| University | Open Polytechnic (OP) |
| Subject | BSNS5001 Organisations in an Aotearoa New Zealand Context |
BSNS5001 Assessment 2
Weighting
35%
Learning outcome
2 Analyse how bicultural partnerships can influence operational business activities and relationships in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Instructions
Complete and submit your assessment according to the Open Polytechnic’s Assessments web page. This includes information on academic integrity, formatting, word limits and referencing.
- Include your name, student number and the assessment number.
- Number your pages.
Submission
- Submit your assessment in one or two files (refer to the Task 2 options).
- Submit your work through your iQualify course.
- Emailed assessments will not be accepted.
- You will receive an automated notice advising you of your successful submission.
By submitting your assessment, you confirm that it is your own original work.
Assessment Overview
In Assessment 1, you explored how different types of organisations in Aotearoa New Zealand operate, including Fonterra as an example of a co-operative enterprise. That assessment focused on purpose, key stakeholders, ownership and operational influences.
Assessment 2 builds on that foundation by examining who’s involved in Fonterra’s operations, who’s most influential among its stakeholders, and how bicultural partnerships guided by Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles shape relationships and operational activities.
This assessment will help you develop a strong understanding of how bicultural partnerships influence business activities and relationships in Aotearoa New Zealand. The insights you gain will also support your final assessment, where you will reflect on communication and ethical behaviour in professional and multicultural contexts.
There are four tasks to complete.
Task 1: Stakeholders – who’s involved
Requirement
Identify six of Fonterra’s stakeholders (two internal and four external) and label each stakeholder as primary, secondary, direct or indirect.
Add two-to-three sentence explanations for each stakeholder covering:
- their role or connection to Fonterra
- why you labelled them as you did
- the sources you used to identify them.
(25 marks)
(Word count guideline: 300 words)
Task 2: Power-interest grid – who’s most influential
Requirement
a. Create a power-interest grid that maps each of Fonterra’s six stakeholders (identified in Task 1) according to their level of power (influence) and interest (engagement) in the organisation.
b. Add two-to-three sentence explanations for each stakeholder covering:
-
- why you placed them where you did on the grid
- two sources you used to support your placement decisions.
You may hand draw and scan your power-interest grid or create it digitally (Word, PowerPoint or any similar tool). Focus on showing accurate plotting and explanations, not on graphic design. The explanations can either be added directly to the map or included in your main answer document.
(25 marks)
(Word count guideline: 300 words)
Task 3: Te Tiriti principles in stakeholder relationships
Requirement
Choose two stakeholders from your Power–Interest Grid. For each:
a. discuss how one Te Tiriti o Waitangi principle (Partnership, Protection or Participation) currently influences Fonterra’s relationship with that stakeholder
b. propose one realistic strategy to strengthen that relationship in alignment with the same principle, explaining why it would be effective in Fonterra’s context.
Use a different principle for each stakeholder. Support your discussion with credible, current and referenced evidence.
(30 marks)
(Word count guideline: 600 words)
Task 4: Bicultural partnerships in operational activities
Requirement
Discuss how bicultural partnership approaches grounded in Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles (Partnership, Participation, Protection) influence Fonterra’s wider operational activities and stakeholder engagement. Where relevant, identify multicultural partnership practices that complement these bicultural commitments.
Support your discussion with credible, current and referenced evidence.
(20 marks)
(Word count guideline: 300 words)
(Total word count guideline: 1500 words)
(Total marks: 100 marks)
BSNS5001 Assessment 2 Marking schedule
| Task 1: Stakeholders – who’s involved | 20–25 marks | 16.5–19.5 marks | 12.5–16 marks | 10–12 marks | 1–9.5 marks |
| Identify six of Fonterra’s stakeholders (two internal and four external) and label each stakeholder as primary, secondary, direct or indirect.
