| Course | MT313 Corporate Sustainability and Social Responsibility |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 8 |
| Paper type | Supplier responsibility memo |
| Length | About 750 words, 5 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 8
Stay, Use Our Buying Power, Set a Deadline: An MT313 Unit 8 Supplier Responsibility Memo on a Tomato Grower
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT313: Corporate Sustainability and Social Responsibility
Unit 8 Supplier Responsibility Memo
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The chain, grower, allegations and figures are composite; the Guiding Principles and sources cited are real.
Memo
To: Chief Supply Chain Officer From: Responsible sourcing analyst Subject: Allegations against our Florida tomato grower Decision needed by: November 15, before the winter harvest contract is signed
Recommendation
Stay with the grower and require it to join a worker-driven social responsibility program, such as the Fair Food Program, before the start of the next harvest. If it has not joined by that date, reduce purchases by half and begin qualifying a replacement.
Background
We have bought from the grower for 11 years. It supplies 38 percent of our tomatoes, and we account for about 9 percent of its sales. It passed our third-party social audit in 2024 with two minor findings, both on recordkeeping.
The Allegations
An advocacy group's complaint, filed publicly in September, alleges:
Supervisors denied shade and water breaks on days when temperatures reached 94 degrees.
Two women who reported a supervisor for harassment were moved to lower-paying tasks and then dismissed.
These are allegations. The grower denies them. Our 2024 audit did not identify them, but audits announced in advance and conducted in a day often miss such problems.
How the Guiding Principles Apply
The Guiding Principles the UN Human Rights Council endorsed in 2011 distinguish three ways a company can be involved in a human rights harm: causing it, contributing to it or being directly linked to it through a business relationship (United Nations, 2011). Each brings a different responsibility.
We did not cause the alleged harm. We do not employ or supervise the workers.
We may contribute to it. Our delivery terms require tomatoes on a fixed schedule, and our price has not risen in three years. If those terms compress harvest schedules and squeeze margins, they may increase pressure on supervisors to skip breaks.
At minimum, the harm is directly linked to our products. The tomatoes on our plates are picked by these workers.
Where a company contributes, the Guiding Principles expect it to stop contributing and use its influence to mitigate remaining harm. Where it is linked, it should use its influence to prevent or mitigate the harm. Ending the relationship is considered only when influence fails, and the company should weigh the effects of leaving on the workers themselves.
Leaving would end our link to the harm without ending the harm, and the women who reported a supervisor would be no better off.
Options
Exit. End purchases now. Protects our reputation quickly. Does nothing for the workers, may lead the grower to cut jobs and leaves us without 38 percent of our tomatoes during winter.
Stay with a corrective action plan. Ask the grower to fix the problems and verify with another audit. Low cost. But audits already missed these issues, and the grower controls the plan.
Stay and require worker-driven monitoring. Require the grower to join a program in which workers themselves can report violations to an independent body that can act. Asbed and Hitov (2017) describe the Fair Food Program, in which participating buyers pay a small premium per pound and agree to buy only from growers who comply with a code enforced through worker complaints and independent audits. They report that the program has been associated with sharp reductions in abuses on participating farms.
Why Worker-Driven Monitoring
Our audit passed the grower in 2024. Locke (2013), studying private compliance programs in global supply chains, found that audits on their own changed conditions only modestly and patchily, and that improvement came more often where buyers' own purchasing practices made compliance possible. A worker-driven program gives the workers a channel that does not depend on the grower's cooperation or an auditor's visit.
Our Own Terms
We should also review our contribution. A small price increase tied to the program's premium and a review of delivery schedules during heat waves would address the ways our terms may add pressure.
Annex: Costs
Exit. Replacement supply at about 8 percent higher cost for one season: about $410,000. Reputational effect: positive short term.
Corrective plan. Audit costs: about $15,000.
Worker-driven program. Premium of about one cent per pound on roughly 9 million pounds a year: about $90,000. Delivery schedule flexibility: minimal direct cost.
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.
Locke, R. M. (2013). The promise and limits of private power: Promoting labor standards in a global economy. Cambridge University Press.
