BEM100L Case Study Assessment Brief 2026

Assessment Mode 

This is an individual case study-based assignment.

Task Description  

This is a three-part case study portfolio in which each component builds on the previous one, guiding you from a macro-level understanding of a contemporary sustainability issue, through a company-level analysis, to applied managerial implications and recommendations. You are required to select a sustainability context of global importance and a real-life international company, and critically analyse the company’s approach to sustainability within that context.

Component 1: Contemporary Sustainability Context (700 words)

a. You are required to select one of the following sustainability contexts and analyse its significance for international business:

1. The rise of ESG regulation and reporting standards

2. The green transition and net-zero commitments

3. The global transition to a circular economy

4. The growing influence of stakeholders on corporate sustainability

5. Sustainability challenges and opportunities in emerging markets

b.   Your analysis should explain the context, evaluate its implications for international business (e.g., opportunities, challenges, and regulatory pressures), and draw on credible academic and industry sources.

Component 2: Company Case Study (1000 words)

c. You are required to select a real-life international company that is directly relevant to your chosen context from Component 1 and critically analyse its approach to sustainability. Your analysis should evaluate how the company addresses environmental, social, and governance (ESG) challenges, integrates sustainability into its global operations, and responds to pressures from stakeholders and international markets.

d. Your company analysis must be clearly connected to the sustainability context established in Component 1, demonstrating how the company responds to, is shaped by, or contributes to that context. 

Component 3: Managerial Implications and Recommendations (800 words)

e. Drawing on two relevant module theories and frameworks, you are required to critically discuss what your findings from Components 1 and 2 mean for managerial decisionmaking. 

f.  You may draw on any theories and frameworks covered in the module, such as

Stakeholder Theory, Institutional Theory, Dynamic Capabilities, Resource-Based View (including the Natural Resource-Based View), Porter’s Five Forces, Triple Bottom Line, or PESTLE.

g. You should develop realistic, evidence-based recommendations for how the company could strengthen its sustainability approach. 

General Requirements 

h.  The three components must be interconnected: your chosen context should inform your company selection, and both should inform your theoretical analysis and recommendations.

i. The case study portfolio should not exceed 2,500 words in total across all three components, excluding title, contents, abstract, tables, figures, figure captions and references. In-text citations will be counted within the word count.

Submission Instructions (When and Where do I submit?)

Please submit your assessment via your module’s Assessment Area on Blackboard. Guidance on how to submit can be found below:

• Guide to submitting to Blackboard assignments.

a. Please use an MS Word document for your assignment, with font size 12 in Times New Roman, double spaced line and normal margins.

b. References should follow a consistent author-date style. APA and Harvard are both acceptable. 

Using AI to create the content of the assessment submission is strictly prohibited, but you may use AI for generating initial ideas, summarising notes or research articles, translation, edits or creating a study plan. 

There are the following reasons for the restrictive use of AI:

a.  Critical thinking: The case study portfolio requires you to apply theories, evaluate evidence, and form your own arguments. Generative AI cannot replace the independent critical thinking expected at this level of study.

b. Accuracy and reliability: Generative AI tools may produce text that is factually inaccurate, fabricated, or insufficiently referenced. Using them risks undermining the academic quality and credibility of your work.

c. Academic integrity: Your assessment should demonstrate your ability to research, analyse, and write independently using credible sources. AI-generated content does not meet these requirements and will be treated as academic misconduct.

 d. Skill development: The case study portfolio is designed to strengthen your research, analysis, and academic writing skills. Reliance on AI prevents you from developing these essential capabilities.

Any application or use of AI should always be acknowledged.

Misuse of generative AI, as defined in Aston’s assessment regulations, will be treated as an academic offence and may be subject to disciplinary action.

You may find this guidance by The Learning Services team on the effective and ethical use of AI for assessment useful: Artificial Intelligence for study and assessment | Rise 360 

Your case study portfolio should address the following across the three components:

1.  Component 1: Contemporary Sustainability Context

• Define and explain your chosen sustainability context, drawing on credible academic and industry sources.
• Analyse the global significance of this context for international business, including opportunities, challenges, and regulatory pressures.
• Consider how this context affects how international companies operate, compete, and make strategic decisions.

