Scoring Debrief

Each choice made consists of a score split into three areas. These areas are economic, environmental, and social. Each of these areas has five subcomponents, and scoring is ranked based upon improvement (for pros) and decline (for cons). Through this, there is a maximum of five positive and five negative points to be scored for each area within each choice made. However, as no choice is perfectly positive or negative, this means scores will sit between +5 and -5 for each of the areas.

The purpose of the game is to have people think about the pros and cons, weighing them against each other. This is within the subcomponents and between the areas. While some choices will weigh heavily toward a positive score in one subcomponent, it is possible there is a negative score associated within a different subcomponent. Alternatively, some choices may have lower weights in all subcomponents, yet this could result in a higher score due to the lack of loss. It is up to the individual to decide which of these is the better overall outcome.

It is important to note that the scores are based upon the intention of the choice, not the outcome. As there is always the possibility of unintended consequences, with choices not working out due to external factors, the scoring is based upon what would happen in the ideal outcome if the choice were made.

As the focus of the areas differ between the actors, the five subcomponents are linked to their roles. Information about each can be found below:

The Company

Economic points for the company were based upon the five following subcomponents:

1) Innovation and R&D investment.

2) Financial accountability and ethical practices.

3) Profitability and return on investment.

4) Stakeholder engagement and reporting.

5) Technology upgrading.

Environmental points for the company were based upon the five following subcomponents:

1) Sustainable materials.

2) Carbon emissions and energy usage.

3) Water and chemical management.

4) Waste management.

5) Local health of humans and animals.

Social points for the company were based upon the five following subcomponents:

1) Labour rights and fair wages.

2) Worker safety and conditions.

3) Diversity and inclusion.

4) Community engagement.

5) Product responsibility and transparency.

The Worker

Economic points for the worker were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Income and financial security.
  2. Social security and bonuses.
  3. Compliance with company policy.
  4. Trade union membership and collective bargaining participation.
  5. Local benefits for individuals and the surrounding communities.

Environmental points for the worker were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Waste management.
  2. Environmental awareness.
  3. Local health of humans and animals.
  4. Local environmental improvements.
  5. Circularity and other environmental practices.

Social points for the worker were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Fairness and team respect.
  2. Health and safety compliance.
  3. Community involvement and volunteering.
  4. Professional development and skills training.
  5. Local community empowerment and well-being.

The Government

Economic points for the government were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Industrial policy.
  2. Technology upgrading, support, and R&D investment.
  3. Anti-corruption measures and transparency.
  4. Financial reporting, transparency, and accountability measures.
  5. Democratic governance and political freedom.

Environmental points for the government were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Climate action and emission reduction.
  2. Sustainable resource management.
  3. Renewable energy.
  4. Environmental conservation and biodiversity protection.
  5. Local health of humans and animals.

Social points for the government were based upon the five following subcomponents:

  1. Human rights and social equity.
  2. Healthcare and education access.
  3. Labour rights and working conditions.
  4. Gender equality and minority rights.
  5. Social welfare programs.

Understanding Your Score

In this game, your score is not about achieving a perfect result but about understanding how your decisions compare to others’ choices. Each decision you make contributes to three areas of sustainability—economic, environmental, and social—each of which is further divided into five subcomponents that reflect your role (worker, company, or government). Every choice carries both advantages and disadvantages, and your score represents how well you balance trade-offs across these dimensions. Scores for each area range between –5 and +5,

based on the intended effects of your decisions rather than their real-world outcomes, since sustainability choices often have uncertain or unintended consequences.

At the end of the game, your overall results will be shown relative to the rest of the class. This means there are no absolute “high” or “low” scores—rather, you can see how your approach ranks within the group and whether your decisions placed you in the top, middle, or lower percentile for each sustainability dimension. The aim is to encourage reflection, not competition: to help you see which priorities guided your decision-making, how your trade-offs compare to others’, and what this reveals about different ways of approaching sustainability challenges in complex value chains.

Score Reflections:

  1. What patterns do you notice in your scores across the economic, environmental, and social dimensions?
  2. How do your priorities and trade-offs differ from those of others in the class?
  3. What might your relative ranking suggest about your sustainability mindset, leadership style, or approach to balancing short- and long-term goals?
  4. If you were to play again, what would you do differently—and why?
  5. How might this way of reflecting on relative performance help you navigate real-world sustainability decisions in your future career?