Climate change-related corporate governance information : an explanation of the difference between the supply of and demand for such information

This study investigates the gap between the climate change-related corporate governance information being disclosed by companies, and the information sought by stakeholders. To accomplish this objective we utilised previous research on stakeholder demand for information, and we conducted in-depth interviews with six corporate representatives from major Australian emission-intensive companies. Having gained and documented a rich insight into the potential factors responsible for the current gap in disclosure we find that the existence of an expectations gap; the perceived cost of providing commercially sensitive information; the limited accountability being accepted by the corporate managers; and, a lack of stakeholder pressure together contribute to the lack of disclosure. In highlighting the gap in disclosure, this study suggests strategies to reduce the gap in climate change-related corporate governance disclosures.

Disclosure of climate change-related corporate governance practices

Based on a survey of climate change experts in different stakeholder groups and interviews with corporate climate change managers, this study provides insights into the gap between what information stakeholders expect and what Australian corporations disclose. This paper focuses on annual reports and sustainability reports with specific reference to the disclosure of climate change-related corporate governance practices. The findings culminate in the refinement of a best practice index for the disclosure of climate-change-related corporate governance practises. Interview results indicate that the low levels of disclosures made by Australian companies may be due to a number of factors. These include a potential expectations gap, the absence of pressure from powerful stakeholders, a concern for stakeholder information overload, the cost of providing information, limited perceived accountability for climate change, and preferring other media for disclosure.

The open kimono: How Intel balances trust and power to maintain platform leadership

A small group of companies including Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco have used "platform leadership" with great effect as a means for driving innovation and accelerating market growth within their respective industries. Prior research in this area emphasizes that trust plays a critical role in the success of this strategy. However, many of the categorizations of trust discussed in the literature tend to ignore or undervalue the fact that trust and power are often functionally equivalent, and that the coercion of weaker partners is sometimes misdiagnosed as collaboration. In this paper, I use case study data focusing on Intel's shift from ceramic/wire-bonded packaging to organic/C4 packaging to characterize the relationships between Intel and its suppliers, and to determine if these links are based on power in addition to trust. The case study shows that Intel's platform leadership strategy is built on a balance of both trust and a relatively benevolent form of power that is exemplified by the company's "open kimono" principle, through which Intel insists that suppliers share detailed financial data and highly proprietary technical information to achieve mutually advantageous objectives. By explaining more completely the nature of these inter-firm linkages, this paper usefully extends our understanding of how platform leadership is maintained by Intel, and contributes to the literature by showing how trust and power can be used simultaneously within an inter-firm relationship in a way that benefits all of the stakeholders.

Securities market regulators’ use of the ‘please explain’ queries sanction and its power of compliance

The aim of this study is to investigate the compliance impact of price queries issued by a securities market operator to its participating firms. Market operators in Australia and New Zealand, such as the Australian Securities Exchange and the New Zealand Securities Exchange, have the regulatory power in their rules to issue queries to its market participants to explain unusual fluctuations in trading price or volume in the market. The operator will issue a price query where it believes that the market has not been fully informed as to price relevant information. Responsive regulation has informed much of the regulatory debate in securities laws in our region. We posit that price queries are one strategy that a market operator can use in communicating its enforcement expectations to its stakeholder. However, whilst responsive regulation informs regulatory choices, an alternate view seeks to explain why participants respond to these regulatory strategies, and we use disclosure behaviour after price queries to test compliance behaviour

The 'Stakeholder Approach' to corporate governance and regulation : an assessment

The framework by which organizations are governed has been changed. A reason for this change is related with the force of stakeholders that compel the political power and the business society to review the ways in which companies are governed. Stakeholder thinking has gradually put this change at the center of research into business and society relations. Based on the stakeholder thinking, the corporate regulation framework has extended a new dimension in the business and society interface. This article assesses these issues.

