BUSS1000: Future of Business
Assessment Instructions
This report should consist of two sections
Part 1: Role of Business in Society (Approx. 500 words)
What is Afterpay Limited’s dominant orientation towards society? Profit Maximisation or Creating Shared Value or
something else? Take a stance and explain your arguments with the help of evidence.
Part 2: Strategy Evaluation (Approx. 1500 words)
In this section, analyse Afterpay Limited’s competitive environment with the help of PESTLE framework. Your response
should demonstrate your ability to integrate various factors of PESTLE framework.
Important points:
• Scope: You need to consider the organization as a whole. In other words, you need to consider all the
operating markets of Afterpay Limited.
• Format: We are NOT expecting any specific format. Also, do not add any cover page or do not repeat the
question before your response (just mention Part 1 and Part 2). 2000 words count towards every words in
your response document. Please remember that you are presenting the report from a general manager’s
perspective (practitioner style), but it must still contain full academic references.
• Evaluation: Each paper is graded against the rubric. Ensure you have looked at the rubric carefully prior to
beginning your paper, and prior to submitting.
• Reference: Thorough and regular referencing adds academic weight to your arguments. Statements not
backed up by data and/or appropriate business theory/frameworks carry less weight. Referencing adds rigour,
integrity and believability to your arguments – doing this as often as possible will enhance your paper by
demonstrating your business knowledge with credible sources.
• Word count and structure: The above word counts include references. References should appear at the end
of the paper and comply with APA 6th standard.
2
Assessment criteria:
Please make sure you read the rubric (pages 3-5) carefully as this is what will be used to grade your paper.
Requirements for submission:
• Your case study must be submitted on the BUSS1000 Canvas site under “Assignments” (submission will
open two weeks prior to the deadline).
• Appropriate word length – the word length for this report is 2000 words. Normal word count penalties apply
when the report word length (including headings, in-text reference and Reference list) should not exceed
word limit of 2000 words or +10% that is maximum of 2200 words. The word count penalty is in line with the
Business School policy which can be found at: http://sydney.edu.au/business/currentstudents/policy. Note
that the word limit includes in-text referencing and the reference list at the end of the document.
• Appropriate referencing throughout the case study, in-text and in the Reference list, using the latest version
of APA 6th Edition Referencing. The University of Sydney has an APA 6th Edition guide which can be found
here: http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/c.php?g=508212&p=3476096.
• Case study must be submitted as a Word file document (.doc, .docx)
• Late penalties will apply after the due date and time 10:00am on 12 April, 2021. The late submission penalty
is in line with the Business School policy which can be found at:
Feedback:
• Feedback will be provided for each part based on the marking criteria,
• Feedback for the case study will be shown as comments.
• The case study will be marked in accordance with the Business School policy,
• Overall, feedback will be provided through the following:
Specific comments on each assessment segments
Overall comments based on each part of the report
By attending tutor consultation hour and asking for additional feedback aimed at achieving better
grades in the future.
Learning outcomes for this case study include: LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4, LO6
BUSS1000 – Case Study Rubric
Task Description: For this assignment you will be undertaking a case study of a provided organization. You will be required to undertake general and academic research,
apply theoretical frameworks, and critically analyse the context and/or organisation. Please see Canvas for the full list of assignment instructions once they are uploaded.
ASSESSMENT
CRITERIA
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 20% 0%
Part 1.
Role of Business
in Society
15 marks
(GQ Information
and digital
literacy And GQ
Critical Thinking
and Problem
Solving)
The analysis
demonstrates a
flawless ability to
correctly identify,
select, analyse
and critique all
relevant
information,
enabling a very
robust and un-
questionable
argument.
The analysis
demonstrates an
outstanding ability to
correctly identify,
select, analyse and
critique all relevant
information,
enabling a strong,
well-explored and
justified argument.
The analysis
demonstrates a
good ability to
correctly identify,
select, analyse
and critique
relevant
information,
enabling a well-
thought-out
argument.
The analysis
demonstrates an
ability to correctly
identify, select
and analyse
relevant
information to
support a good
argument.
The analysis
demonstrates a
basic ability to
correctly identify
and select
relevant social
and ethical
information.
Argument could
be further
strengthened &
less descriptive.
The analysis
demonstrates an
attempt to
identify some
reliable social and
ethical
information,
however, is
somewhat
descriptive.
Depth, strength of
argument &/or
accuracy are
therefore lacking.
The analysis is
superficial due to
being descriptive
with little
connection
between evidence
and theory,
building a weak
argument.
The analysis is
lacking or
extremely
superficial,
demonstrating a
weak
understanding of
the different
orientations
businesses may
adopt.
No evidence of
appropriate
analysis.
Part 2.
Competitive
Environment
Evaluation
60 marks
(GQ Information and digital literacy And GQ
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving)
The analysis demonstrates a flawless ability to correctly identify, select, analyse and critique all
relevant
information,
enabling a very
robust and un-
questionable
argument.
The analysis
demonstrates an
outstanding ability to
correctly identify,
select, analyse and
critique all relevant
information,
enabling a strong,
well-explored and
justified argument.
The analysis
demonstrates a
good ability to
correctly identify,
select, analyse
and critique
relevant
information,
enabling a well-
thought-out
argument using
theory well.
The analysis
demonstrates an
ability to correctly
identify, select
and analyse
relevant
information to
support a good
argument using
theory
appropiately.
The analysis
demonstrates a
basic ability to
correctly identify
and select
relevant
information.
Argument could
be further
strengthened &
less descriptive.The analysisdemonstrates anattempt toidentify somerelevant
information,however, issomewhatdescriptive.Depth, strength ofargument &/or accuracy are therefore lacking.
The analysis is superficial due to being descriptive with little connection between evidence and theory, building a weak argument.
The analysis is lacking or extremely superficial, demonstrating a weak understanding of the relevant theory. No evidence of appropriate analysis.
