MT313 Unit 10 Corporate Responsibility Target Plan Example

Course	MT313 Corporate Sustainability and Social Responsibility
Unit	Unit 10
Paper type	Corporate responsibility plan
Length	About 870 words, 6 pages double-spaced
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Purdue University Global
Program	BS in Business Administration
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for MT313 Unit 10

Five Targets Anyone Could Check: An MT313 Unit 10 Corporate Responsibility Plan for a Breakfast Chain

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT313: Corporate Sustainability and Social Responsibility

Unit 10 Corporate Responsibility Plan

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The chain, targets and costs are composite; the frameworks, guidance and sources cited are real.

What this part is doingStating that every target follows the same structure tells the reader how to check the plan.

Executive Summary

Five targets, from earlier units:

1. Cage-free eggs: from 54 percent to 100 percent by December 2028.

2. Scope 1 and 2 emissions: down 30 percent from 2019 by 2030.

3. Recyclable packaging: from 61 percent, restated, to 80 percent by 2029.

4. Hard scheduling blocks for minors in every restaurant by June 2027.

5. All Florida tomatoes from growers in a worker-driven program by the 2027 harvest.

Combined cost: about $61 million over five years.

Target Register

1. Cage-free eggs. Baseline: 54 percent in 2025 (71 percent company-operated, 44 percent franchised). Target: 100 percent by December 2028. Interim: 80 percent by December 2027. Owner: Chief Supply Chain Officer. Verification: supplier attestations plus an annual audit of purchasing data by the internal audit team. Annual cost: rising to $4.6 million.

2. Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Baseline: 2019, the base year in the sustainability-linked loan. Target: 30 percent reduction by 2030; current reduction 12 percent. Interim: annual milestones as set in the loan. Owner: Chief Financial Officer. Verification: limited assurance by the external auditor, as the loan already requires. Annual cost: about $8 million average, mostly kitchen equipment and a renewable power contract.

3. Recyclable packaging. Baseline: 61 percent in 2025, restated from the published 87 percent. Target: 80 percent by 2029. Interim: 70 percent by 2027. Owner: Vice President, Procurement. Verification: independent review of packaging specifications against the FTC test. Annual cost: about $1.1 million.

4. Scheduling blocks for minors. Baseline: hard blocks in no restaurants. Target: every restaurant by June 2027. Interim: all company-operated by December 2026. Owner: Chief Operating Officer. Verification: monthly exception reports and an annual sample audit. Annual cost: about $180,000 for software configuration and audits.

5. Florida tomatoes. Baseline: 0 percent from growers in a worker-driven program. Target: 100 percent by the 2027 harvest. Interim: main grower enrolled by the 2026 harvest. Owner: Chief Supply Chain Officer. Verification: program participation records. Annual cost: about $90,000 in premiums.

A target with no baseline, no owner or no outside check is a hope, and this register leaves no room for hopes.

What this part is doingBuilding every row with the same columns shows that each target can be tested independently.

Restated Baseline: Packaging

The published report claimed 87 percent recyclable packaging, defined as designed to be recyclable. The FTC's Green Guides allow an unqualified recyclable claim only when recycling is reachable by most of the people or communities where the item is sold, a threshold the guides put at 60 percent (Federal Trade Commission, 2012). Applying that test removes coated cups and some film wrappers, lowering the figure to 61 percent. Setting a target from the flattering baseline would have made 80 percent look like a decline.

How the Targets Were Set

Each target is set from what the budget supports, not from what sounds ambitious. The emissions target keeps the 30 percent goal because it is contractual, but its cost line shows that most of the remaining reduction depends on equipment upgrades approved year by year. The packaging target stops at 80 percent because the remaining items, mainly hot-food containers, have no recyclable alternative at current prices.

Total Cost Over Five Years

Cage-free eggs: about $19 million, rising as franchised restaurants switch.

Emissions: about $40 million, mostly capital for kitchen equipment and a renewable power contract.

Packaging: about $1.2 million in total, as some items cost slightly more.

Scheduling blocks: about $0.6 million.

Tomatoes: about $0.4 million in premiums.

Total: about $61 million, of which about $40 million is capital that will also lower energy costs.

What Is Not in the Plan

The plan does not include a net-zero target, a commitment on plant-based menu items or a broader human rights audit of all suppliers. Each was considered. Each lacks either a reliable baseline or a budget the board has approved, and adding them would weaken the register by mixing checkable targets with aspirations.

Governance

The board's audit committee reviews the register twice a year. Each owner reports progress against interim milestones. A missed milestone triggers a written explanation and a revised plan within 60 days. Carroll (1991) placed ethical responsibilities beneath philanthropy because stakeholders expect them, and this governance makes the expectations measurable.

Reporting

Progress on all five targets appears in the annual sustainability report, separately for company-operated and franchised restaurants, with the methods for each figure stated. Cage-free and tomato figures are also reported quarterly.

