| Course | SUST 5063 Developing Sustainable Business Strategies |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 3 |
| Paper type | Materiality assessment and goal setting |
| Length | 1,190 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 5063 Module 3
Barista Turnover Ranks First: A Materiality Assessment and Seven 2030 Goals for a Denver Coffee Company
Student Name
American College of Education
SUST5063: Developing Sustainable Business Strategies
Module 3 Assignment
Instructor Name
September 18, 2028
Introduction
The second paper set a 2025 baseline for Front Range Roasters, the composite Denver roastery and café chain: 1,746 tonnes of Scope 1 and 2 emissions, about 380 tonnes from waste, fewer than two in five pounds of green coffee sourced under certification or direct relationships, wages just above the city minimum and café turnover of 92 percent. A small company cannot act on everything at once. This paper identifies which issues are material, meaning most important to stakeholders and to the business, and sets measurable goals for them, with baselines, targets, dates and owners.
Why Materiality Matters
Khan et al. (2016) classified sustainability issues as material or immaterial for each industry and examined how firms' performance on each related to stock returns. Firms with strong performance on material issues outperformed those with weak performance, while performance on immaterial issues made little difference. The finding supports focusing effort where it matters to the business and its stakeholders rather than spreading it across every topic. GRI's standard on material topics similarly asks organizations to identify their most significant impacts on the economy, environment and people, through engagement with stakeholders, before deciding what to report and manage (Global Reporting Initiative, 2021).
Method
Sixteen candidate issues were drawn from the baseline and from industry sources, including energy and emissions, coffee grounds, cups and packaging, water, farmer income, certification, café job quality, roastery safety, food safety, pay equity, community giving, local purchasing and product quality. Customers rated each issue's importance through a short survey at the registers and online, with 300 responses. Employees rated them in a survey with 96 responses. Eight direct trade farmers and four grocery buyers were interviewed. Separately, the owners and managers rated each issue's effect on revenue, cost and risk. Ratings were averaged on a five-point scale for each axis.
The Materiality Matrix
Plotting stakeholder importance against business importance placed five issues in the upper right. Café job quality, including pay, hours and scheduling, scored highest on both axes, 4.6 for stakeholders and 4.7 for the business, reflecting both employee views and the cost of 92 percent turnover. Farmer income scored 4.4 and 4.1, driven by customers and grocery buyers. Coffee grounds and cups scored 4.2 and 3.8, energy and emissions 3.9 and 3.7 and food safety 4.5 and 4.8. Food safety is material but already well managed under existing compliance, so it is monitored rather than given a new goal.
Issues Below the Line
Several issues scored lower. Water use, important in many industries, ranked low because cafés and the roastery use modest amounts and Denver's water utility already sets conservation requirements. Community giving was valued by customers but rated low by managers for business effect. Local purchasing of pastries and milk was moderately important. These issues are not ignored; they will be reviewed each year and could rise if conditions change, such as a drought or a new customer requirement. Separating them now keeps the strategy focused.
Principles for the Goals
Each goal follows the same rules. It names a measure, a baseline from the second paper, a target and a date. It is absolute where the framework's natural case calls for limits, such as total emissions, and intensity-based only where growth makes absolute targets misleading, such as turnover. It has an owner. And it can be checked from records the company keeps or will begin keeping. Goals that cannot be measured yet start with a data goal, which sets the date by which the company will have the information needed to set a performance target.
Goals for Café Jobs
Goal one: reduce café turnover from 92 percent in 2025 to 60 percent by 2028 and 50 percent by 2030, owned by the director of café operations. Goal two: raise the share of baristas eligible for health insurance from about 40 percent to 70 percent by 2028, by offering more stable schedules and lowering the eligibility threshold, owned by the people director. These goals answer the most material issue directly and should pay back through lower hiring and training costs, the shared value logic chosen in the first paper.
Goals for Coffee Sourcing
Goal three: lift certified and direct-relationship purchases as a share of green coffee volume from 38 percent to 70 percent by 2030, owned by the green coffee buyer. Goal four, a data goal: by 2027, record and publish the price paid per pound to every direct trade farm or cooperative, compared with the market price at the time of purchase. Because research finds that certification does not always raise farmer incomes, the second goal makes the first one meaningful, letting the company and its customers see what farmers actually receive.
Goals for Waste and Energy
Goal five: divert 90 percent of coffee grounds from landfill to compost by 2028, up from 20 percent, owned by the operations manager. Goal six: cut mixed waste sent to landfill from 260 short tons to 160 by 2030, mainly through reusable cups for dine-in customers and a recycling program for milk cartons. Goal seven: reduce Scope 1 and 2 emissions, counted under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's corporate standard (World Resources Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2004), 40 percent in absolute terms by 2030, from 1,746 tonnes to about 1,050, even with four new cafés, owned by the chief operating officer. A supporting data goal sets 2027 for a first screen of purchased goods emissions.
Are the Goals Realistic?
Each goal was tested against the company's capacity. The turnover goal is ambitious but consistent with the roastery's 31 percent, which shows that more stable jobs are possible in the same company. The composting goal builds on a pilot that already works. The emissions goal is the hardest: the roastery's gas use cannot be cut 40 percent without new equipment, so reaching it will likely require a more efficient roaster with heat recovery, renewable electricity for the cafés or both. The fourth paper will cost these actions and decide whether the target holds.