2. Component 2: Company Case Study

• Provide a brief overview of your chosen company, including its industry, markets, and global footprint.
• Explain why this company is relevant to your chosen context from Component 1.
• Analyse the company’s sustainability commitments, initiatives, and integration of sustainability into its international operations and supply chains. o            Evaluate how the company balances pressures from stakeholders such as governments, NGOs, customers, investors, and communities.
• Identify key challenges the company faces in implementing sustainability internationally (e.g., regulatory differences, costs, greenwashing risks).

3. Component 3: Managerial Implications and Recommendations

• Select and apply two module theories or frameworks to critically analyse the implications of your findings from Components 1 and 2 for managerial decisionmaking.
• Provide a critical evaluation of the company’s success in embedding sustainability into its international business strategy.
• Develop realistic, evidence-based recommendations for how the company could strengthen its sustainability approach.

Your case study portfolio should address the following across the three components:

1. Component 1: Contemporary Sustainability Context

• Define and explain your chosen sustainability context, drawing on credible academic and industry sources.
• Analyse the global significance of this context for international business, including opportunities, challenges, and regulatory pressures.
• Consider how this context affects how international companies operate, compete, and make strategic decisions.

2.  Component 2: Company Case Study

• Provide a brief overview of your chosen company, including its industry, markets, and global footprint.
• Explain why this company is relevant to your chosen context from Component 1.
• Analyse the company’s sustainability commitments, initiatives, and integration of sustainability into its international operations and supply chains. o            Evaluate how the company balances pressures from stakeholders such as governments, NGOs, customers, investors, and communities.
• Identify key challenges the company faces in implementing sustainability internationally (e.g., regulatory differences, costs, greenwashing risks).

3. Component 3: Managerial Implications and Recommendations

• Select and apply two module theories or frameworks to critically analyse the implications of your findings from Components 1 and 2 for managerial decisionmaking.
• Provide a critical evaluation of the company’s success in embedding sustainability into its international business strategy.
• Develop realistic, evidence-based recommendations for how the company could strengthen its sustainability approach.

Your case study will be assessed against the following criteria:

• Critical Analysis and Application of Theory (25%): Critically evaluates the company’s sustainability strategy and applies two relevant module theories or frameworks to analyse findings and inform managerial implications (Components 2 and 3). Identifies strengths,

weaknesses, and dilemmas in the company’s approach. Integrates perspectives on internationalisation, innovation, and stakeholder engagement.

• Use of Evidence and Research (25%): Relevance of insights to sustainability and international business practice. Supports arguments with credible, up-to-date evidence (e.g. academic sources, company reports, industry data). Demonstrates breadth and depth of research into both sustainability and international business issues. Correctly integrates data, figures, and case material to strengthen analysis across all three components.
• Presentation, Clarity and Coherence (25%): Presents work in a logical, coherent, and well-structured format. Demonstrates clear connections between the three components, with the sustainability context informing the company analysis and both informing the theoretical discussion and recommendations. Uses clear, professional, and academic writing style. Incorporates figures/tables where appropriate to aid clarity.
• Evaluation and Recommendations (20%): Provides a balanced and critical evaluation of the company’s performance. Develops realistic, evidence-based recommendations that show awareness of global business contexts. Demonstrates originality and insight in suggesting future strategies.
• Adherence to Word Limit and Referencing (5%): Clear expression within 2,500 words across all three components (suggested: 700, 1000, and 800 words respectively). References should follow a consistent author-date style (APA or Harvard).

Detailed and technically assured work demonstrating ingenuity and a detailed knowledge and comprehension in specialised areas of the academic discipline or area of professional practice. Coherent, articulate and comprehensive, the work reflects relevant professional standards. Although there may be some minor errors or miscalculations, these do not compromise the overall integrity of the work. Standards of written English are excellent.

Largely descriptive work demonstrating some general knowledge and understanding of the discipline or area of professional practice but including little to no originality in the application of knowledge. Exhibits capability in some key areas but also errors, omissions, insecurity and/or misunderstanding in some aspects of methodology, analysis and/or interpretation that compromise the basic integrity of key aspects of the work. Standards of written English are generally adequate.