BUSM2575 Business in Society asks you to judge the role of business in society, and the rubric rewards critical argument over describing what firms do.
BUSM2575 Business in Society asks you to judge the role of business in society, and the rubric rewards critical argument over describing what firms do. Most students who struggle with this RMIT course are not short on examples — they explain a company's CSR programme well but never argue whether it is genuine responsibility or public relations. This guide answers the seven questions Vietnamese students at RMIT ask MAAS mentors most often before they start BUSM2575 (also coded BUSM2576 across campuses).
Author: MAAS Editorial Team · Reviewed by a Senior Business & Management mentor (PhD, Corporate Social Responsibility)
Last updated: 2026-06-25
Category: writing-tips
What is BUSM2575 Business in Society about?
Direct answer: BUSM2575 (and its companion code BUSM2576) is an RMIT business course — offered at RMIT Melbourne and RMIT Vietnam — that examines the relationship between business, government, and civil society. It covers corporate social responsibility (CSR), stakeholder management, business ethics, sustainability and ESG, and the idea of a "social licence to operate". The course wants you to think like a critical analyst of corporate behaviour, not a spokesperson reciting a company's sustainability report.
Evidence: Courses of this type draw heavily on the corporate citizenship tradition associated with Crane and Matten (2016, Business Ethics), which frames business as an actor with rights and responsibilities inside a wider social system. That framing is why the assessment asks you to judge corporate conduct against ethical and stakeholder standards rather than simply summarise it.
Example: A Vietnamese student at RMIT Vietnam came to MAAS sure that BUSM2575 was "just writing about a company's good deeds". Her MAAS mentor reframed it: the course is about the tension between profit and social obligation. Once she viewed every case through that lens, her draft stopped praising CSR campaigns and started questioning them — and her mark moved from a Pass-level draft toward a Distinction.
What assessment does the BUSM2575 assignment usually involve?
Direct answer: Business in Society courses at this level are typically assessed through an individual report or essay built around a real company or a contemporary social issue, often with a shorter reflective or analytical task earlier in the semester. You are usually asked to choose an organisation, identify a social, ethical, or sustainability challenge it faces, and evaluate its response using stakeholder and CSR theory. Always confirm the exact brief, word count, and weighting in your own Canvas shell — assessment design changes by semester and campus.
Evidence: RMIT business assessments are criterion-referenced, meaning marks are awarded against published rubric criteria rather than ranked against classmates. This is set out in RMIT's assessment policy, which is why decoding the rubric (next section) matters more than writing length.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student chose a fast-fashion brand as her case and spent 500 of her 1,100 words describing the company's history and revenue. Her MAAS mentor cut that to 150 words and reallocated the rest to evaluating the brand's labour practices against stakeholder theory. Same company, same word count — the analysis-heavy version earned a clear Distinction.
How is the BUSM2575 assignment graded — what does the rubric actually reward?
Direct answer: Business in Society rubrics at this level reward four things, roughly in this order: (1) depth of critical analysis and ethical judgement, (2) correct and explicit use of CSR and stakeholder frameworks, (3) evidence-based, realistic recommendations, and (4) academic writing and referencing. Describing what a company says it does earns almost no marks on its own — marks live in why it acts, who benefits, and whether the response is adequate. Replace a descriptive sentence with an evaluative one every time you can.
Evidence: RMIT business rubrics use criterion bands (Pass / Credit / Distinction / High Distinction). The jump from Credit to Distinction is almost always defined by the word "critical" — critical evaluation, critical application of theory, critical judgement — not by adding more content.
Example: A MAAS mentor colour-coded one Vietnamese student's draft sentence by sentence as "describe" or "evaluate". The draft was about 75% describe. After one restructuring pass that flipped the ratio toward evaluation, the same evidence and the same case company moved the mark up two full rubric bands.
Which frameworks should you use in BUSM2575?