United Nations. (2011). Guiding principles on business and human rights: Implementing the United Nations "Protect, Respect and Remedy" framework. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/publications/guidingprinciplesbusinesshr_en.pdf
Reading the MT 313 Unit 8 instructions
In Unit 8 students write a memo on how a company should respond to alleged harm at a supplier. The memo should open with a recommendation and the date a decision is needed. Background should state the relationship in figures, such as years of purchasing and shares of supply and sales. Allegations should be summarized strictly as allegations. Instructors expect a framework, usually the UN Guiding Principles, to classify the company's relationship to the harm and set its duty. Options should be compared, typically exit, a corrective plan and stronger monitoring, with the effect of each on workers. The company's own purchasing terms should be examined. Costs for each option belong in an annex or table so the reader can compare them quickly.
How this MT313 Unit 8 example is built
The sample's memo heading gives a November decision date. Background states 11 years of purchasing, 38 percent of tomatoes and 9 percent of the grower's sales. Allegations are listed as allegations with the grower's denial. The Guiding Principles section concludes that the chain did not cause, may contribute to and is directly linked to the harm, under the highlighted line that leaving would end the link without ending the harm. Three options are compared. Locke and Asbed and Hitov explain why worker-driven monitoring beats audits. A section on the chain's own price and delivery terms follows. The annex prices exit at about $410,000, a corrective plan at $15,000 and the program at about $90,000.
Reading the MT313 Unit 8 grading rubric
Supplier memos are usually weighed on correct use of the framework, careful handling of allegations, comparison of options and attention to the company's own role. Graders reward memos that classify the relationship to harm before choosing a response. Allegations should never be presented as findings. Options should be compared for their effect on workers as well as the company. Examining the buyer's own purchasing practices shows understanding of contribution. Costs should be specific. Leading with the decision and its date respects a busy reader. The Guiding Principles and supporting research appear in APA 7. Memos that recommend immediate exit to protect reputation, without considering the workers, tend to score lower in this unit.
Common MT313 Unit 8 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Supplier memos often jump to ending the relationship because it looks decisive. Another common weakness is treating a passed audit as proof that no problem exists. Some students describe the Guiding Principles in general without classifying the company's relationship to the harm. The buyer's own prices and delivery terms are rarely examined. Before drafting, find out what share of the supplier's sales your company represents and what its contract requires on price and timing. Those two facts usually show how much influence the company has and whether its own terms add pressure. Write the options only after that.
Get an MT313 Unit 8 example written to your instructions
Share the supplier scenario from the Unit 8 prompt, or the company and supply chain you chose, plus the memo format and rubric. Back in 24-48h: a recommendation up front, the relationship quantified, allegations framed carefully, the Guiding Principles applied and options priced. Your first custom sample is free, and both the chain and the grower here are invented. 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 1: Kids' Meal Default Discussion Post
- MT313 Unit 2: Cage-Free Commitment Position Paper
- MT313 Unit 3: Franchise Child Labor Conduct Case
- MT313 Unit 4: Sustainability Report Review
- MT313 Unit 5: Double Materiality Assessment
- MT313 Unit 6: Greenhushing Seminar Reflection
- MT313 Unit 7: Stakeholder Salience Analysis
- MT313 Unit 9: Program Proposal
- MT313 Unit 10: Corporate Responsibility Plan
- MT304 Unit 8: Leadership Ethics Case Analysis
- MT302 Unit 8: Job Satisfaction and Performance Study
- MT300 Unit 8: Business Analytics Report
- MT299 Unit 8: Cost and Benefit Case
MT313 Unit 8 questions, answered
Do I need to use the UN Guiding Principles?
Many MT313 prompts on supply chains expect them, because they give the clearest language for what a buyer owes when harm occurs at a supplier. Some sections assign the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises instead, which align closely with them. The sample applies whichever framework your prompt names, explaining its terms rather than assuming the reader already knows them.
What is a worker-driven program?
A monitoring arrangement in which workers' organizations help set the standards and can file complaints that a third party investigates, while buyers agree to stop purchasing from growers that violate them. The Fair Food Program in Florida agriculture is the best-known example. The memo presents it as one option among several, with its costs listed beside the others.
Where can I find a free MT313 Unit 8 sample paper?
The complete MT313 Unit 8 supplier responsibility memo is on this page, responding to allegations against a breakfast chain's tomato grower.
Why does the MT313 Unit 8 sample reject immediate exit?
Leaving would end the chain's link to the harm without ending the harm, and the workers would be no better off.
Why recommend staying with a supplier accused of abuse?
Because leaving ends the buyer's link to the harm without ending it, while staying lets the buyer use its purchasing power to require worker-driven monitoring by a deadline.