CW1 PM Brief Background: my team and I made YouTube video about tasting food from the team members' hometown. I'm from southern China, Zhejiang Province. I brought nuts(xiangfei), from Zhejiang Province. My group consisted of Finnish girls with Finnish wine and Finnish chocolate. Thai boys bring a lot of Thai snacks. Three other Chinese, all from the north of China, brought all kinds of delicious snacks. And a Indian guy brought Indian dishes，We tastes and share. All tastes nice. rubric Sheet1Marking Criteria/RubricScale 1 No SubmissionScale 2 PoorScale 3 Incomplete Scale 4 BasicScale 5 Appropriate Scale 6 Competent Scale 7 CommendableScale 8 Excellent Scale 9 OutstandingScale 10 ExceptionalCriterion  1  - Executive Summary (5%) Criterion 1 description.  Setting of Context. (to be no more than one page)No Executive SummaryPoor Executive Summary or Inadequate information provided.Inadequate attempt at an Executive Summary. Limited information given in an Introduction rather than a summary. Limited inclusion of recommendations. Inadequate in-text referencingBasic attempt at providing an Executive Summary. Acceptable level of articulation of the key features of the submission. Satisfactory inclusion of recommendations. Basic  referencing. Acceptable attempt to set the submission in context.An Executive Summary is presented which appropriately highlights the key features of the submission. Fair inclusion of recommendations but with brief rationale. Reasonable referencing. Sets the submission partially in context.Overall well-presented commendable Executive Summary that articulates the key features of the submission including recommendations with rationale. Overall good referencing. Sets the submission in context.Proficiently  well- presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key features of the submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall management report.Articulated and  well- presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key features of the submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall management report.Superbly presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key features of the submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall management report.Industry standard presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key features of the submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall management report.Criterion  2  - Introduction (5%)Criterion 2 description.  Ability to effectively present the aim of the management brief. Giving a clear structure of the brief and arguments with an explicit identification of areas of analysis and evaluation supported by relevant background information of the case study org.

1. CW1 PM Brief
Background: my team and I made YouTube video about tasting
food from the team members' hometown. I'm from southern
China, Zhejiang Province. I brought nuts(xiangfei), from
Zhejiang Province. My group consisted of Finnish girls with
Finnish wine and Finnish chocolate. Thai boys bring a lot of
Thai snacks. Three other Chinese, all from the north of China,
brought all kinds of delicious snacks. And a Indian guy brought
Indian dishes，We tastes and share. All tastes nice.
rubric
Sheet1Marking Criteria/RubricScale 1 No SubmissionScale 2
PoorScale 3 Incomplete Scale 4 BasicScale 5 Appropriate Scale
6 Competent Scale 7 CommendableScale 8 Excellent Scale 9
OutstandingScale 10 ExceptionalCriterion 1 - Executive
Summary (5%) Criterion 1 description. Setting of Context. (to
be no more than one page)No Executive SummaryPoor
Executive Summary or Inadequate information
provided.Inadequate attempt at an Executive Summary. Limited
information given in an Introduction rather than a summary.
Limited inclusion of recommendations. Inadequate in-text
referencingBasic attempt at providing an Executive Summary.
Acceptable level of articulation of the key features of the
submission. Satisfactory inclusion of recommendations. Basic
referencing. Acceptable attempt to set the submission in
context.An Executive Summary is presented which
appropriately highlights the key features of the submission. Fair
inclusion of recommendations but with brief rationale.
Reasonable referencing. Sets the submission partially in
context.Overall well-presented commendable Executive
Summary that articulates the key features of the submission
including recommendations with rationale. Overall good
referencing. Sets the submission in context.Proficiently well-
presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key

2. features of the submission including recommendations with
rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in
context of the overall management report.Articulated and well-
presented Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key
features of the submission including recommendations with
rationale. Fully referenced. Sets the submission firmly in
context of the overall management report.Superbly presented
Executive Summary that clearly articulates the key features of
the submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully
referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall
management report.Industry standard presented Executive
Summary that clearly articulates the key features of the
submission including recommendations with rationale. Fully
referenced. Sets the submission firmly in context of the overall
management report.Criterion 2 - Introduction (5%)Criterion 2
description. Ability to effectively present the aim of the
management brief. Giving a clear structure of the brief and
arguments with an explicit identification of areas of analysis
and evaluation supported by relevant background information of
the case study organisationNo IntroductionWeak management
brief lacks proper introduction and is poorly structured.
Unsatisfactory presentation of the aims of the brief. Weak
identification of the relevant arguments and issues and
inadequate background information provided.The management
brief lacks proper introduction and presentation. It lacks
coherence and provided very limited presentation of aim(s) of
the management brief. Equally giving limited identification of
the relevant arguments and issues and some background
information.The management brief shows satisfactory effective
introduction and presentation. The student provides a report
with a basic structure and an acceptable level of coherency.
Acceptable presentation of the aims of the management report.
Identification of relevant arguments and issues and some
background information is given.The management brief has
reasonable introduction and presentation. The student provides
a report with an appropriate and coherent structure. Appropriate