Kaleidoscope : shaping a better future through a stakeholder approach to widespread organisational change

The main focus of ‘Kaleidoscope: Reframing evaluation through a stakeholder approach to sustainable, cultural change in Higher Education’ is to develop a set of principles to guide user-led engagement in widespread organisational change and maximise its impact. The word kaleidoscope represents the unique lens through which each institution will need to view their cultural specificity and local context through an extensive process of collaboration and engagement, followed by communication and dissemination. Kaleidoscope has particular relevance when new approaches to learning and teaching evaluation are introduced by tertiary institutions. Building on the Reframe Project, which involved three years of user-led consultation and was designed to meet stakeholders’ needs, QUT successfully introduced a new evaluation framework in 2013 across the university. Reframe was evidence based, involved scholarly reflection and was founded on a strong theoretical framework. The evolution of the evaluation framework included analysis of scholarly literature and environmental scans across the higher education sector (Alderman, et al., 2012), researched development of conceptual theory (Alderman, et al., in press 2013), incorporated the stakeholder voice and framed within project management principles (Alderman & Melanie, 2012). Kaleidoscope’s objectives are for QUT to develop its research-based stakeholder approach to distil the successful experience exhibited in the Reframe Project into a transferable set of guidelines for use by other tertiary institutions across the sectors. These guidelines will assist others to design, develop, and deploy, their own culturally specific widespread organisational change informed by stakeholder engagement and organisational buy-in. It is intended that these guidelines will promote, support and enable other tertiary institutions to embark on their own projects and maximise the impact. In correlation with a our conference paper, this round table presents the Draft Guidelines and Framework ready for external peer review by evaluation practitioners, as part of Kaleidoscope’s dissemination (Hinton & Gannaway, 2011) applying illuminative evaluation theory (Parlett & Hamilton, 1976), through conference workshops and linked round table discussions (Shapiro, et al., 1983; Jacobs, 2000).

A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning

Scenario planning is a method widely used by strategic planners to address uncertainty about the future. However, current methods either fail to address the future behaviour and impact of stakeholders or they treat the role of stakeholders informally. We present a practical decision-analysis-based methodology for analysing stakeholder objectives and likely behaviour within contested unfolding futures. We address issues of power, interest, and commitment to achieve desired outcomes across a broad stakeholder constituency. Drawing on frameworks for corporate social responsibility (CSR), we provide an illustrative example of our approach to analyse a complex contested issue that crosses geographic, organisational and cultural boundaries. Whilst strategies can be developed by individual organisations that consider the interests of others – for example in consideration of an organisation's CSR agenda – we show that our augmentation of scenario method provides a further, nuanced, analysis of the power and objectives of all concerned stakeholders across a variety of unfolding futures. The resulting modelling framework is intended to yield insights and hence more informed decision making by individual stakeholders or regulators.

Food waste, power, and corporate social responsibility in the Australian food supply chain

By examining corporate social responsibility (CSR) and power within the context of the food supply chain, this paper illustrates how food retailers claim to address food waste while simultaneously setting standards that result in the large-scale rejection of edible food on cosmetic grounds. Specifically, this paper considers the powerful role of food retailers and how they may be considered to be legitimately engaging in socially responsible behaviors to lower food waste, yet implement practices that ultimately contribute to higher levels of food waste elsewhere in the supply chain. Through interviews with key actors in the Australian fresh fruit and vegetable supply chain, we highlight the existence of a legitimacy gap in corporate social responsibility whereby undesirable behaviors are pushed elsewhere in the supply chain. It is argued that the structural power held by Australia’s retail duopoly means that supermarkets are able to claim virtuous and responsible behaviors, despite counter claims from within the fresh food industry that the food supermarkets’ private quality standards mean that fresh food is wasted. We argue that the supermarkets claim CSR kudos for reducing food waste at the expense of other supply chain actors who bear both the economic cost and the moral burden of waste, and that this is a consequence of supermarkets’ remarkable market power in Australia.