This is a group activity and must be completed by all members of the group that you

have been allocated to.

Learning unit 2: case study 1

Due date – 2 June 2023

Read the following article provided by clicking on the link below:

https://businesstech.co.za/news/business/551342/what-businesses-in-south-africa-are-most-
worried-about-in-2022/

The article listed the following risks and challenges that South African businesses are facing:

1. cyber incidents
2. business interruption
3. critical infrastructure blackouts
4. political risks and violence
5. pandemic outbreak
6. climate change
7. changes in legislation and regulation
8. shortage of skilled workforce
9. fire and explosion
10. new technologies

Required:

You are required to

1. Select the latest <IR> (2020 – 2022) of a JSE listed company.

You may only consider this company if another group has not already selected it. View the
video in the link below that explains how to determine if you can use a company’s <IR> or
not.

https://youtu.be/lYO7Qfk6jUA
2. Review the risk section of the <IR>. State where has the company reported its risks? –
that is, which section of the <IR>?

3. List all the risks that the company has reported on – risk title/summary of the identified
risk.

4. Indicate whether the company identified any of the top ten risks for South African
businesses in their <IR> – if yes, which risks were reported on?

5. Select three risks from the risks listed in (4) above and summarise them.
Indicate
a) why this is a risk for the company; and
b) how the company has responded to the risk.

6. Assess in your own words whether the company’s response to the risks identified in (5)
is adequate or not.

The following resources can be considered for this exercise:

a. the discussion forum – ask questions and request feedback from your e-tutor.
b. the CAS3701 site for notes on the topic
c. the <IR> Framework, which can be obtained from the following website:

https://www.integratedreporting.org/resource/international-ir-framework/

d. the CBC1501 module has detailed guidance on how to structure a report. Please
refer to the information for the detailed guidance.

Submission instructions:

1. Present your findings in a written report (1 report per group). The report must meet the
following requirements:
 Font type: Arial
 Font size: 11
 Line spacing of 1.5
 Justified
 The report must be submitted on the provided template
 Submit the completed report on myUnisa as a PDF document. Save the report, using
the following format:
Group number_Case study1.pdf
 Assessment rubric
LU 2 – Case study 1

Assessment criteria Maximum mark Student

mark
Submission requirements:
1. The formatting requirements were adhered to 4
a. Font type: Arial,
b. Font size: 11,
c. 1.5 line spacing and
d. Justified
2. A list of references has been given in line with the referencing 2
guide provided.

Content of report
3. The information presented is relevant to the topic: 5
a. The content of the report is meaningful and
appropriate for all members of the audience.
b. It explains jargon or slang when it is used.
c. It clearly states the purpose and outcomes of the
findings
4. The researched information is not older than 2020. 2
5. The topic is discussed under suitable headings and sub- 1
headings.
6. The information presented is relevant to the topic. 2
7. The content of the report shows insight and understanding of 10
the assigned topic.
a. The work provides in-depth coverage of the topic.
b. Assumptions or claims are clearly supported by
evidence.
c. The report illustrates that the students can synthesise
and make sense of ideas and information from the
<IR>.

Communication
8. The report follows a logical structure, for example, it has an 3
introduction and conclusion, and the content flow is linked.
The main ideas are clearly communicated.
Paragraphs and transitions are clear and appropriate.
9. Correct grammar, language, and sentence construction. 3
10. There are no spelling errors. 1
11. Avoided plagiarism (did not copy directly from sources, 2
presentation in own words, and authors acknowledged).
Total 35

Criteria 0 – Poor
Team member’s Quality of - The team member’s work
contribution to case study was not thorough,
inaccurate, or showed
little attention to detail.
- The team member did not
contribute significantly to
the project.
Accountability of team - The team member did not
member – submission of manage their time
tasks effectively and missed
multiple deadlines.
- The team member needs
constant chasing to get
the work submitted on
time.
Accountability of team - The team member
member - Attendance frequently misses
meetings and does not
inform the team, or an
agreed upon member of
the team. When they do
come, they are often late
or leave early.
Assessment rubric
teamwork
1 - Satisfactory 2 – Good 3 – Excellent
- The team member’s work - The team member’s - The team member's
was somewhat thorough, work was mostly work was
accurate, and showed thorough, accurate, and consistently
some attention to detail. showed attention to thorough, accurate,
- The team member detail. and showed
somewhat contributed to - The team member attention to detail.
the project. mostly contributed - The team member
effectively. consistently
contributed
effectively.
- The team member - The team member - The team member
somewhat managed their managed their time consistently
time effectively but effectively and met the managed their time
missed some deadlines. deadlines effectively, met all
deadlines and is
self-motivated. The
team member
completed work
without being
reminded.
- The team member is - The team member is - The team member
present at most meetings. present at all meetings. attends all meetings,
When the team member is punctual, and
is absent, he/she informs stays for the entire
the team or an agreed meeting.
upon member of the
team.
 Criteria 0 – Poor
Communication - The team member did not
communicate well with
the group, did not
participate in discussions,
or did not respect others'
ideas.
- The team member did not
adhere to the team
contract regarding
communication for
meetings – example use
of agreed platforms and
inclusivity of all members.
Conflict Management - The team member did not
handle conflict effectively,
did not listen actively to
others, was disrespectful,
and did not work
collaboratively towards a
resolution.
Maximum mark for teamwork:
Total for project =
1 - Satisfactory
- The team member
somewhat communicated
with the group but didn't
consistently participate in
discussions or respect
others' ideas.
- The team member
somewhat adhered to the
team contract regarding
communication for
meetings – example use
of agreed platforms and
inclusivity of all members.
- The team member
somewhat handled
conflict effectively but
didn't consistently listen
actively to others, remain
respectful, or work
collaboratively towards a
resolution.
2 – Good 3 – Excellent
- The team member - The team member
communicated well with consistently
the group, participated communicated well
in discussions, and with the group,
respected others' ideas. actively participated
- Communication in discussions, and
amongst team members respected others'
was in line with the team ideas.
contract – example use - Communication
of agreed platforms and amongst team
inclusivity of all members was in line
members. with the team
contract – meetings
held on agreed
platform.
- The team member - The team member
mostly handled conflict consistently handled
effectively, listened conflict effectively,
actively to others, listened actively to
remained respectful, others, remained
and worked respectful, and
collaboratively towards a worked
resolution collaboratively
towards a resolution.
15
35 + 15 = 50