Corporate social reporting in Malaysia: a qualitative approach

This paper examines corporate social reporting in Malaysia from the public relations perspective of issues management. Data was derived from case studies of four relatively high impact companies in Malaysia, two owned by multinationals and two Malaysian-owned. An obvious continuum of corporate social reporting practice is apparent with one multinational adopting comprehensive corporate social reporting, the other minimal social reporting within Malaysia (though the parent company reports elsewhere), one Malaysian company engaging in selective disclosure, and the other expressing reservations about this so-called ‘new business’ concept of corporate social responsibility and reporting. Although company representatives interviewed were aware of trends toward increased disclosure, most reflected a desire to shun corporate social responsibility and reporting, in this case, of moral obligations. Our analysis affirms the possibility of the urge to push aside social reporting obligations re-emerging recently as a key aspect of corporate legitimation in Malaysia, as is occurring elsewhere

Caron Taurima and Carich: Entrepreneurial success?

Caron Taurima was founder and chief executive of Carich Training Centre Limited, a computer and English language training provider based in New Zealand. Named Ernst & Young New Zealand Entrepreneur of the Year in October 2003, Taurima became the much-maligned owner of a collapsed company just three weeks later. What happened? And what can be learnt from a situation like this? How do you define entrepreneurial success? And what processes might you follow if you are ever involved in organising or judging these kinds of business awards

Pushing the boundaries: the limits and limitations of new public management

This paper considers the limitations and boundaries of new public management (NPM) through a case study on activity within Transpower, a New Zealand state-owned enterprise (SOE). The case highlights complexities of NPM in practice, and reveals inconsistencies between structured theoretical principles and less structured reality on the fringes of NPM. An assessment of NPM reveals blurred lines and boundaries within NPM frameworks, with implications for public sector organisations such as SOEs, government, and other external stakeholders. Despite regulations and guidelines, the reality of NPM is such that SOE managers may push the boundaries beyond the point where the shareholders and public are comfortable. Thus, a key challenge of NPM involves finding a balance between commercial freedom and external stakeholder acceptability

Who's afraid of the dark? Transpower New Zealand Ltd

On 12 June 2006, the lights went out in New Zealand’s largest city and major commercial centre, Auckland. Business was disrupted and many thousands of people inconvenienced. The unscheduled power cut was the latest in a series of electric power problems in New Zealand over the past decade. Attention turned to state-owned enterprise [SOE] Transpower, which was in charge of maintaining and developing New Zealand’s national electricity grid. The problem of 12 June was traced to two shackles in poor condition, small but essential parts of the electricity grid infrastructure. Closer examination of New Zealand’s electricity sector indicated these shackles were merely the tip of a power supply iceberg. Transpower’s Chief Executive, Ralph Craven, was now answerable to the Prime Minister for the issues creating the problems, and a workable solution to fix them. Transpower Chief Executive Ralph Craven needed to produce answers that went well beyond the problem of the two faulty shackles. The power crisis had brought to the fore wider issues of roles, responsibilities, and expectations in relation to the supply of electric power in New Zealand. Transpower was contending with these issues on a daily basis; however, the incident on 12 June publicly highlighted the urgent need for solutions that served the stakeholders in this critical industry

Academia accommodating plagiarism? Surely not!

In April 2010, Senior lecturer A discovered a new article on strategic entrepreneurship that contained her own words and paragraphs, published under the name of two complete strangers. Over the next eight months, in search of a just outcome, A contacted various people and institutions involved: the journal editor and publisher, and more than 20 academics and academic managers at five universities located in four different countries, including vice chancellors, rectors, and university professors. While nobody disputed the plagiarism (which involved at least three documents and more than 50 pages of text, tables, and figures), most were reluctant to act. Disillusioned by institutional responses, A had to decide whether to continue pursuing a just outcome at the risk of damaging professional relationships (and her future career), or whether to accept the status quo. She wondered what it would take to change the system to genuinely reject plagiarism

Inclusiveness incorporated characterisation of stakeholders and partners in annual reports

This paper contributes to descriptive theory of stakeholder identification and salience, providing evidence of distinctions made by companies in respect of those they refer to as ‘stakeholders’ and ‘partners’. Combining content and discourse analysis of annual reports, the paper reveals a vague and all-inclusive characterisation of stakeholder relationships occurring alongside a more detailed representation of partnerships with select groups, mostly relating to explicit commercial dealings or specific projects. Intimacy and mutuality – and an apparent lack thereof - distinguish those the companies refer to as ‘stakeholders’ from their ‘partners’. It is concluded that the threshold differentiating stakeholders from partners bears greater scrutiny in defining spheres of stakeholder salience than does the previously emphasised question of who (or what) is a stakeholder

Exposing students to the potential and risks of stakeholder engagement when teaching sustainability: A classroom exercise

In-class, stakeholder negotiation exercises are proposed as a means of students experiencing and reflecting critically on the potential and the risks of an increasingly popular mechanism for advancing sustainability—stakeholder engagement. This article reviews the theoretical framework for stakeholder engagement and for an issue-based rather than firm-centric approach to classroom stakeholder negotiation exercises. An example of a classroom exercise is given as the basis of a possible template for replicating the exercise. This assists students to recognize the potential and risks associated with stakeholder engagement at individual, organizational, and societal levels