| Course | SUST 5003 Building Better Businesses: Social Entrepreneurship in Action |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Benefit corporation comparison |
| Length | 1,220 words, about 4 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | M.S. in Organizational Leadership |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for SUST 5003 Module 3
Same Mission, Different Charters: Warby Parker and National Vision as Benefit and Conventional Corporations
Student Name
American College of Education
SUST5003: Building Better Businesses: Social Entrepreneurship in Action
Module 3 Assignment
Instructor Name
September 18, 2028
Introduction
Does becoming a benefit corporation change how a company behaves, or only how it describes itself? This paper tests that question by comparing two optical retailers with strikingly similar stated missions. Warby Parker, the venture profiled in earlier papers, is a Delaware public benefit corporation. National Vision Holdings, which operates America's Best and Eyeglass World stores, is a conventional Delaware corporation whose stated mission is to help people by making quality eye care and eyewear more affordable and accessible (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026). The comparison covers legal duties, reporting, enforcement, governance, social programs and results.
Benefit Corporation Versus B Corp
Two terms are often confused. A benefit corporation is a legal form created by state statute; a company chooses it in its charter, and the law then changes directors' duties and reporting. B Corp certification is a private standard awarded by the nonprofit B Lab after a company completes an assessment of its social and environmental performance; any type of company may seek it, and it does not change the company's legal duties. Hiller (2013) traced the emergence of the benefit corporation form and its relationship to B Lab's work, arguing that the legal form gives directors explicit room to weigh social goals. This paper compares legal forms, not certifications.
Directors' Duties
Delaware treats this form as a profit-seeking company that is also meant to create a public benefit and to run itself responsibly and sustainably. Its board must manage the business in a way that balances stockholders' financial interests, the best interests of those materially affected by its conduct and the specific public benefits named in its charter. A director's balancing decision satisfies fiduciary duties if it is informed, disinterested and not one that no person of sound judgment would approve (Delaware General Corporation Law, 2025). National Vision's directors owe the conventional duties to the corporation and its stockholders, although Delaware law gives them broad discretion in pursuing long-term value.
Stated Benefits and Missions
Warby Parker's certificate of incorporation commits it to two public benefits, one about access to eye care and eyewear and one about its effect on the communities around it (Warby Parker Inc., 2026). National Vision's mission statement is similar, and its 10-K describes a business that historically targeted lower-income consumers with low prices and that serves customers of all income levels (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026). The difference is where the commitment sits. Warby Parker's benefits are written into its certificate of incorporation, which can be changed only with stockholder approval; National Vision's mission is a management statement that the board could revise at any time.
Reporting
Delaware requires a public benefit corporation to give stockholders, at least every two years, a statement of the objectives the board has set, the standards it uses to measure progress, factual information based on those standards and an assessment of its success (Delaware General Corporation Law, 2025). Warby Parker meets this through an annual impact report benchmarked against GRI and SASB standards (Warby Parker Inc., 2026). National Vision has no such legal duty but published its fourth corporate responsibility report in 2025 (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026). Both report voluntarily or by law; only one can be held to its reporting by statute.
Enforcement
Enforcement is limited. Delaware lets stockholders sue to enforce the balancing duty only if they own at least 2 percent of the shares or, for a listed company, shares worth at least $2 million, and directors owe no duty to the people a public benefit is meant to help (Delaware General Corporation Law, 2025). Customers, partners and communities therefore cannot sue Warby Parker for neglecting its benefits. Hiller (2013) noted similar limits in benefit corporation statutes generally. In practice, the form's force comes less from lawsuits than from the requirement to set objectives and report on them, and from the signal it sends to employees, customers and investors.
Governance and Control
Ownership structure also shapes how firmly a mission is held. Warby Parker has a multi-class share structure, and at listing its co-founders controlled about 48 percent of the voting power (Warby Parker Inc., 2021), which allows founders committed to the mission to resist pressure from other investors. The structure also concentrates power, which can cut either way. National Vision has a conventional single class of common stock, and its board authorized a $50 million share repurchase in March 2026 (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026), a typical way of returning cash to stockholders in a conventional corporation.
Social Programs
The clearest difference lies in programs. Warby Parker matches each pair sold with a pair given away, books those donations in its operating expenses, and it runs a school vision program (Warby Parker Inc., 2026). National Vision's main social contribution is its business itself: low-priced exams and glasses, a signature offer of an eye exam plus two pairs of glasses for one price and participation in managed care programs, including government programs such as Medicaid (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026). For a lower-income U.S. customer, National Vision's prices and acceptance of public insurance may matter more than any donation program.
Results Compared
The two companies differ greatly in scale. For fiscal 2025, a 53-week year, National Vision reported net revenue of $1,987.5 million, up 9.0 percent, net income of $29.6 million and 1,250 stores, with 13,138 associates (National Vision Holdings, Inc., 2026). Warby Parker reported net revenue of $871.9 million, up 13.0 percent, net income of $1.6 million, 323 stores and 4,036 employees (Warby Parker Inc., 2026). Both returned to profit in 2025 after losses in 2024. Neither set of results suggests that legal form, by itself, determines financial performance.
What Legal Form Changes
The comparison suggests that benefit corporation status changes three things. It makes the mission durable, since changing it requires stockholder approval rather than a management decision. It requires regular, structured reporting against objectives the board sets. And it gives directors explicit legal cover to weigh social goals against short-term returns. It does not guarantee more social impact. A conventional company with a mission built into its prices and customers, as National Vision's is, may reach more underserved people than a benefit corporation that serves a more affluent market and gives through partners.
