BUSM3199: Ethics, CSR and Corporate Governance in Practice Industry Focused: Ethics & Governance Report, SUSS, Singapore

Ethics, CSR and Corporate Governance in Practice – Industry Focused Report
Assessment task details:
An article “Singapore corporate governance worse than in neighbors Malaysia and Thailand more transparent than a financial hub, study finds” references a study that assesses corporate governance areas covering business ethics, including internal and external commitments against corruption, as well as reporting and monitoring. Article link –

A key statement for students to consider, out of the article, is “In Singapore companies — and I’m not so sure how to put this — there seems to be a reticence, a reluctance, to make disclosures”.

The articles above make uncomfortable reading, as it poses significant reputational damage.

For this assignment, put yourself in the position of being an external advisor or consultant, appointed by a medium-sized, non-listed Singapore-owned company with regional manufacturing links. As part of this consultancy brief, you have been directed to investigate whether concepts of Corporate Social Responsibility may provide future direction. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is generally understood to mean that companies have a degree of responsibility not only for the economic consequences of their activities but also for social and environmental implications.

Students are to write a researched report, reframing this situation through the perspective of Corporate Social Responsibility to set a higher-order agenda for Corporate Governance. In this report, devote thought and well-grounded arguments to the company, drawing on Stakeholder Salience.

Reflecting on the course, draw upon their learnings from this semester, the theories which have been discussed, to consider why Singapore companies seem to be reluctant to make disclosures.

Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the different perspectives. You should consider. How can organizations and specifically organizational boards be made more accountable?

(Schillemans and Bovens 2019)? From accountability (Schillemans and Bovens 2019) and stakeholder (Freeman 2008; Mitchell et al 1997) perspectives, what are the strengths and weaknesses of the extant governance models?

Drawing on course literature and concepts (for example Psaros 2008; Mitchell et al 1997; Boyd et al 2011; Morck, and Yeung, 2003; Young et al 2008) critically address these questions by interrogating literature on the following alternative governance models and structures (Government Business Enterprises (GBEs)/State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs), cooperatives, unitary boards, dual-tier boards/codetermination/Works Councils).

Your answer must discuss principles that might apply to all models and draw on the following literature: stakeholder value (Freeman 2008), Government Business Enterprises (GBEs) (Bovens 2019; Henderson & Clarke 2016), co-operatives (Erassti et al 2017; Cook 1995), and codetermination on boards & works councils/dual boards (Jackson & Muellenborn 2012; Frege 2005, 2002; Hertig 2006).