Search results

The development of successful Sustainable Development Goals realization cannot be divorced from regulations governing sustainability information. Therefore, limited research on the regulatory environment regarding sustainability reporting in the Malaysian context requires further examination to ascertain the current framework. This study aims to critically assess the Malaysian Companies Act 2016 and Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance (MCCG) to examine the regulatory environment regarding the sustainability reporting framework. The examination is done to determine the extent of support provided under the Malaysian regulatory environment for the said practice.

A doctrinal methodology that relies on the extant literature, statutory instruments and case laws complemented by content analysis is adopted to explore the current regulatory environment regarding sustainability reporting.

The findings indicate that the Companies Act 2016 has already paved the way for the integration of corporate sustainability through the Business Review Report (BRR). However, the application is voluntary and hence could lead to inconsistent implementation. The MCCG has introduced the integrated reporting practice, but the application is limited to large companies on “apply and report” approach. This practice is voluntary to other types of companies, which diminishes the importance of sustainability reporting and gives rise to doubt about its efficiency in addressing sustainability in the long term. The current framework for sustainability reporting cannot be considered satisfactory, given the significance of sustainable development to the Malaysian economy and society, due to a lack of appropriate legal obligations.

This study is presently amongst the available legal literature on sustainability reporting practice in Malaysia, adding to its originality. This paper hopes to stimulate discussion among academicians on incorporating sustainability principles in the Companies Act 2016 and expanding directors’ duties.

This paper explores organization-level racialized work strategies for maintaining racialized organizations (Ray, 2019). It focuses on intentional actions to maintain dominant racial norms, demonstrating how work strategies are informed by dominant racial structures that maintain racial inequities.

We compiled a chronological case study (Yin, 2012) based on 168 news media articles and various organizational documents to examine responses to athlete protests at the University of Texas at Austin following the death of George Floyd. Gioia et al.’s (2013) method uncovered how dominant racial norms inform organizational behaviors.

The paper challenges institutional theory neutrality and identifies several racialized work strategies that organizations employ to maintain racialized norms and practices. The findings provide a framework for organizations to interrogate their strategies and their role in reproducing dominant racial norms and inequities.

In 2020, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement was reinvigorated within sporting and corporate domains. However, many organizations engaged in performativity, sparking criticism about meaningful change in organizational contexts. Our case study examines how one organization responded to athlete activists’ BLM-fueled demands, revealing specific racialized work strategies that maintain structures of racism. As organizations worldwide disrupt and discuss oppressive structures such as racism, we demonstrate how organizational leadership, while aware of policies and practices of racism, may choose not to act and actively maintain such structures.

In an era where health professionals are increasingly demanding, and communicative skills are one of the keys to improve the relationship with the patient. The communicative competencies of assertiveness, clarity in verbal and non-verbal language, and positivity, based on the positive construction of the patient’s health path, improve the therapeutic relationship, as well as the relationship between professionals in the world of health complexity. The ACP Model is validated with extensive application by hundreds of professionals in Portugal who use it daily. Active learning is one of the most effective means of raising awareness and involving the professionals who are learning and implementing the ACP Model.

The purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between employer and employees in a public power sector undertaking through the validation of CODE (compensation, organizational justice, dispute resolution and employee empowerment) and PLE (workforce productivity, employee loyalty and employee engagement) model.

A hypothesized research model was developed and validated by using structural equation modeling (AMOS 20). In total, 303 responses were accumulated by administering a structured questionnaire among the employees of a state-owned power sector.

The results revealed that a harmonious climate of employee relations is prevailing in the public power utility. Additionally, the findings suggest that the CODE and PLE model of employee relations are found to be positive and significant by investigating the impact of compensation, organizational justice, dispute resolution and employee empowerment as the predictors; and workforce productivity, employee loyalty and employee engagement as the critical outcomes of employee relations.

The study recommends some plausible insights for practitioners, decision-makers and policy formulators to develop strategies and policies for nurturing congenial employee relations and also to cultivate a facilitative work environment for generating contented and competent manpower.

Validation of CODE and PLE model of employee relations in the new perspective of power sector undertaking is an epoch-making and novel contribution that offers significant empirical evidence to the extant literature. Moreover, the exploration of employer–employee relations in this context is a unique and innovative effort toward existing research.

This study draws parallels between the Major and Johnson eras to reclaim a discursive space beyond the media and political battlefields to examine long-term systemic failure of government PR.

As part of a wider study into government communications from 1979 to date, this paper draws on evidence from government archives from the 1990s, as well as contemporary accounts, official documents, media accounts, memoirs and biographies, to examine the PR record of two Conservative administrations divided by three decades.

News management during the Major premiership is worth serious scrutiny, not just as an interlude between two media-friendly Prime Ministers, Thatcher and Blair, but in comparison to Boris Johnson's struggle to contain the news narrative between 2019 and 2022. Both administrations experienced terminal reputational crises during their closing years but their means of managing the news were counter-productive and damaging to public trust (65).

Does this failure in public communication illustrate a systemic dysfunction in government-media relations and, if so, what is the role of government PR in these circumstances?

This article uses a comparison between fixed and moving variables associated with two very different administrations to identify the causes of ongoing systemic failure in government communication.