Describe about the Corporate Governance and Ethics for Business Ethical Origin.
Case study Assessment Task Topic
Is it ethical or not for origin energy and other to obtain coal seam gas (CSG) against the will of landowners?
Background and Ethical Question
Background of the study
This particular study emphasis upon understanding whether it is ethical for origin energy in obtaining Coal Seam gas in against its landowners. Coal Seam Gas is one of the natural gas consisting of methane (Trong Tuan 2012). This is used on everyday basis for generating electricity, running home appliances as well as fuel business and industries. In other words, CSG provides more than 90% of Queensland Gas needs.
Coal Seam Gas is termed as way in describing the gas originates in coal seams in areas of subversive petroleum. These coal layers are found wherever from 200 meters to 1000 meters underneath the surface of earth (Tricker 2015). This usual gas bonds prefaces the surface of the coal as a thin film as well as alternative water pressure holding at some point of time. Coal Seam Gas (CSG) used from millions years as a by-product especially of decaying organic plant matters. On the contrary, Layers of sand as well as soil compresses of matter for millions of years combining of earth heat converted into natural gas (Soltani and Maupetit 2015). Coal Seam Gas wells differs from size and drilled into ground until it reaches coal seams covering the surrounding areas
Coal Gas Extraction
Figure: Coal Gas Extraction
(Source: Scherer, Baumann-Pauly and Schneider 2013)
Wells are drilled into the ground. In other words, they are pierced into the crushed reaching the coal seams. This occurs in the nearby areas lining with strengthen casing as well as cement barrier for protecting it as far as possible (Samaha et al 2012). Firstly, some water needs to be removed from well. This mainly decreases the weight from the dissident coal seams as well as allows gas for flowing into the well for the surface. In case of operations, surface areas fenced under Coal Seam Gas in around half the size for farming as well as grazing in desired form. Fraccing is one of the techniques used for the extraction of Coal Seam Gas. In this particular extraction process, CSG fails in flowing on free in terms of natural background for reaching the surface. This act as hydraulic fracturing used for gas flow in given surface areas (Rothaermel 2015).
Is it ethical or not for origin energy and other to obtain coal seam gas (CSG) against the will of landowners?
What are the key stakeholders and Corporate Social Responsibility?
Who are the firm stakeholders?
In this particular assignment, firm stakeholders come under generic categories. Stakeholders are an independent party taking interest for any business. Stakeholders affected by organizational actions as well as objectives and policies (Peters and Romi 2014). In other words, key stakeholders involve creditors, employees, government, suppliers as well as community and Directors.
What are the stakeholder’s stakes?
This technique is used by the Business Analyst for understanding the priority as well as level of attention by particular stakeholders (Ntim and Soobaroyen 2013). It helps in selection of proper communication approach for each of the stakeholder group.
Definite stakeholders have power, legitimacy as well as urgency that need to be communicated in the desired form. On the other hand, dependent shareholders lack essential control but poses required urgent and genuine claims (Nica 2013). Therefore, this needs to be managed for selecting ways in aligning from other project stakeholders for influencing the project.
Dangerous shareholders have power as well as earnestness but lack legitimacy. This can be seen as hazardous because it may option with coercion and violence at the same time (Nica 2012). On the other hand, dominant stakeholders pose both power as well as legitimate claims in an organization for robust influence in the given project. As far as demanding stakeholders are concerned, stakeholders pose urgent claims but lacks power and legitimacy in enforcing activities. It requires reducing investing and keeping updated information by proper communication (Müller et al 2015).
What opportunities and challenges do our stakeholders present?
There are various opportunities and challenges presented to the stakeholders can be potential for cooperation as threat. Opportunities help in building good working relationships with the stakeholders (Müller et al. 2013). On the contrary, challenges considers as representative of how the for handles with the key stakeholders. Stakeholders present under both opportunity as well as risk firms for how manager’s views as dichotomy in crucial component based upon the response by stakeholders
What responsibilities does the firm have towards its stakeholders?
Stakeholders have various responsibilities putting pressures in firms for responding for social issues in given ways. It widely expects things in advance dependent upon industry as well as location and other factors (Mason and Simmons 2014). These pressures are having positive effect starting from spurring firms for making changes benefiting its key stakeholders. Firms operating in the same industry involves stakeholders as well as organizational pressures in given way.
What strategies or actions should the firms take the best address stakeholders?
Some of the strategies or actions undertaken by firm addressing the stakeholder
Communication- Communication considers as the most visible manifestation of culture (Khan, Muttakin and Siddiqui 2013). Managers take into consideration various cultural differences in communication on matters concerning language, candor as well as context
Negotiations- Internal clienteles are the persons within the group who are mainly clienteles for meeting the needs of interior demands. This customer holds the power for accepting or rejecting work. Managers should negotiate and clarify the doubts in case of any kind of deliverables (Jo and Harjoto 2012).
