Highlights
Task
(Distinction ) The assignment evaluated is of a high to exemplary standard. The work addresses clearly and articulately the assignment requirements and thus meets, and satisfies all the learning outcomes (either well or in an exemplary way). The work demonstrates: clear knowledge; references to appropriate academic literature; analysis; critical evaluation; and originality of argument. It is structured and presented to a high (or exemplary) standard. Referencing conventions are fully observed.
60 to 69%
(Merit) The assignment evaluated is of a good to a high standard. Substantial knowledge, comprehension and analysis is evident throughout. Arguments presented are clear and focussed with a logical structure in place. There is clear evidence of critical evaluation of a wide range of theories/perspectives from academic literature and some independent thought. The work is well-written and addresses well all of the learning outcomes. Referencing conventions are fully observed.
50 to 59%
(Pass) The assignment evaluated is of a fair to good standard. Adequate knowledge, comprehension and analysis is evident throughout. The arguments presented have a logical structure and show some critical evaluation in places, although there may be limited evidence of an independent perspective. There is evidence of some good engagement with some of the appropriate literature. Learning outcomes have been largely met and to an appropriate degree. Referencing conventions are observed.
40 to 49%
(Fail/Redo) The assignment evaluated is of a basic standard. The arguments presented have some logical structure and are supported by academic literature in most cases. The academic literature used is outside of the suggestions made in the module guide but remains limited. Little critical evaluation is evident, and the work tends more widely towards a descriptive style. Learning outcomes have been addressed in a basic but satisfactory way. Referencing conventions are mostly observed.
Fail Grades
30 to 39%
(Module retake) The assignment evaluated is of a limited standard. Limited use of academic literature and as such knowledge and argument is very weak. A simple descriptive style with no evidence of critical evaluation throughout. Over-reliance on simplistic, limited sources. Referencing conventions may not be observed. Some learning outcomes met but in a weak and simplistic way. The work is needs to be developed in greater depth and detail to move to a passable standard at this level of study
29% and Below
(Module retake) The assignment evaluated is of an unacceptable standard. There is little or no evidence of knowledge and understanding that is required at this level. Referencing is inadequate or non-existent. The learning outcomes have not been addressed fully and the work requires significant modification to bring it to a passable standard.
Business Sustainability Management
Module description
This module provides an opportunity for learners to develop a good grasp of business sustainability related knowledge in organizational management and development. The module also prepares students to develop fresh ideas and implement them effectively in their place of work. The module generates a robust learning impact, which can go well beyond the classroom experience.
Learning outcomes
LO1. Assess the numerous dimensions of sustainability requirements for businesses in the context of global challenges.
LO2. Appraise, assess and develop strategies of organisations which will be sustainable in the long run.
LO3. Strategic integration of business functions with sustainability processes.
LO4. Effect of sustainability on supply chain management operations.
Expectations
Materials Access
All learning materials are provided in the form of a module kit and can be accessed from the Learning Management system (LMS)
Learning Hours
Students need to be aware of their commitment requirements in regard to study time. In order to give you an indication of that, we have based the following information on the United Kingdom (UK) Higher Education Quality Assurance Agency guidelines. “The notional learning hours associated with qualifications, programmes and individual units of study are based on a broad agreement across institutions that students can expect to spend 10 hours learning on average in order to gain one academic credit unit” (QAA 2006).
Re-sit
If you do not secure a pass, please read closely the feedback and speak with your Course leader(s) or faculty. After consulting the feedback, close attention is essential to rework on the areas of weakness, and then resubmit the work at the next opportunity. As per the QAA requirements, only one REDO is allowed where the marks will be capped at a Pass.
Plagiarism
All forms of plagiarism are taken seriously, and any suspected cases will be investigated thoroughly. If a case is found proven then the work will be graded as a fail and the case will be reviewed by the academic committee.
Student appeals
This Management Assignment has been solved by our Management Experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment Experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.
© Copyright 2026 My Uni Papers – Student Hustle Made Hassle Free. All rights reserved.