3. presentation of the aims of the management report.
Identification of relevant arguments and issues supported by
relevant background information which however requires
further development.The management brief has competent
introduction and presentation. The student demonstrates
commendable ability to produce a report with a coherent
structure. Commendable presentation of the aims of the
management report supported with relevant backgroundThe
management brief has proficient presentation. The student
provides a report with a clear and has a very good structure. The
introduction provides the aims of the management report and
explicitly identifies the relevant arguments and issues to be
address, supported with relevant background. The identified
areas are proficiently developed logically within the main body
of the analysis. There is a very good conclusion of the areas
discussed that follow on from the analysis.The management
brief is highly impressive in its presentation. The student
provides a report with an articulated and coherent structure. The
introduction provides the aims of the management report and
explicitly identifies the relevant arguments and issues to be
address, supported with excellent and relevant background. The
identified areas are developed logically within the main body of
the analysis. There is a firm conclusion of the areas discussed
that follow on from the analysis.The management brief has
outstanding presentation. The student provides a report with a
clear and coherent structure. The introduction provides the aims
of the management report and explicitly identifies the relevant
arguments and issues to be address, supported with relevant
background. The identified areas are developed logically within
the main body of the analysis. There is a firm conclusion of the
areas discussed that follow on from the that follow on from the
analysis.The management brief has publishable presentation.
The student provides a report with an industry standard and
coherent structure. The introduction provides the aims of the
management report and explicitly identifies the relevant
arguments and issues to be address, supported with relevant

4. background. The identified areas are developed logically within
the main body of the analysis. There is a firm conclusion of the
areas discussed that follow on from the that follow on from the
analysis.Criterion 3 - Current CSR strategy across national
contexts -6 Core charactertistics (20%) -Criterion 3
description. Critical evaluation of Critical evaluation of the
organisation's the organisation’s CSR strategy, clearly
identifying which valid identifying theoretical models and have
application in different contexts in the assessment of the
organisation's current CSR strategy. This must include the This
must include the six core characteristics of CSRNo Current CSR
StrategyPoor evaluation of data. Weak critical data.
Unsatisfactory critical investigation .Models and Models and
frameworks either not either not considered or considered or
poorly represented. Poor understanding of the basic
issues.There is limited attempt at analysing and evaluation of
data information. Inadequate discussion of the relevant models
and frameworks. Limited frameworks. Inadequately criticality
presented. Statements are very limited.Demonstrates a basic
attempt and analysing/evaluating information/data. Basic
application of the relevant models and frameworks. Very basic
and descriptive in form.Demonstrates an appropriate level of
interpretation, critical evaluation and critical evaluation and
categorisation. This part of the submission is appropriate in
forms.Demonstrates effective ability to interpret, critically
evaluate and categorise appropriate frameworks and models
which shows commendable level of the analysis. A range of
implications for the organisation are explored.Demonstrates
vey good ability to interpretability to interpret, critically
evaluate and categorise to a very good standard.
Interrelationships are clearly developed and clearly developed
and illustrated. Implications are fully explored.Demonstrates
excellent ability to interpret and critically evaluate and
categorise to high standard.Interrelationships are clearly
developed and illustrated. Implications are fully explored at a
high standard.Demonstrates outstanding ability to interpret,