Corporate Governance Discussion based on ASX 2010 principles and recommendations
Corporate Governance considers as the framework consisting of rules, relationships as well as process and system whereby authority exercises over control by the ASX listed companies. It majorly encompasses for mechanism by the ASX listed companies for control in account (Idowu, Capaldi and Zu 2013). In other words, Corporate Governance influences over objectives for the company in setting and achieving risk-monitoring activities. Effective Corporate Governance structures encourage companies in creating value for innovation and development for future analysis purpose.
Corporate Governance practices revolve around changing circumstances for company for tailoring for meeting the best interest of stakeholders (González and García-Meca 2014). In other words, Corporate Governance practices revolve around context for development in both Australia as well as overseas. ASX Corporate Governance Council recommendations for prevention in corporate failures in leading towards poor corporate decision-making
These activities are majorly intended in rendering reference point for major companies regarding corporate governance structures as well as practices (Carroll and Buchholtz 2014). Fundamentals in any of the corporate governance structure establish the role of Board and related Senior Executives. Principle 1 reveals the balance of skills as well as experience and interdependence of Board in given nature and company operations. In other words, Principle 2 reveals the basic need for integrity in and among influencing for company strategy as well as financial performance in aligning towards ethical decision-making process.
Meeting the information needs for modern investment community considers as paramount of accountability as well as attracting capital. Presentation of company financial as well as non-financial position aims at bringing process for safeguarding attributes both the internally and externally for company reporting system. It renders timely as well as balanced figures in relation with material matters. Principles 5 discuses on the rights of company owners for recognizing and upholding activities
Every business decision takes into consideration various elements for checking over uncertainty as well as carries out risk for managing activities through effective oversight and internal control (Jo and Harjoto 2012). This reveals rewards are also required for attracting skills in order to achieve performance expecting by shareholders in the most appropriate way.
Corporate Governance structures as well as practices continue for gaining importance for determination of cost of capital especially in global capital market. Most of the Australian companies should be well equipped for completing on global basis in maintaining for promoting investor confidence in and around Australia (González and García-Meca 2014). It is essential for understanding the fact for reviewing practices for ensuring continuation of reflecting local as well as international developments. It is promoted under high standards for gaining understanding over transparency regarding corporate governance practices in ASX listed companies.
Corporate Social Responsibility
In this particular assignment, CSR models have to be explained in minimizing the mistakes undertaken by business organization. Corporate Social Responsibility considers as corporations taking initiatives for assessing as well as taking responsibility for taking company effects on environmental as well as social wellbeing. In other words, these models are applicable in rendering efforts for going beyond by the regulators as well as environmental protection groups in an overall manner (González and García-Meca 2014). This particular aspect refers under corporate citizenship involving short-term costs for getting immediate financial benefit for companies. This reveals in promoting positive social as well as environmental change.
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility considers under corporate social responsibility incorporating both ethical CSR as well as altruistic in performing activities (Soltani and Maupetit 2015). This will be advantageous for community as well as rendering profit-using goodwill. Social Responsibility reveals the idea for company in order to embrace its social issues in focusing ways for profit maximization. On the contrary, social responsibility inculcates for developing business using positive relationship to society for operating purpose. Corporate Social investment defines under the contributions involving monetary, employee time as well as resources bringing benefits in directing for core business activities. CSR is one of the business approaches contributing towards sustainable development on delivering economic as well as environmental and social attributes. SAP approaches Corporate Social Responsibility ensures sustainable future concerning society as well as customers and company. It majorly focuses on talent, technology as well as capital on education and entrepreneurship for striving towards positive social change. This majorly concerns economic growth, innovation as well as job creation and community at the same time (González and García-Meca 2014).
In this particular assignment, ethical questions are listed whereby it is required in understanding the ethical implications (Mason and Simmons 2014). There is mentioned regarding the coal seam gas causing eruption in case of debating arguments. Anti CSG campaigners argues as there is not enough scientific evidence practicing harm water tables as well as environment and healthy living. Operators in this sector comes against strong opposition for development of Coal Seam Gas with the protestors for slow operational activities, Origin Chief Executive are of the opinion in opening the facts regarding Coal Seam Gas for circulating the truths. Coal Seam Gas has more than $60 billion investment for injecting new Queensland projects like creation for 10000 jobs from past financial years (Soltani and Maupetit 2015). In that case, Queensland Coal Seam Gas sector experiences for more than relevant growth for past 15 years under the Queensland Government. This act as a forefront of Queensland Petroleum industry
Ethical Analysis implies Queensland Coal Seam Gas sector for more than 20 years in comparison with New South Wales. AGL upstream gas group reveals the Australian Mining Queensland for maturing in the market concerned with Coal Seam Gas (Soltani and Maupetit 2015). New South Wales considers under immature coal seam gas industry at the same time. This is considered as the only coal gas project whereby AGL is issues for the particular State. This occurs under fellowship concerning processing attributes. In Australia, rights to minerals as well as resources below the land surfaces involving gas as taken by State as well as territory governments on behalf of Australian governments (Mason and Simmons 2014). This is in case of Origin as well as paying rights for exploring as well as devising resources in and across defined geographical tenures. These are the royalties for paying state on Gas in extraction of production in given terms.