Add two-to-three sentence explanations for each stakeholder covering: • their role or connection to Fonterra • why you labelled them as you did • the sources you used to identify them. |
Correctly identifies six highly relevant stakeholders (two internal, four external) and labels each accurately as primary, secondary, direct, or indirect. The selections and labels are precise and fully consistent with Fonterra’s organisational context.
|
Identifies six appropriate stakeholders with accurate labels that correctly reflect their relationship to Fonterra. | Identifies six suitable stakeholders and labels them correctly. | Identifies most stakeholders correctly but includes some errors or missing labels. | Identifies only some relevant stakeholders; labelling is limited, unclear or incomplete. |
| Provides concise, welldeveloped explanations that clearly connect each stakeholder’s role, relationship and classification.
|
Provides clear explanations for all stakeholders linking role, relationship and classification. | Provides basic explanations for each stakeholder linking role, relationship and classification. | Provides explanations that are brief or lack consistent detail. | Provides minimal or unclear explanations that only touch on some stakeholders. | |
| Integrates credible, relevant sources effectively to support all stakeholder choices and labels. | Selects and uses suitable sources consistently to support most identifications and explanations, showing a clear connection between evidence and reasoning. | Refers to relevant sources to confirm stakeholder choices and classifications, demonstrating appropriate but basic use of evidence.
|
Refers to limited or general sources; connection to task not always clear. | Provides minimal or no reference to information sources. | |
| Task 2: Power-interest grid – who’s most influential | 20–25 marks | 16.5–19.5 marks | 12.5–16 marks | 10–12 marks | 1–9.5 marks |
| a. Create a power-interest grid that maps each of Fonterra’s six stakeholders (identified in Task 1) according to their level of power
(influence) and interest (engagement) in the organisation. b. Add two-three sentence explanations for each stakeholder covering: • why you placed them where you did on the grid • two sources you used to support your placement decisions. You may hand-draw and scan your power-interest grid or create it digitally (Word, PowerPoint, or any similar tool). Focus on showing accurate plotting and explanations, not on graphic design. The explanations can either be added directly to the map, or included in your main answer document.
|
Plots all stakeholders logically; placement clearly reflects each stakeholder’s actual level of power and interest. Grid is complete, clear, and professionally presented.
|
Plots all stakeholders logically with accurate placement of power and interest. Minor inconsistencies may be present but overall alignment is strong. | Plots stakeholders in generally logical positions that reflect their overall level of power and interest, with some inconsistencies or less clear placements. | Grid shows basic placement of stakeholders, but several positions are uncertain or only loosely linked to power and interest. | Grid is incomplete or placements mostly do not align with stakeholder power and interest. |
| Provides concise, welllinked explanations for all stakeholders that clearly justify grid placements. | Provides clear explanations for all stakeholders that justify grid placements. | Provides explanations for each stakeholder that support grid placements. | Provides brief or partial explanations for most stakeholders; but connection to grid placement is limited.
|
Provides short or general statements for some stakeholders. | |
| Accurately identifies and integrates two credible, relevant sources supporting decisions.
Sources cited clearly. |
Two sources identified; mostly relevant with minor citation gaps. | Sources mentioned but incomplete or inconsistent and evidence partly integrated. | Sources are minimal or unreliable. Shows limited connection to placement decisions. | No sources or untraceable evidence. | |
| Task 3: Te Tiriti Principles in Stakeholder Relationships | 24–30 marks | 19.5–23.5 marks | 15–19 marks | 12–14.5 marks | 1–11.5 marks |
| Choose two stakeholders from your Power–Interest Grid. For each:
a. Discuss how one Te Tiriti o Waitangi principle (Partnership, Protection, or Participation) currently influences Fonterra’s relationship with that stakeholder. b. Propose one realistic strategy to strengthen that relationship in alignment with the same principle, explaining why it would be effective in Fonterra’s context. Use a different principle for each stakeholder. Support your discussion with credible, current, and referenced evidence. |
Provides clear, detailed, and accurate analysis for both stakeholders, showing exactly how the selected principle shapes each relationship. Demonstrates strong insight into the nature of influence within
Fonterra’s context. |
Analyses both stakeholders clearly, explaining the influence of the selected principle with minor gaps in depth or contextual detail. | Analyses both stakeholders with mostly accurate explanations of how the selected principle influences each stakeholder. Links to Fonterra’s context are present but may be limited or not consistently clear across both stakeholders.
|
Provides a brief or general description of how the principle influences each stakeholder. | Refers to the principle with minimal explanation or unclear links to stakeholder influence. Statements are incomplete or do not address the influence on both stakeholders. |
| Integrates current, credible evidence that clearly supports each analysis. | Uses appropriate and recent evidence with minor gaps in integration or citation accuracy.