Risks

Franchisee resistance. Targets 1 and 4 depend on franchisees. Response: binding franchise amendments at renewal and a shared purchasing contract.

Egg price shocks. Avian flu can raise cage-free premiums. Response: the interim milestone may slip by up to a year, with a public explanation.

Grower refusal. The main tomato grower may decline to join. Response: the Unit 8 plan to reduce purchases and qualify a replacement. Asbed and Hitov (2017) note that buyer commitment is what gives worker-driven programs their force.

Political pressure on climate targets. Response: the target is contractual and stays; Unit 6 showed that withdrawing it would not remove the obligation.

What this part is doingPairing each risk with a response drawn from earlier units shows the plan holds together.

References

Asbed, G., & Hitov, S. (2017). Preventing forced labor in supply chains: The Fair Food Program and worker-driven social responsibility. Wake Forest Law Review, 52(2), 497-531.

Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G

Federal Trade Commission. (2012). Guides for the use of environmental marketing claims, 16 C.F.R. pt. 260. https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/federal-register-notices/guides-use-environmental-marketing-claims-green-guides

MT313 Unit 10 instructions, in plain terms

In Unit 10 students set out a corporate responsibility plan with measurable commitments. Instructors expect every target to be built the same way: baseline year and value, target and date, interim milestone, owner, verification method and cost. Baselines should be restated where earlier reporting flattered them. Targets should be set from what the budget supports, with the reasoning shown. Most prompts ask for governance, reporting and risk sections. The plan should explain what it leaves out and why. A target register, set out as a table or structured list, usually sits at the center of the plan. Commitments should draw on the analysis from earlier units so that the plan reads as the end of the course's argument rather than a fresh list of goals.

Inside the MT313 Unit 10 example

The sample's summary lists five targets and the $61 million cost. The register gives each target its baseline, target, interim milestone, owner, verification and annual cost, under the highlighted line that a target with no baseline, owner or outside check is a hope. A section restates the packaging baseline using the FTC test. Another explains how targets were set from the budget. Total cost is broken down by target, with about $40 million in capital. A section lists commitments considered and left out. Governance assigns twice-yearly review to the audit committee, citing Carroll. Reporting separates company-operated and franchised restaurants. Four risks are paired with responses from earlier units.

Reading the MT313 Unit 10 grading rubric

Responsibility plans are generally assessed on the completeness and consistency of targets, the honesty of baselines, the link between targets and budget and the strength of governance. Graders reward registers in which every target has the same structure. Restating a flattering baseline shows integrity. Costs should be shown per target and in total. Verification should be specific to each target. Governance should name who reviews progress and what happens after a missed milestone. Exclusions show judgment. Standards and guidance appear in APA 7. Plans that list ambitious goals without baselines, owners or costs usually score lower, because the unit asks for commitments a reader could check later.

MT313 Unit 10 help: mistakes that cost points

Responsibility plans often state goals such as "reduce emissions" or "improve sourcing" with no baseline or date. Another common weakness is accepting published baselines without checking their definitions. Some plans promise verification in general rather than naming a method for each target. Costs are frequently left out. Before drafting, list every commitment from your earlier units and, for each, find the current figure, decide who would own it and ask how an outsider could check progress. Any commitment that fails one of those three tests should be fixed or left out. The resulting register is the core of the plan.

Get an MT313 Unit 10 example written to your instructions

Send the Unit 10 prompt, the organization studied across the term and any earlier papers the plan should build on, with the rubric. In 24-48h the plan is returned with a target register, restated baselines, costs, named verification and a risk section. The first custom sample is free, written to your instructions rather than from a template. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

More MT313 papers and BS in Business Administration samples

MT313 Unit 10 questions, answered

Does the plan have to use my earlier papers?

It works best when it does, since instructors tend to reward a closing plan that builds on the term's analysis. Send whatever you wrote, and the sample draws on your findings rather than replacing them. Without earlier papers, it assembles a short evidence base first so that each target still rests on something specific and checkable.

How many targets should a responsibility plan include?

Usually few enough that each can be costed and verified, often four to seven. The example uses five, chosen because they scored high in the materiality work earlier in the term. A long list of targets without owners or budgets tends to score lower than a short one where every row can be checked by somebody outside the company.

Should targets be ambitious or achievable?

Both, and the plan should show how it balanced them. The example sets its emissions target from what the capital budget supports and says what extra funding would allow. Graders tend to distrust targets that are dramatic but unfunded as much as ones that are safe but trivial, so the reasoning behind each figure carries most of the weight.

Where can I find a free MT313 Unit 10 sample paper?

The complete MT313 Unit 10 corporate responsibility plan is on this page, setting five checkable targets for a breakfast chain.

Why is the packaging baseline restated in the MT313 Unit 10 sample?

Applying the FTC's substantial-majority test lowers the published 87 percent recyclable figure to 61 percent.