At the end of the study, it is recommend that Coal Seam Gas mining considers under the invasive form in and within unconventional gas mining. This involves in case of gas wells as well as roads and pipelines by other infrastructural attributes. There are numerous risks as well as problems identified in invasive Coal Seam Gas gasfields. In this case, this involves encroachment on good farming land as well as disruption for other land uses in industries. Coal Seam Gas is one of the types of unconventional natural gas. It is made up with primarily form of methane gas with more than 95 to 97%. It is found under coal seams at depths in underground of 300m to 100m underground. This is referred as the coal bad methane at the same time. Coal gas Seam refers extracted by drilling a well on vertical basis with rock strata for reaching coal seam. In case of Coal Seam Gas operations, water need to be pumped from coal seam for lowering the pressure as well as allowing gas for flow of surface. Hydraulic farming considers under fracking or fraccing for stimulating as well as accelerating flow of coal seam gas. There are some of the significant concerns in association with hydraulic fracturing involving potential for contaminating water sources as well as causing earthquakes. In addition, it takes into consideration for contamination of aquifers regarding contamination of water supplies after seismic activity in the fracking process. These are the amount of water in coal seam gas varying from project to project. Coal Seam Gas behaving on identical basis for treatment facilities.
Carroll, A.B. and Buchholtz, A.K., 2014. Business and society: Ethics, sustainability, and stakeholder management. Nelson Education.
González, J.S. and García-Meca, E., 2014. Does corporate governance influence earnings management in Latin American markets?. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(3), pp.419-440.
Idowu, S.O., Capaldi, N. and Zu, L., 2013. Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Jo, H. and Harjoto, M.A., 2012. The causal effect of corporate governance on corporate social responsibility. Journal of business ethics, 106(1), pp.53-72.
Khan, A., Muttakin, M.B. and Siddiqui, J., 2013. Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility disclosures: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of business ethics, 114(2), pp.207-223.
Mason, C. and Simmons, J., 2014. Embedding corporate social responsibility in corporate governance: A stakeholder systems approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), pp.77-86.
Müller, R., Andersen, E.S., Kvalnes, Ø., Shao, J., Sankaran, S., Rodney Turner, J., Biesenthal, C., Walker, D. and Gudergan, S., 2013. The interrelationship of governance, trust, and ethics in temporary organizations. Project Management Journal, 44(4), pp.26-44.
Müller, R., Turner, J., Andersen, E.S., Shao, J. and Kvalnes, Ø., 2015. Governance and Ethics in Temporary Organizations: How Corporate Governance Influences the Temporary Organization. Proceedings of the IRNOP, pp.22-24.
Nica, E., 2012. Social Responsibility, Corporate Welfare, and Business Ethics. Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management, 1(1), pp.9-14.
Nica, E., 2013. Social Responsibility, Corporate Welfare, and Business Ethics. Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management, 1(1), pp.9-14.
Ntim, C.G. and Soobaroyen, T., 2013. Corporate governance and performance in socially responsible corporations: New empirical insights from a Neo?Institutional framework. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 21(5), pp.468-494.
Peters, G.F. and Romi, A.M., 2014. Does the voluntary adoption of corporate governance mechanisms improve environmental risk disclosures? Evidence from greenhouse gas emission accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(4), pp.637-666.
Rothaermel, F.T., 2015. Strategic management. McGraw-Hill.
Samaha, K., Dahawy, K., Hussainey, K. and Stapleton, P., 2012. The extent of corporate governance disclosure and its determinants in a developing market: The case of Egypt. Advances in Accounting, 28(1), pp.168-178.
Scherer, A.G., Baumann-Pauly, D. and Schneider, A., 2013. Democratizing corporate governance compensating for the democratic deficit of corporate political activity and corporate citizenship. Business & Society, 52(3), pp.473-514.
Soltani, B. and Maupetit, C., 2015. Importance of core values of ethics, integrity and accountability in the European corporate governance codes. Journal of Management & Governance, 19(2), pp.259-284.
Tricker, B., 2015. Corporate governance: Principles, policies, and practices. Oxford University Press, USA.
Trong Tuan, L., 2012. Corporate social responsibility, ethics, and corporate governance. Social Responsibility Journal, 8(4), pp.547-560.