5. critically evaluate and categorise to an exceptionally high
standard. Interrelationships are clearly developed and clearly
developed and illustrated. Implications illustrated with original
thinking. Demonstrates faultless ability to interpret, critically
evaluate and categorise to an exceptionally high standard.
Interrelationships are clearly developed and clearly developed
and illustrated. Implications illustrated with original
thinking. Criterion 4 -Recommendations -Examine how your
chosen organisation’s CSR strategy on the ecological
environment can be further enhanced (10%) - Criterion 4
description. Ability to analyse and synthesise understanding
and knowledge of critical aspects of the organisation’s CSR
strategy. Articulate such synthesis in clear recommendations.
understanding and knowledge of critical aspects of the
organisation’s CSR. No Recommendations on ecological
environmentThere is weak organisation of ideas from findings
to a ideas. Difficult to follow logic. Poor information sources
used. Inadequate information base.Limited recommendations
based on anecdotal and generalisations. Recommendations
inadequately grounded in reality. There is no linkage to
preceding material in the assignment.Satisfactory approach.
Recommendations shows basic development with acceptable
theoretical and practical evidence. Basic understanding of the
Issues of grounding within reality. There is acceptable linkage
to preceding material in the assignment.Reasonable attempt to
overall approach. Recommendations generally coherent
supported by theoretical and practical evidence.
Recommendations appropriately grounded in reality. There is
fair level of linkage to preceding material in the
assignment.Commendable approach, partially analytical.
Recommendations are effective and supported by theoretical
and practical evidence. Effective recommendations grounded in
reality. Commendable level linkage to preceding material stated
in the assignment.Analytical approach is very good with clearly
and well defined recommendations. Coherent and consistently
supported by theoretical concepts and practical evidence.

6. Recommendations grounded in reality. Clearly links
recommendations are proficient to preceding material stated in
the assignment.High standard approach with clearly and well
defined recommendations. Excellent and consistently supported
by theoretical concepts and practical evidence.
Recommendations grounded in reality. Clearly links
recommendations to preceding material stated in the
assignment.Outstanding approach with clearly and well defined
recommendations. Excellent and consistently supported by
theoretical concepts and practical evidence. Recommendations
grounded in reality. Clearly links recommendations to preceding
material stated in the assignment.Industry standard approach
with clearly and well defined recommendations. Publishable
theoretical concepts and practical evidence. Recommendations
grounded in reality. Clearly links recommendations to preceding
material stated in the assignment.Criterion 5 -
Recommendations -Examine how your chosen organisation’s
CSR strategy in the community can be further enhanced (10%) -
Criterion 5 description. Ability to analyse and synthesise
understanding and knowledge of critical aspects of the
organisation’s CSR. Articulate such synthesis in clear
recommendations.No Recommendations on communityThere is
weak organisation of ideas from findings to a ideas. Difficult to
follow logic. Poor information sources used. Inadequate
information base.Limited recommendations based on anecdotal
and generalisations. Recommendations inadequately grounded
in reality. There is no linkage to preceding material in the
assignment.Satisfactory approach. Recommendations shows
basic development with acceptable theoretical and practical
evidence. Basic understanding of the Issues of grounding within
reality. There is acceptable linkage to preceding material in the
assignment.Reasonable attempt to overall approach.
Recommendations generally coherent supported by theoretical
and practical evidence. Recommendations appropriately
grounded in reality. There is fair level of linkage to preceding
material in the assignment.Commendable approach, partially

7. analytical. Recommendations are effective and supported by
theoretical and practical evidence. Effective recommendations
grounded in reality. Commendable level linkage to preceding
material stated in the assignment.Analytical approach is very
good with clearly and well defined recommendations. Coherent
and consistently supported by theoretical concepts and practical
evidence. Recommendations grounded in reality. Clearly links
recommendations are proficient to preceding material stated in
the assignment.Analytical approach with clearly and highly
articulated recommendations. Impressively supported by
theoretical concepts and practical evidence. Recommendations
articulated grounded in reality. Clearly links recommendations
to preceding material stated in the assignment.Analytical
approach with clearly and well defined recommendations.
Coherent and consistently supported by theoretical concepts and
practical evidence. Recommendations grounded in reality.
Clearly links recommendations to preceding material stated in
the assignment.Industry standard analytical approach with
clearly and well defined recommendations. Coherent and
consistently supported by theoretical concepts and practical
evidence. Recommendations grounded in reality. Clearly links
recommendations to preceding material stated in the
assignment.Criterion 6 -Recommendation - Examine how your
chosen organisation’s CSR strategy in the workplace can be
further enhanced (10%) - Criterion 6 description. Ability to
analyse and synthesise understanding and knowledge of critical
aspects of the organisation’s CSR strategy. Articulate such
synthesis in clear recommendationsNo Recommendations on
WorkplaceThere is weak organisation of ideas from findings to
a ideas. Difficult to follow logic. Poor information sources
used. Inadequate information base.Limited recommendations
based on anecdotal and generalisations. Recommendations
inadequately grounded in reality. There is no linkage to
preceding material in the assignment.Satisfactory approach.
Recommendations shows basic development with acceptable
theoretical and practical evidence. Basic understanding of the

