Ethics and Governance Board Paper

Ethics and Governance Board Paper

This assignment assesses Course Learning Objectives 1, 2, 3, and 6

CLO1: Integrate and apply contemporary Ethics & Governance issues in a business context

CLO2: Critically analyse and apply ethics to contemporary business practice

CLO3: Critically analyse key perspectives on corporate social responsibility and their application

CLO6: Effectively communicate ethics and governance concepts and arguments in a logical manner.

You are an ethics and governance officer working for a listed corporation CorpCo. The board of CorpCo has asked for a board paper (See Board Report Template for further guidance) to be prepared on one of the two contemporary corporate social responsibility (CSR)/business ethics issues below (Rio Tinto or Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship).

Select one of the two cases (Rio Tinto or Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship) for tabling at the next meeting of the company’s board of directors. Board members gain a great deal of information about the decisions they need to make through the board papers they receive prior to a board meeting. Board papers are often prepared by non-board members. Board papers cover a variety of functions, ranging from providing general information to a call for action. Section 180 of the Australian Corporations Act 2001 outlines that directors have a statutory duty of care to have read the board papers to be able to contribute effectively to board meetings. Board papers provide information to non-executive directors thereby reducing information asymmetry and somewhat resolve the principal-agent problem (connecting to Week 7 E&G Corporate Governance Theory – Psaros (2008)). Please refer to the E&G Board Paper TemplatePreview the document for further guidance on structure.

In the paper you are required to outline and then analyse the case using the concepts and ideas outlined in Assessment Task 1 including Husted 1993, Jones & Ryan 1998, Victor & Cullen 1998 and Monahan & Quinn 2008; but also Mitchell et al 1997, Gioia 1993 and other references to course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research. Your report should contain practical recommendations to the board of CorpCo on improving CSR/ethical decision making. These recommendations should be theoretically informed and evidenced.

Explore the interaction between organisational context and the CSR/ethical issue in the case chosen (considering the concepts of moral intensity, moral language and framing) and then address the following questions [Links to Cours Learning Objectives CLO1, CLO2 CLO3, CLO6 – see Table above for descriptions of CLOs]

What role do the internal and external factors on CSR/ethical decision making play within this case? (Consider the role that organisational schemas/scripts/moral language/ethical work climates/stakeholder salience play in CSR/ethical decision making within the case) [Links to CLO1, CLO 2, CLO3, CLO6] How can unethical/poor decisions be avoided? [Links to CLO 1, CLO 2, CLO6) Are ethical leadership, codes and training adequate responses to preventing similar problems at CorpCo or does the board need to do more? Critically discuss with reference to course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research. [Links to CLO 1, CLO 2, CLO3, CLO6) Make practical recommendations for the board of CorpCo to consider based on your analysis of the CSR/ethical decision making case chosen (these must be theory driven/evidence based). [Links to CLO1, CLO 2, CLO3 & CLO6)

the course material will be attached as well as the Board Paper template You are required to formulate an argument, undertake research to locate academic references, and support your argument with theories covered in this course. To formulate your argument, you are required to undertake research to locate academic references using online databases (e.g. EBSCO, Proquest, Emerald, Science Direct etc). You must to use at least 14 academic references to support your argument Topic 1: Rio Tinto destroys cave in the Juukan Gorge In 2020 Rio Tinto came under fire for destroying a cave in the Juukan Gorge of significant indigenous artefacts. The board of CorpCo would like a board paper with recommendations on the Rio Tinto case. Answer the assignment questions posed above and critically discuss with reference to course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research. Whilst you have to choose and make a judgement as to what concepts are evident in the case, you do have to include some discussion of the role of stakeholders on the decision using stakeholder salience (Mitchell et al 1997). Literature pointers: Gioia, D (1992) ‘Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities’, (Links to an external site.) Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.11(5), pp.379-389 Hepburn, S. (2020) Rio Tinto just blasted away an ancient Aboriginal site. Here’s why that was allowed, Available at: https://theconversation.com/rio-tinto-just-blasted-away-an-ancient-aboriginal-site-heres-why-that-was-allowed-139466 (Links to an external site.) [Accessed July 19 2020] Husted, B. W. (1993) ‘Reliability and the design of ethical organizations: A rational systems approach (Links to an external site.)’, Journal of Business Ethics, 12(10), 761-769. Jones, T.M. & Ryan, L.V. (1998) ‘The effect of organizational forces on individual morality: Judgment, moral approbation, and behavior (Links to an external site.) ‘, Business Ethics Quarterly, 8 (3), 431-45. Langton, M (2020) We need a thorough investigation into the destruction of the Juukan Gorge caves. A mere apology will not cut it Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/28/we-need-a-thorough-investigation-into-the-destruction-of-the-juukan-gorge-caves-a-mere-apology-will-not-cut-it?CMP=share_btn_tw (Links to an external site.) [Accessed July 30 2020] Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, (Links to an external site.) Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886. Monahan, S. C., & Quinn, B. A. (2006) ‘Beyond ‘bad apples’ and ‘weak leaders’ Toward a neo-institutional explanation of organizational deviance (Links to an external site.)’, Theoretical Criminology, 10(3), 361-385. Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988) ‘The organizational bases of ethical work climates (Links to an external site.)’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 101-125. Chicago Wahlquist, W. (2020) ‘Leaked tape reveals Rio Tinto does not regret destroying 46,000-year-old Aboriginal rock shelter to expand mine’, The Guardian 17 June 2020, (Links to an external site.)Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jun/16/rio-tinto-repeats-apology-for-blasting-46000-year-old-rock-shelter-to-expand-mine (Links to an external site.)[Accessed July 19 2020] Topic 2: Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship In 2020 Covid19 has rocked the Globe. The board would like a board paper with recommendations on the Greg Mortimer Cruise Ship case. Critically discuss with reference to course and assessment task 1 literature, theory, concepts, and further research. Whilst you have to choose and make a judgement as to what concepts are appropriate, you do have to include some discussion of the role of stakeholders on the decision using stakeholder salience (Mitchell et al 1997). Literature pointers: Alexander, H (2020) ‘Give limited information truthfully’ (Links to an external site.): The extrication of a cruise ship, The Age [Accessed 22 June 2020] Gioia, D (1992) ‘Pinto fires and personal ethics: A script analysis of missed opportunities’, (Links to an external site.) Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.11(5), pp.379-389 Husted, B. W. (1993) ‘Reliability and the design of ethical organizations: A rational systems approach (Links to an external site.)’, Journal of Business Ethics, 12(10), 761-769. Jones, T.M. & Ryan, L.V. (1998) ‘The effect of organizational forces on individual morality: Judgment, moral approbation, and behavior (Links to an external site.)’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 8 (3), 431-45. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts, (Links to an external site.) Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886. Monahan, S. C., & Quinn, B. A. (2006) ‘Beyond ‘bad apples’ and ‘weak leaders’ Toward a neo-institutional explanation of organizational deviance (Links to an external site.)’, Theoretical Criminology, 10(3), 361-385. Victor, B., & Cullen, J. B. (1988) ‘The organizational bases of ethical work climates’ (Links to an external site.), Administrative Science Quarterly, 101-125. choose which topic you can write properly and easy for you to do research. attachments are Course material where you will find answers to some of the questions above, the first assignment with the comment from the professor, board paper template where you will get the structure of the assignment, and the assignment criteria. please read the course material to understand the course and how to answer the questions.