Search results

In construction, stakeholders engagement is viewed from two major perspectives: management perspective and ethical perspective. Management perspective deals with capturing of information, increase in responsibility of the property by users, minimising conflict and support innovation while ethical perspective deals with decision-making for both inclusive and local, promote equity and build social capital. Apart from the two major view, stakeholder's engagement can also be viewed from another angle, which is social learning perspective. Social learning is an area where different stakeholders have the same place for discussion, acquiring of each other's values, agree on their own values and generate mutual objectives. Stakeholders make use of dialogue to create consciousness, changing of attitude and affect behaviours. Stakeholders' engagement are majorly viewed from either management perspective or ethical perspective but not from both perspectives. For us to achieve sustainability, there is need for an approach that will bring the two major perspective together.

Since its inception, the term ‘corporate governance’ (CG) has attracted mainstream attention, continuing to generate discussion among academics, practitioners and policy-makers. This heightened interest generally revolves around clarifying the principles of CG, both in theory and practice. This is particularly important in the context of emerging economies, where the sociocultural ethos and values often differ from those of most developed economies, where the CG concept was conceived and developed. In this vein, this chapter draws on empirical data to explore practical CG challenges faced by corporations in the Nigerian manufacturing and banking sectors. Nigeria is a country whose dominant national culture is one of high-power distance (HPD), which endorses servant-master relationships and encourages deference to authority. In this study, we found that HPD culture can undermine stakeholders’ ability to hold corporate executives to account on practices and behaviours that are antithetical to principles of corporate integrity and ethics, accountability, transparency, autonomy and stakeholder engagement, which in turn, leads to (and exacerbates) corporate misgovernance among businesses in the sectors. The theoretical and practical implications of the study are expatiated in the discussion section.

The chapter aims to explore the corporate social responsibility (CSR) policy domain at EU decision-making level, aiming to understand the nature of the participation shaping the CSR policy agenda co-design.

Building on a conceptual framework of participation, the chapter highlights the literature and policy views around the importance of EU CSR policy and how EU envisage the framework of the CSR policy co-design. By highlighting conceptual dimensions of the participatory governance, different levels of participation that shape the policy are evidenced. In particular, a case analysis emphasising the predominant role of the consultation approach in the decision-making process of the CSR policy is undertaken.

The findings shed light on the shift from the traditional passive participation in EU CSR policy decision making, based on purely communications towards consultation and multi-stakeholders participation. From the multi-stakeholder perspective, the EU Multi-Stakeholder Forum’s strategic relevance is observed, however, with no clear mechanisms to enforce its aims. Although the CSR policy is a core priority on the policy agenda, its voluntary approach justifies its early stages of implementation and fragmented use.

The research is qualitative, based on literature review and policy view. Further research directions could enrich the chapter.

The research contributes to the theoretical discussion around participation in a supranational context. Our insights shed light on the levels of participation and CSR policy goals and call for a critical debate on the EU policy co-design processes. Furthermore, through the lens of a case analysis, it sheds light on how EU CSR forum fits in with the current EU structure and its ‘principle of subsidiarity’, which states that decisions must be taken close to its citizens.

Implementing the sustainable development goals (SDGs) has proven a significant challenge for companies. While multinational enterprises (MNEs) have shown a real intention to contribute to these goals, they face major barriers in implementing the SDGs in their core business strategies. Extant academic studies on this phenomenon have primarily explored why companies “should” address the SDG agenda but have not (yet) explored what “works,” what does not “work,” and why. Therefore, evidence of a sizable gap between intention and realization is growing. Besides, there is a limited explanation for the existence of this gap and no validated implementation models that could help overcome it. Additionally, management research remains relatively fragmented. The diversity of existing theoretical and empirical frameworks makes it difficult to consolidate scientific and practical insights on “how” to guide companies to accelerate the global goals through their core operations.

This study is one of the first attempts to draw lessons from extant research on effective SDGs’ implementation strategies. For that, we upgrade the “SDG Compass,” which has been recognized as a leading framework for SDGs implementation in companies’ core activities. A critical assessment of the literature on the SDGs implementation has been conducted through a systematic literature review (SLR) and bibliometric analysis. This has helped us identify gaps in the SDG implementation practice and accumulate relevant insights supporting a more integrated and upgraded implementation framework: the SDG Compass+. This framework can advance coordinated theoretical and practical research by identifying the antecedents and critical factors of impactful SDG implementation strategies.