8. Issues of grounding within reality. There is acceptable linkage
to preceding material in the assignment.Reasonable attempt to
overall approach. Recommendations generally coherent
supported by theoretical and practical evidence.
Recommendations appropriately grounded in reality. There is
fair level of linkage to preceding material in the
assignment.Commendable approach, partially analytical.
Recommendations are effective and supported by theoretical
and practical evidence. Effective recommendations grounded in
reality. Commendable level linkage to preceding material stated
in the assignment.Analytical approach is very good with clearly
and well defined recommendations. Coherent and consistently
supported by theoretical concepts and practical evidence.
Recommendations grounded in reality. Clearly links
recommendations are proficient to preceding material stated in
the assignment.Analytical approach with clearly and highly
articulated recommendations. Impressively supported by
theoretical concepts and practical evidence. Recommendations
articulated grounded in reality. Clearly links recommendations
to preceding material stated in the assignment.Superb approach
with clearly and highly articulated recommendations.
Impressively supported by theoretical concepts and practical
evidence. Recommendations articulated grounded in reality.
Clearly links recommendations to preceding material stated in
the assignment.Industry standard approach with clearly and
highly articulated recommendations. Impressively supported by
theoretical concepts and practical evidence. Recommendations
articulated grounded in reality. Clearly links recommendations
to preceding material stated in the assignment.Criterion 7 .
Conclusion and reflection (10%) - Criterion 7 description.
Synthesis of knowledge and understanding of findings and
various critical strategic issues from the CSR audit to draw and
present coherent and consistent sets of CONCLUSIONS. You
also need to reflect on the learnings from the module. No
ConclusionThere is weak organisation of ideas from findings to
a ideas. Difficult to follow logic. Poor information sources

9. used. Inadequate information base.There is very limited
organisation of ideasDemonstrates basic ability to organise
ideas and perspectives from finding in the analysis to draw
coherent conclusion. Presenting acceptable support from
analysis done and some reflection can be seen within the
report Demonstrates reasonable ability to organise ideas and
perspectives from finding in the analysis to draw coherent
conclusion. Though limited, but demonstrates appropriate level
of evidence of ability to logically synthesis findings and critical
issues in the business environment. Reasionable reflection can
be seen within the report Demonstrates commendable ability to
organise ideas and perspectives from finding in the analysis to
draw very coherent set of conclusions that follow effectively on
analysis carried out. Easy to follow, logical presentation of
synthesis of findings and critical issues in the business
environment's. Commendable reflection can be seen with in the
report. Demonstrates very good ability to organise ideas and
perspectives from finding in the analysis to draw very coherent
set of conclusions that follow effectively on analysis carried
out. Demonstrates proficient ability to synthesise findings and
critical issues in the business environment and logically
presented Reflection is very clear and detailed.Demonstrates an
articulated ability to organise ideas and perspectives from
finding in the analysis to draw very coherent set of conclusions
that follow effectively on analysis carried out. Demonstrates
highly impressive ability to synthesise findings and critical
issues in the business environment and logically presented.
Excellent representation on the reflection in the
report. Demonstrates a superb ability to organise ideas and
perspectives from finding in the analysis to draw very coherent
set of conclusions that follow effectively on analysis carried
out. Demonstrates highly impressive ability to synthesise
findings and critical issues in the business environment and
logically presented. Fully detailed coherent reflection on the
trip.Demonstrates an industry standard ability to organise ideas
and perspectives from finding in the analysis to draw very

10. coherent set of conclusions that follow effectively on analysis
carried out. Demonstrates highly impressive ability to
synthesise findings and critical issues in the business
environment and logically presented. Industry standard
understanding of the sustainability gained reflected within the
report. Criterion 8 - Practical Application (10%) - Criterion 8
description. Practical application of theoretical models, theories
and frameworks in the context of the case study company.No
Theoretical FrameworkInadequate demonstration of practical
application of the models, theories and frameworksThere is
limited demonstration of practical application of the models,
theories and frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates basic
practical application of the relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates a reasonable level
of practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates a competent level
of practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates proficient level of
practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates excellent level of
practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates an outstanding
level of practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Demonstrates an exceptional
level of practical application of relevant models, theories and
frameworks to the organisation.Criterion 9 . Structure and
Presenttion (10%) - Criterion 9 description. Demonstrates a
clear structure (required components covered clearly) with the
points clearly presented and related togetherNo
StructureInadequate information base. The submission is
unsatisfactory and incoherent. Does not follow the requirements
as stated in the Assessment BriefThe arguments are limited and
not related together and, to the extent they are, this is done in a
manner that is weak, with inadequate synthesis or analysis. The
assignment is poorly organised with incomplete balance
between context, research, discussion, analysis and