Direct answer: Anchor your analysis in two or three established frameworks rather than name-dropping many. The most useful for BUSM2575 are Carroll's CSR pyramid (economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities), Freeman's stakeholder theory (mapping and prioritising those affected by the firm), and either Elkington's triple bottom line or Porter and Kramer's creating shared value for the sustainability angle. Use Friedman's shareholder view as a counter-argument, not as your main lens. Pick frameworks that fit your case, and apply them to reach a judgement.
| Framework | What it analyses | Best used for |
|---|---|---|
| Carroll's CSR pyramid | Four layers of corporate responsibility | Judging whether a firm meets economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic duties |
| Freeman's stakeholder theory | Who is affected by the firm and how | Mapping and prioritising competing stakeholder claims |
| Triple bottom line | People, planet, profit | Evaluating sustainability beyond financial returns |
| Creating shared value | Overlap of social need and business value | Arguing that responsibility and profit can align |
| Friedman's shareholder view | Profit as the sole social duty | A counter-argument to test stakeholder claims against |
Evidence: Carroll (1991) introduced the CSR pyramid that still structures most undergraduate CSR analysis; Freeman (1984) formalised stakeholder theory; Elkington (1997) coined the triple bottom line; and Porter and Kramer (2011) defined shared value. These are foundational, examiner-recognised sources — not blog-level references.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student analysing a beverage company's plastic-waste problem tried to apply five frameworks and explained each shallowly. Her MAAS mentor cut it to two — Carroll's pyramid to show the firm met legal but not ethical responsibilities, and stakeholder theory to explain why local communities outranked shareholders on this issue. Fewer frameworks, deeper application, higher mark.
How should you structure the BUSM2575 report?
Direct answer: Use an argument-led structure: (1) brief introduction and case context (keep it under 10% of the word count), (2) identification of the specific social, ethical, or sustainability issue, (3) analysis of that issue using your chosen frameworks, (4) evidence-based recommendations, and (5) conclusion. The single biggest structural fix is shrinking the description sections and expanding the analysis and recommendation sections, where the marks concentrate.
Evidence: Criterion-referenced rubrics weight "analysis and application of theory" and "recommendations and justification" far above "context and background". Matching your word budget to the rubric weighting is the most reliable way to lift a grade without doing new research.
Example: A Vietnamese student at RMIT submitted a draft with a 400-word company background and a 100-word recommendations section. His MAAS mentor inverted the ratio. The final report — same case, same sources — moved from a borderline Credit to a Distinction because the recommendations were finally developed enough to be assessed against the rubric.
What are the most common mistakes that lose marks in BUSM2575?
Direct answer: Three recurring mistakes show up across MAAS Business in Society coaching. First, students describe a company's CSR claims instead of evaluating them — they treat the sustainability report as fact rather than evidence to interrogate. Second, students apply frameworks as labels rather than tools — they name Carroll's pyramid but never use it to judge anything. Third, recommendations are generic ("the company should be more sustainable") rather than specific, realistic, and tied to the analysis. Fixing these three lifts most drafts by at least one rubric band.
Evidence: Across MAAS coaching, marker feedback before intervention clusters heavily on "more critical analysis needed" and "recommendations not sufficiently justified" — the two phrases that most often separate a Credit from a Distinction in RMIT business rubrics.
Example: A Vietnamese student's recommendation read "the company should improve its supply chain ethics." His MAAS mentor pushed him to specify: which tier of supplier (garment subcontractors in a named country), which intervention (independent audits plus published remediation timelines), and why (to satisfy the ethical layer of Carroll's pyramid the firm currently fails). The specific version earned full marks on the recommendations criterion.
How long is the BUSM2575 assignment and what referencing style does it use?
Direct answer: Confirm the exact word count and style in your assessment brief — Business in Society individual reports at this level commonly sit between 1,000 and 2,500 words depending on the task, and use RMIT Harvard referencing, the default business style. Stay within the 10% tolerance band, cite every theoretical claim and statistic, and make sure your in-text citations and reference list match exactly. Reference accuracy is a quick, reliable source of marks that many students leave on the table.