|
Includes some relevant evidence but limited depth or partial accuracy. | Provides minimal evidence; may rely on general statements without clear sourcing. | No credible or traceable evidence included. | |
| Proposes realistic, context-specific strategies for both stakeholders, clearly aligned with the selected principle. Provides well-reasoned justification explaining why each strategy would be effective within Fonterra’s operations.
|
Suggests appropriate, logical strategies aligned with the principle and offers good justification with minor gaps. | Suggests relevant strategies but with limited detail or brief reasoning. | Suggests general or partly relevant strategies; justification weak or unclear. | Provides unrealistic or absent strategies; little or no reasoning offered. | |
| Task 4: Bicultural Partnerships in Operational Activities | 16–20 marks | 13–15.5 marks | 10–12.5 marks | 8–9.5 marks | 1–7.5 marks |
| Discuss how bicultural partnership approaches grounded in Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles (Partnership,
Participation, Protection) influence Fonterra’s wider operational activities and stakeholder engagement. Where relevant, identify multicultural partnership practices that complement these bicultural commitments. Support your discussion with credible, current, and referenced evidence.
|
Provides a clear, detailed, and accurate explanation of how all three Te Tiriti principles are reflected in Fonterra’s operational practices. Demonstrates strong contextual understanding and links explanations to specific operational areas.
|
Accurately explains how Te Tiriti principles influence Fonterra’s operations with relevant detail and examples. Minor gaps in coverage or depth. | Provides generally correct explanations of some principles with partial linkage to operational practices. | Gives brief or general descriptions of bicultural influence; coverage limited to one or two principles. | Mentions Te Tiriti principles vaguely or incorrectly; lacks clear connection to operations. |
| Clearly describes how bicultural partnerships are strengthened by multicultural engagement in Fonterra’s operations. Shows insight into how these approaches coexist to support inclusion and equity. Uses relevant examples accurately.
|
Explains bicultural and multicultural connections clearly with some specific examples. Minor depth or linkage gaps. | Provides general mention of multicultural practices that support bicultural approaches but lacks detailed connection or examples. | Mentions multicultural or bicultural approaches briefly; relationships between them unclear. | Minimal or inaccurate reference to multicultural aspects or their connection to bicultural partnerships. | |
| Integrates credible, current evidence throughout discussion. Evidence supports analysis clearly and is correctly referenced. Discussion is logically structured and coherent. | Uses relevant, traceable evidence with minor citation or integration issues. Discussion is mostly clear and well structured. | Includes some relevant evidence but integration or referencing is inconsistent. Discussion is adequate though occasionally repetitive or disorganised. | Minimal evidence used; ideas are somewhat unclear or loosely connected. | No credible evidence or referencing; ideas are unclear or unsupported. |
Improve Your BSNS5001 Organisations in an Aotearoa NZ Context Assignment Grades
Hire NZ Native Experts 24/7.
Many students at Open Polytechnic find this BSNS5001 assessment difficult, especially when they have to analyse stakeholders, apply Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles, and link bicultural partnerships with real business practices. If you’re unsure how to structure your answers or use the right evidence, you can get expert open polytechnic assignment help from NZ Assignment Help, where solutions are written in a simple and clear human tone. You can also explore business assignment samples to understand the expected standard, and then choose suitable assignment help new zealand to get a customised, plagiarism-free solution for your assessment.
- BSNS5003 Business Functions Assessment 3 Brief 2026 | Open Polytechnic
- CON106 Structures for Residential Construction Projects Assessment 2 , 2026
- CQS103 Construction Planning & Construction Methodology Assessment 1, 2026 | Open Polytechnic
- BSYS701 Enterprise Information Systems Individual Assignment 2, 2026 | AUT
- 115.112 Accounting for Business Assessment 3, 2026 | Massey University
- 161.777 Practical Data Mining Assignment Project 2026 | Massey University
- BUSINESS 114 Accounting for Decision Making Assignment 1, 2026 | UOA
- LAWS621 Public Law Written Assignment Semester 1, 2026 | AUT
- LAWS605 Trusts Law Written Assignment Semester 1, 2026 | AUT
- HUMS5003 Ko Au Tēnei Assessment 2 Brief 2026 | Waikato Institute of Technology