11. synthesis.The relevant arguments are related together in a
manner that is acceptable and achieves a satisfactory level
synthesis. The structure has a in equated balance between
context, research, discussion, analysis and synthesis. Basic
level of understanding when follows the requirements as stated
in the Assessment BriefThe assignment is organised and the
arguments are related together in a appropriate manner, and
there is some degree of analysis and synthesis but fair attempt
towards originality.The assignment is effectively organised
achieving a good balance between context, research, discussion,
analysis and synthesis. The structure clearly supports the
overall delivery of the author's argument. Follows the
requirements as stated in the module guide.The assignment is
proficiently organised, achieving an excellent balance between
context, research, discussion, analysis and synthesis. The
document is professional and reflects the very good standards
expected in academic or professional publications. FollowsThe
assignment is highly impressive organised, achieving an
excellent balance between context, research, discussion,
analysis and synthesis. The document is professional and
reflects the standards expected in academic or professional
publications. FollowsThe assignment is outstandingly
organised, achieving an excellent balance between context,
research, discussion, analysis and synthesis. The document is
professional and reflects the standards expected in academic or
professional publications. FollowsThe assignment is
outstandingly organised for publication, achieving an excellent
balance between context, research, discussion, analysis and
synthesis. The document is professional and reflects the
standards expected in academic or professional publications.
FollowsCriterion 10 ,Citing and Referencing (10%) -Criterion
10 description. Demonstrates range of appropriate academic
literature with references properly cited expressed in the CULC
Harvard referencing format. (accuracy, spelling, grammar,
punctuation)No Referencing and Not PresentWeak attempt.
Significant problems with structure and accuracy in expression.

12. Very difficult to follow and understand.Citing and referencing
is limited, unclear and/or very inadequately placed in context.
There is little mention of relevant literature, and any outline of
these is highly restricted, unclear, and/or with no sense of
context. In the future, better referencing and a stronger
interaction with the question at hand would go far in helping to
achieve a pass. The overall and specific meaning of the writing
is unclear. There are consistent grammatical and spelling errors
throughout the submission.Basic relevant literature is outlined,
but this outline is acceptable. Satisfactorily located in an
adequate Harvard Referencing Format. Some major points of the
literature are brought out, but there are acceptable. The overall
meaning shows acceptable understanding. However the quality
of the writing is variable. There are basic level of grammar and
punctuation.Citing and referencing is appropriate and there is a
strong engagement with the literature. The paper reads well,
has appropriate level of transitions and carries a clear argument
throughout, appropriately supported by accurate in-text citations
and quotations in Harvard Referencing Format. Writing style
generally fluent. Spelling, grammar and punctuation generally
accurate.Citing and referencing is commendable and located in
an appropriate context, there are no significant omissions and
the essential points of the sources are brought out and related to
reveal a competent grasp of the topic in question combined
with accurate in-text citations and quotations in Harvard
Referencing Format. Fluent writing style. Spelling, grammar
and punctuation accurate.Strong and proficient literature has
been creatively chosen, properly cited, referenced in Harvard
Referencing Format, and outlined and located in an appropriate
context.Articulated and excellent literature has been creatively
chosen, properly cited, referenced in Harvard Referencing
Format, and outlined and located in an appropriate
context.Superb and original literature has been creatively
chosen, properly cited, referenced in Harvard Referencing
Format, and outlined and located in an appropriate
context.Extensive and relevant literature has been creatively

13. chosen, properly cited, referenced in Harvard Referencing
Format, and outlined and located in an appropriate
context.There are no significant omissions, and the essential
points of the sources are brought out and related to reveal an
outstanding overall grasp of the topic in question, combined
with accurate in-text citations and quotations. Exceptionally
fluent writing style. Engaging to read. Spelling, grammar and
punctuation accurate.There are no significant omissions, and the
essential points of the sources are brought out and related to
reveal an outstanding overall grasp of the topic in question,
combined with accurate in-text citations and quotations.
Exceptionally fluent writing style. Engaging to read. Spelling,
grammar and punctuation accurate.There are no significant
omissions, and the essential points of the sources are brought
out and related to reveal an outstanding overall grasp of the
topic in question, combined with accurate in-text citations and
quotations. Exceptionally fluent writing style. Engaging to read.
Spelling, grammar and punctuation accurate.There are no
significant omissions, and the essential points of the sources are
brought out and related to reveal an outstanding overall grasp of
the topic in question, combined with accurate in-text citations
and quotations. Exceptionally fluent writing style. Engaging to
read. Spelling, grammar and punctuation accurate.
Brief-cw2 78 csr