Evidence: RMIT's Business school uses RMIT Harvard as its standard referencing style, documented in RMIT's Easy Cite referencing tool. Markers routinely deduct marks for inconsistent or incomplete referencing even when the analysis is strong.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student lost several marks across two assignments for mismatched in-text citations and reference-list entries. A MAAS pre-submission audit caught more than a dozen referencing errors in an hour. On her next BUSM2575 task, clean Harvard referencing recovered the marks she had previously been losing on a criterion that requires no extra research at all.
Frequently asked questions
Is BUSM2575 a hard course?
It is conceptually demanding rather than technically hard — there is no maths, but the course expects critical, ethical reasoning instead of memorisation. Students who treat it as "describe a company's good deeds" struggle; students who treat it as "argue whether a company is genuinely responsible" do well.
What is the difference between BUSM2575 and BUSM2576?
They are paired codes for the same Business in Society course delivered across different RMIT campuses or cohorts. The content, frameworks, and rubric logic are effectively the same, so this guide applies to both — always confirm your specific brief in Canvas.
Can I use a famous company like a fast-fashion or tech brand as my case?
Yes — large, well-documented companies work well because there is enough public information to evaluate. The risk is spending too long on background. Pick a firm with a clear, contestable social or ethical issue you can analyse, not just a famous name.
How many frameworks should I use in the assignment?
Two or three, applied deeply, beats five applied shallowly. Examiners reward critical application — using a framework to reach a judgement — not the number of models you can name.
What referencing style does BUSM2575 use?
RMIT Harvard is the default for business courses. Always confirm in your own brief, and use RMIT's Easy Cite tool to format entries consistently.
Can MAAS help me with BUSM2575?
Yes. MAAS Academic Mentoring coaches you through the assignment with the Outline → Draft → Final model — rubric decoding, framework selection, draft feedback, and a pre-submission referencing audit, all with PhD-level mentors. We coach your work; we do not write it for you.
Ready to approach BUSM2575 with a clear argument?
If you have the case company but not the critical argument, that is exactly where a mentor helps most. MAAS Academic Mentoring is an advisory partner — we work alongside you through Outline → Draft → Final so the analysis stays yours and the structure earns the marks. Every engagement is backed by our three-tier outcome guarantee (Pass / Merit / Distinction) and a 90-day warranty.
Bring your BUSM2575 brief and we will match you to a Business & Society mentor — 23% of our 100+ experts hold a PhD — within 48 hours.
Book a free 20-minute BUSM2575 consultation with MAAS Academic Mentoring →
Related guides
- BUSM7113 assignment: how do you approach Leading Social Impact? — sibling RMIT guide on leading purpose-driven, socially responsible organisations
- How do you approach the BUSM3312 Managing Change assignment? — sibling guide on diagnosing and leading organisational change
- BUSM2519 assignment: how do you approach Leading in the Age of Digital Disruption? — sibling RMIT leadership guide on navigating disruptive change
- How do you approach the BUSM2412 Marketing for Managers assignment? — sibling RMIT business guide on applying marketing theory to managerial decisions
- How to write a theoretical framework — for applying CSR and stakeholder frameworks with academic depth
- How to write a reflection essay — useful if BUSM2575 includes a reflective component
- MAAS Academic Mentoring service — 1:1 coaching with PhD-level mentors in your discipline
- Tutoring service — 1:1 subject tutoring in 60- or 90-minute sessions with a course-matched expert
- Admissions Consulting service — SOP, personal statement, and application coaching for study-abroad applicants
References
- Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.
- Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
- Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone.
- Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
- Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
- Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1–2), 62–77.
- United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development (A/RES/70/1).
Tools & resources
- RMIT University. (n.d.). Assessment and exams. Retrieved June 25, 2026, from https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/assessment-and-exams
- RMIT University. (n.d.). Easy Cite referencing tool. Retrieved June 25, 2026, from https://www.rmit.edu.au/library/study/referencing
This article is part of the MAAS Journal series for Vietnamese international students. MAAS Academic Mentoring is an advisory partner — we coach students through the Outline → Draft → Final delivery model with developmental feedback from PhD-level mentors. We do not write or submit work on a student's behalf.