This case study was designed using the qualitative research method of interviews with key employees to investigate university social responsibility (USR) practices within Institut Catholique de Kabgayi (ICK) in Rwanda and to advance understanding of ways USR is defined against a postgenocide history, to identify its core components, and to track how it is communicated. Key respondents in accordance with their relationships with internal and external stakeholder groups were interviewed from among functions/departments of public relations, human resource management, community outreach, student services, courses and examination office, and the ombudsperson who plays an intermediary role between employees and employer in case of conflict. Findings suggest that for this higher education organization, on one hand, USR is understood mainly as stakeholder aid and Christian engagement benefitting employees, students, and community members according to specific needs. On the other hand, USR also is understood in terms of privacy protection and as a research driver that integrates openness, flexibility, and autonomy. Core components comprising USR are extension services, business incubation, student volunteer services, public relations activities, public works services, alumni relations, and employee outreach services. Means for communicating USR are face-to-face communication, partnerships, and mass media channels.

The purpose of this chapter is to describe the First Contact Pilot Program carried out in collaborative work between ISAGEN, a partly government-owned firm within the energy sector, and Universidad EAFIT, a private university in the city of Medellin.

The First Contact Pilot Program was developed following an existing model implemented at the Universidad Externado de Colombia, a private university located in Bogotá. Nevertheless this pilot program took methodology elements from ISAGEN and its suppliers relationship policy. Additionally content concerning the Global Compact and its principles was provided within the subject “Senior Seminar.” Students from this subject were voluntary participants in the pilot program.

The chapter provides a brief survey conducted by ISAGEN wherein some findings are visible. In this survey the First Contact Pilot Program participating entrepreneurs were asked about their motivations in order to voluntarily be part of the program and they recognized the great importance of this initiative for their businesses to change lots of practices and to become part of a global market culture.

This first version of the program was at the same time a way to invite other big organizations in the city of Medellin to take part in such activities. Massive participation, not only from the big players but also from small and medium enterprises, is necessary to achieve the goal of spreading the Global Compact’s principles. In the longer run it assures the creation of a fairer market place where all players in all sizes contribute to respect and promote a core of best practices in business.

One of the most remarkable implications by designing and implementing the pilot program was the fact of having interactions between International Business Students and local small and medium firm managers together talking about the Global Compact and the way it may improve many aspects within the firm and toward stakeholders.

A particular feature of this chapter to be considered as original and valuable is the establishing of networks for the dissemination of the Global Compact’s principles. Collaborative work among private and public sectors and with higher education institutions in fostering the transformation of business practices to achieve a fairer global market place constitutes the aim of this particular pilot program. At the same time this pilot program embodies the spirit of the UN PRME in giving the students of International Business the opportunity to develop their capabilities to become the future managers aware of the sustainability value for business.

Academic freedom has been the topic of debate and discussion since the concept evolved in academia. It has been a controversial topic that has different dimensions and explores the significance of this concept with relation to knowledge development and enhancement of student’s progress. Academic freedom expects faculty members to submit their ideas and research results to rigorous peer review and to experts who excel in the subject matter. The current debate surrounding the topic lacks clarity and has taken a different shape in different countries. In some countries, it has assumed the role of individual freedom, in some the collegial and institutional freedom, and in others it respects the freedom of students. Apart from teaching–learning, it is the freedom to conduct research and explore new avenues of knowledge. In this book, the concept of academic freedom is examined in the lights of globalization and challenges it poses to the development of higher education. We have seen that in recent years the concept of academic freedom has been threatened and some academics expressing their right of academic freedom were fired from their academic position, and in some cases, were imprisoned. Such case studies where academic freedom was silenced have been highlighted in this book. Authors have tried to explore how the concept has been balanced with transparency and accountability and what role did racial and gender biases played in pairing with rights and responsibilities. Case studies from Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan and Hungary have been presented along with other interventions and programs meant to support and uphold academic freedom.