Limits of the Comparison
Two companies cannot settle the question. They differ in age, size, customer base and history, and those differences explain much of their conduct. Social impact is also measured differently: Warby Parker counts glasses distributed, while National Vision's contribution lies in prices and in accepting public insurance, which neither company reports as an impact measure. A fuller comparison would use each company's impact or responsibility report and independent evidence on access to eye care among the people each serves.
Conclusion
Warby Parker and National Vision state almost the same mission but hold it under different legal forms. As a public benefit corporation, Warby Parker has a charter-level commitment, balancing duties and a statutory reporting requirement, though enforcement rests only with larger stockholders. National Vision pursues affordability as a conventional corporation, with voluntary reporting and a business model aimed at lower-income customers. Legal form makes a mission more durable and visible, but impact depends on how the business itself is designed. The next module compares social enterprise business models directly.
References
Delaware General Corporation Law, Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, ยงยง 361-368 (2025). https://delcode.delaware.gov/title8/c001/sc15/index.html
Hiller, J. S. (2013). The benefit corporation and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(2), 287-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1580-3
National Vision Holdings, Inc. (2026). Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 3, 2026. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1710155/000162828026014379/eye-20260103.htm
Warby Parker Inc. (2021). Prospectus (Form 424B4). U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1504776/000162828021019236/warbyparkerinc424b4.htm
Warby Parker Inc. (2026). Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1504776/000150477626000006/wrby-20251231.htm
SUST 5003 Module 3 instructions, in plain terms
The third SUST 5003 paper usually asks you to compare a benefit corporation with a conventional corporation. Expect to explain the benefit corporation form under a specific state's law, distinguish it from B Corp certification and compare the two companies' duties, reporting, governance and practices. Most prompts reward using the statute and each company's own filings or reports rather than secondary summaries. Compare results fairly and judge what legal form changes and what it does not. Choosing companies in the same industry often makes the comparison sharper. Cite laws and filings in APA 7. Pick a conventional company with a similar business or mission, so that legal form, rather than industry or purpose, explains the differences you find.
How this SUST 5003 Module 3 example is built
The sample picks two optical retailers with nearly identical missions so that legal form is the main difference. It explains benefit corporations versus B Corp certification, then compares Delaware's balancing duty with conventional duties, charter benefits with a mission statement and statutory reporting with a voluntary responsibility report. Enforcement limits, dual-class control versus a share buyback, giving versus low prices and Medicaid acceptance and FY2025 results follow. The paper concludes that legal form makes missions durable but does not guarantee impact. The limits of a two-company comparison are stated plainly. Both companies' figures come from their own annual reports, and the statute is quoted where wording matters.
Reading the SUST 5003 Module 3 rubric
Benefit corporation comparisons are graded on legal accuracy and balanced judgment. Graders look for a correct explanation of the form under a named state's law, a clear distinction from B Corp certification and comparisons drawn from the statute and company filings. Strong papers address duties, reporting and enforcement as well as social programs and results, and they avoid assuming the benefit corporation is better. Stating the comparison's limits, such as differences in size and customers, is often credited. Confusing the legal form with certification, relying on marketing claims or comparing unrelated companies tends to cost points. Explaining who can enforce a benefit corporation's duties, and what that means in practice, shows a grasp of the law beyond the definition.
SUST 5003 Module 3 help from the desk
Comparing legal forms means reading a statute and two sets of filings, which takes time and care. We can help you choose a fair pair of companies, explain the benefit corporation law that applies and compare duties, reporting and practices without bias. Tell us which companies interest you, or let us suggest a pair, and share your prompt; a writer will draft a comparison grounded in the statute and each company's own documents. Retail, food, apparel, finance and health companies all work. Expect your draft within two days, with every legal and financial figure sourced. If your course uses a state other than Delaware, we can apply that state's benefit corporation statute instead.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official American College of Education document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More SUST 5003 and M.S. in Organizational Leadership sample papers
- SUST 5003 Module 1: Warby Parker Founders Profile
- SUST 5003 Module 2: Warby Parker Innovation Strategy
- SUST 5003 Module 4: Social Business Model Comparison
- SUST 5003 Module 5: Social Enterprise Transformation
- SUST 5013 Module 5: Vital Farms Impact Plan
- HRM 5473 Module 3: Pregnancy Accommodation Analysis
- HRM 5473 Module 1: Employment Law Audit
- HRM 5473 Module 5: Legal Risk Management Plan
SUST 5003 Module 3 questions, answered
What does SUST5003 Module 3 usually ask for?
Module 3 of SUST5003 usually asks you to compare a benefit corporation with a conventional corporation, including legal duties, reporting and practice.
What is the difference between a benefit corporation and a B Corp?
A benefit corporation is a legal form chosen under state law; B Corp is a certification from the nonprofit B Lab that any company type can earn.
Who can enforce a Delaware public benefit corporation's duties?
Only stockholders holding at least 2 percent of shares or, for listed companies, at least $2 million in shares; beneficiaries cannot sue.
Where can I find a free SUST 5003 Module 3 sample paper?
This page has one: Warby Parker, a public benefit corporation, compared with National Vision, a conventional corporation with a nearly identical affordability mission.
Does benefit corporation status make a company more socially responsible?
It makes a mission more durable and requires reporting, but impact depends on how the business is designed; compare actual practices, not only legal form.