Reviewing Materiality Over Time
Materiality changes. A new customer requirement, a drought, a change in coffee prices or a new law could move an issue across the line. The company should repeat the customer and employee surveys every two years and the farmer and buyer interviews annually, update the matrix and adjust goals if a new issue becomes material. The review should also ask whether goals are driving the right behavior; for example, a turnover goal could tempt managers to discourage departures in unhealthy ways, which exit interviews can reveal.
Conclusion
A materiality assessment combining surveys of 300 customers and 96 employees, interviews with farmers and grocery buyers and management ratings of business effect identified café job quality, farmer income, grounds and cups and energy as Front Range Roasters' most material issues, with food safety material but already managed. Seven goals follow, each with a baseline, target, date and owner, along with data goals where measurement is missing. Research on materiality supports this focus. The next paper turns these goals into an action plan with owners, budgets and timelines.
References
Global Reporting Initiative. (2021). GRI 3: Material topics 2021. https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/
Khan, M., Serafeim, G., & Yoon, A. (2016). Corporate sustainability: First evidence on materiality. The Accounting Review, 91(6), 1697-1724. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51383
World Resources Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2004). The greenhouse gas protocol: A corporate accounting and reporting standard (Rev. ed.). https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard
SUST 5063 Module 3 instructions, in plain terms
The third SUST 5063 paper usually asks you to identify an organization's material sustainability issues and set measurable goals. Expect to gather stakeholder views through surveys, interviews or existing research, rate each issue's importance to stakeholders and to the business and present the results, often as a matrix. Most prompts reward explaining why some issues fall below the line and setting goals for the material ones with a baseline, target, date and owner. Where data are missing, a data goal is a sound first step. Use the baseline from the previous module and cite research on materiality and any standard used in APA 7. Explain how stakeholder groups were weighted, since customers usually outnumber farmers or suppliers in any survey, and say how you kept the loudest group from deciding everything.
How the SUST 5063 Module 3 example is put together
The sample opens with research showing that performance on material issues matters more than performance on immaterial ones, then describes a survey and interview method covering customers, employees, farmers and grocery buyers. Five issues reach the upper right of the matrix, with scores shown, and issues below the line are explained. Goal principles follow, then seven goals: turnover, benefit eligibility, certified coffee, farmer price data, composting, landfill waste and a 40 percent absolute emissions cut. A realism test and a plan to review materiality every two years close the paper. Each goal names an owner by role, and the paper shows which earlier baseline figure every target is measured against, so progress can be tracked from the next module onward.
Where the points sit in the SUST 5063 Module 3 rubric
Materiality papers are graded on method, judgment and goal quality. Graders look for stakeholder input gathered in a stated way, issues rated on both stakeholder and business importance and a clear explanation of why issues are or are not material. Strong goals have baselines from the previous module, targets, dates and owners, and they distinguish absolute from intensity measures. Testing goals for realism and planning periodic review are often credited. Papers that list issues without evidence, set vague goals or ignore social topics tend to score lower. Cite materiality research and standards accurately in APA 7. Explaining how goals could create unintended behavior, and how that will be watched, shows mature judgment.
SUST 5063 Module 3 help from the desk
Materiality assessments need stakeholder evidence and careful judgment, and goals need numbers that hold up. We can help you design a short survey or interview guide, build the matrix and write goals with baselines, targets, dates and owners. Send the organization's baseline or ask for a composite case, include the prompt, and we will prepare an assessment and goals grounded in research on materiality. Businesses, nonprofits, hospitals and universities all work. Most papers are finished within two days, and survey questions can be included as an appendix if your instructor wants them. We can also help you present the matrix as a simple chart.
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 5063 and M.S. in Organizational Leadership sample papers
- SUST 5063 Module 1: Sustainability Models Comparison
- SUST 5063 Module 2: Sustainability Baseline
- SUST 5063 Module 4: Sustainability Action Plan
- SUST 5063 Module 5: Sustainable Business Plan
- HRM 5473 Module 2: Worker Classification Analysis
- SUST 5003 Module 4: Social Business Model Comparison
- SUST 5023 Module 4: Sustainability Governance Review
- DIV 5013 Module 3: Psychological Safety Assessment
SUST 5063 Module 3 questions, answered
What does SUST5063 Module 3 usually ask for?
Module 3 of SUST5063 usually asks you to identify an organization's material sustainability issues and set measurable goals for them.
What is a materiality assessment?
A process that ranks sustainability issues by their importance to stakeholders and to the business, often shown as a two-axis matrix.
Does focusing on material issues pay off?
Research by Khan, Serafeim and Yoon found that firms performing well on material issues outperformed, while performance on immaterial issues made little difference.
Where can I find a free SUST 5063 Module 3 sample paper?
This page has one: a Denver coffee company's materiality matrix with café job quality ranked first and seven 2030 goals with baselines, targets and owners.
What makes a sustainability goal measurable?
A named measure, a baseline, a target, a date and an owner, with data the organization can actually collect.