline the three approaches and emphasise (with an articulated and detailed discussion) the one you recommended for the organisation.
Please remember that the discussion is not just theoretical as you must explain the reasons why you think your approach is the most suitable for Evolution Mining.
Applying more than one approach is not recommended as you need to take into account your word limit and your arguments in the business report that should be coherent with the approach you have chosen.
The approach that you recommend should be explicitly applied to the case company while addressing the requirements of the assignment.
Particular emphasis on the sustainability objectives and their measurement (indicators) are expected to be discussed in requirements 3, 4 and 5. There
is no one best answer as you are required to apply your critical thinking to the case study. Therefore you should direct your attention to ensure coherence to Evolution Mining’s real-world situation in addressing those assignment points and motivate your choices.
Areas for you to explore should include sustainability issues/priorities/focuses that are of strategic importance to Evolution Mining, as well as the sustainable achievements that Evolution Mining is proud of. These are expected to be considered in your sustainability strategy map and SBSC from the organisation’s management perspective (not from a stakeholders’, shareholders’ or other external parties’ perspectives).
Note that your SBSC should be consistent with your sustainability strategy map. That is, the perspectives and objectives formulated in your sustainability strategy map should be the same in your SBSC. Objectives should be measurable, so are the indicators.
Requirement 4 asks you to justify why your chosen lag indicators are the best in measuring your objectives under each perspective, and why your chosen lead indicators are the best drivers for the outcome (lag indicators). Remember that there are many lead and lag indicators that you can chose from, so only select those are best suitable based on you strategy.
In terms of requirement 5, it is suggested that you consider the impacts of your choice of indicators for the sustainability objectives in the organisation’s decision-making processes. You are expected to consider any possible positive and negative outcomes from the selection of your indicators (e.g. changes on the production processes, costing system, organisational culture and climate, social perception of the organisation, behaviour issues, etc.). In this discussion, you can follow the causal relationships that you were required to explicitly elaborate on in the sustainability strategy map of the organisation, which (of course) would continue to inform your SBSC (independently from your chosen development approach). Both positive and negative impacts from your chosen indicators should be considered.
It should be pointed out that real-world issues are often complex and there is no definite right or wrong decisions. The most important skill that you are expected to develop from this assignment is your reasoning skills and application skills. That is, you are expected to justify your arguments coherently with the approach you have chosen and the prompts of your case study.
Read carefully the marking rubric (on the next page), and understand how your work will be assessed.
Assignment Three Marking Rubric (30%)
|Business Report Contents (26 marks)||Unsatisfactory||Satisfactory – Pass||Highly Competent Credit/Distinction||Accomplished High Distinction|
|Identification and Discussion of Main Issues within the Project (as outlined below)||Unclear or no identification of the issue. Discussion (justification) not provided or not related to the specific organisation. No attempt at critical analysis.||Identification of the issue but only limited discussion/explanation of the issue. Discussion sometimes too general or too theoretical and/or not relevant to issue. Discussion is without adequate reference to the theory and the case prompts (where required). Discussion not specifically related to the organisation. Very little attempt at critical analysis.||Identification and discussion/explanation of the issue. Discussion is referenced and mainly relevant to the issue. Discussion usually includes adequate detail of the case prompts (where required). Discussion is usually specifically related to the organisation. Good attempt at critical analysis.||Clear identification and discussion/explanation of the issue. Discussion is well referenced and always relevant to the issue. Discussion always includes adequate detail of the case prompts (where required). Discussion is always specifically related to the organisation. Excellent attempt at critical analysis.|
|Choose one of the three approaches to the development of a sustainability strategy map and Sustainable Balanced Scorecard (Topic 9) and explain your choice with reference to the case company. Consider the company’s mission, vision and five-year objectives as a starting point.Total 4 marks|
|2. What is the strategy map? Explicitly identify the strategic objectives of the case company and their main connections. Please put a specific focus on its sustainability objectives and motivate your objectives’ formulation with reference to the case study prompts. 2. Total: 5 marks|
|3. Based on your chosen approach and the sustainability strategy map, show your classification of the strategic|
|objectives into the perspectives of your suggested SBSC. Please justify your classification with specific reference to the sustainability objectives. 3. Total 3 marks|
|4. For each sustainability objective, identify one or more suitable/reasonable indicators through which you would advise to measure the fulfilment of the objective. Justify your choice of indicator/s. 4 Total 8 marks|
|5. Identify and explain the eventual impacts of the indicators you have chosen with reference to the sustainability objectives of your suggested SBSC onto the organisation’s decision making. 5. Total: 6 marks|
|Business report presentation style (4 marks)||Unsatisfactory||Satisfactory – Pass||Highly Competent Credit/Distinction||Accomplished High Distinction|
|Business Report Presentation (0.5 marks)||Key elements of the business report are not provided (e.g. headings/ subheadings of the sections, table of contents, introduction, etc.) and/or presented with evident errors. Overall presentation of the document is not to a professional standard.||All required elements of the business report are present and completed to a satisfactory standard. Some attention to the presentation is given, but is often not well-executed.||All required elements of the business report are present and most are completed to a high standard. Most, but not all of the document is presented in a professional-format, using informative headings and sub – headings||All required elements of the business report are present and completed to a high standard. The document is presented in a professional-format, using informative headings and sub – headings|
|Clarity of Communication (2 marks)||Report has grammatical, spelling and/ or typographical errors that make it unsuitable for presentation to client or superior.||Report has some grammatical, spelling and/or typographical errors that detract from the quality of the communication but does not prevent the ideas being effectively communicated.||Report has a few grammatical, spelling, typographical and/or other communication errors. It is almost at a standard that could be presented to a superior in the workforce or a client.||Report has NO grammatical, spelling, typographical or other communication errors. It is at a standard that could be presented to a superior in the workforce or a client.|
|Referencing (0.5 marks)||No references provided or very few resources acknowledged. Or referencing styles are incorrect.||Most sources acknowledged with reference details. Referencing styles are mostly followed.||All sources acknowledged with reference details. Referencing styles are mostly followed with few errors.||All sources acknowledged with reference details. Referencing styles are correct without any errors.|
|Figures (at least strategic map and SBSC, sustainability aspects presented in the body of the report) (1 marks)||No or just one figure is presented.||Two figures are presented but without correct referencing style (e.g. title of the figure) and without referencing to the figure/s within the discussion. The presentation of figure is basic and in need for further improvements.||Both the required figures are presented with correct referencing style and with referencing into the discussion. However, the figures are just referenced and not fully explained in the discussion. The presentation of figure is professional.||Both the required figures are presented with correct referencing style and with a complete explanation and use of them in the discussion. The presentation of figure is professional.|