Instructions and Submission: Problem Solving Case Study and Proposal Report

Social sustainability is an important factor to consider when starting up or designing a business since it considers safety concerns, corporate responsibility, and community involvement as key components. Several factors constitute social sustainability, including personal relationships, safety, health, the standard of living, freedom, community connectedness, equality, material affluence, achievements, environment and services, future security, and others. The concept does not focus only on short term wellbeing but considers factors such as diversity, understanding, equity, quality of life, opportunity, individual empowerment, and inclusion that are key to sustaining long term social wellbeing.

Sustainable development is a major standard for policymakers worldwide since there is a rising awareness to stop following the traditional paths for development. Sustainable development has three pillars, economic, environmental, and social factors working together, but social sustainability has been given little attention and implementation as other factors. Business and the community around the business must be in a good relationship; otherwise, social sustainability might not succeed (Haugsbakk 2007). Community engagement must be carried out to build the relationship, especially when the business or organization needs to make significant changes that affect the community, when the organization needs more information to base a business decision or when a change is likely to generate community outrage.

The reaction of communities to extraction activities has become more delicate, leading to delays, cancellation of projects, and closure of mining activities in many countries. As a result, companies get losses due to stalled projects, opportunity costs due to planned projects and reconciliation processes as a result of community outrage. A mining company is utilizing public relations methods such as contributing to school initiatives and community actions such as charities, donations, public sporting events, and many others to build community relations. However, despite the use of public relations methods to build community relationships, members of the community still accuse the company of hypocrites in their intentions. Therefore, there is a need to determine why the community is not satisfied with what the company is doing for them and find out why the public relations methods used failed. A company working in harmony with the community is an indication of improving social sustainability since it suggests that community factors are in consideration.

Against learning Reclaiming a language for education in an age of learning is based on the radical structuralist paradigm since it focuses on overthrowing the limitations placed on existing organizational and social arrangements. While four paradigms of information systems development support neo-humanism in embracing everything throughout the earth by seeking radical change. However, Thus, this methodology is based on neo-humanism since it recognizes the complexity and elusiveness of knowledge about human beings' means and ends.

Companies do not deal with objective economic reality but one that evolves, thus, there is no one with a privileged source of information, (Hirschheim and Klein 1989). Since they work with systems, companies should develop legitimate systems that meet the approval of the affected parties, especially the community. To achieve this, continuous community engagement and modification of critical.

To improve community relations, the company should use emancipator or social therapist to develop a system from within. Some conflicts are negotiable in neo-humanism but ineradicable in radical structuralism due to communication barriers that can only be addressed through fairness (Biesta 2005). For fairness, the system should be built from within by a social therapist and should improve human understanding and the rationality of human action by emancipating suppressed interests and liberation from unwarranted natural and social hindrances (Hirschheim and Klein 1989). Besides, the subjectivity of meaning and intersubjectivity of language use in other knowledge interest must be considered as an element in defining the system.

3.1 Mining-community conflict

Incidences of conflict between mining companies and communities hosting them are increasing (Brereton 2016). Protests against mining activities have led to interruptions of mining activities through permanent closure, suspension or delay of operations. Mining companies who consider social responsibility and sustainability debates play a leadership role in developing progressive ways of solutions to the problems (Bebbington 2014). Social responsibility makes all parties associated parties around the mining company satisfied minimizing cases of community outrage. The rise in mining company community conflicts raises questions on social responsibility, governance, environment, and local rights. Even though the two authors studied mining companies, they did not consider neo-humanism as a factor that can help minimize company-community conflicts.

Understanding risks and managing them safeguard assets, enhance production and service delivery, and enhances the ability to make proper decisions. Enterprise risk management framework is increasingly becoming important in providing ways to recognize and mitigate risks. It was first developed to manage risks associated with financial institutions and insurance companies. (Mohammad et al. 2017). With time, investment and liability risks extended to operational, technological, translational, and currency exchange risks. Enterprise risk management, if well implemented, enhance the value of a large business by reducing earning volatility, provide higher returns, and reduce the business cost of capital (Zou eta al 2017). Besides, to encourage implementation, relevant authorities have developed different frameworks; for instance, the Federation of European Risk Management Association (FERMA), a risk management standard (Mohammad et al. 2017). Mining companies need not only to concentrate on social sustainability but also implement a risk management framework to safeguard operations. However, Mohammad et al. (2017), narrowed the risk management framework to climate risk, which does not give a full picture of risks in a mining company.

Reputational risk refers to events that can lead to negative publicity or uncontrollable events that can impact the image of the company negatively. Workplace activities, CEO reputation, bad financial statements, poor community relationships, data retention failures, and product recalls can cause reputational risks. (Scott 2018). Reputational risk can be managed through measuring reputational risk to determine public perception, monitoring reputation, and carrying out campaigns and community engagements. Ignoring reputational risk can adversely affect a company’s operations and might lead to closure.

The project planning life cycle involves a sequence of phases through which a project plan must pass, defining all the tasks to be accomplished in each phase, and the team responsible for each phase. (Scott 2018). The number of sequences varies depending on the size of the project plan and the number of players involved in the process. It defines all the activities to be carried out at all stages and the teams responsible. A project plan that is inclusive and well-implemented leads to an accommodating project that satisfies all the players, including the community. However, Scott studied the project planning life cycle and reputational risk on campus, which might not be similar to mining companies’ risks.

Management of employees is very crucial for the development of a company. Both radical structuralism and neo-humanism should be incorporated in the development of systems to prevent employees from being partisan to the company-community conflict. Apart from being fair to employees as neo-humanism suggest, system developer should also side with management, (Hirschheim and Klein 1989). The system should rationalize the interests of the owners and management but against the workers' interests by changing instruments and intensity of work. They should be provided with the necessary working equipment, good working conditions, and not be overworked, but the system is developed to manage them.

Checks and balances on personal views should be guarded against biases to allow the occurrence of undistorted communication, which means that physical and social barriers should be identified and removed. Thus, during system development, in this case, a system should be developed from without by a warrior for social progress, but the system should raise ideological conscience and consciousness through organized political action and adaptation of tools and methods to different social class interests.

Radical structuralism favors the management and owners of a company. Using this strategy as a market campaign tool will lead to a backlash from the public. Radical structuralism does not incorporate views of workers and community members in the development of the systems, (Hirschheim and Klein 1989). Besides, the system developer is partisan and uses the system to minimize the power of workers by replacing some of them with machines (Haugsbakk 2007). Similarly, radical structuralism does not take views of consumers and the public during decision making resulting in a communication barrier that leads to backlash.

A risk management framework is a tool that helps process and integrates information into the business development cycle. It helps in identifying potential threats to a business or organization and also see to it that the identified risks are either eliminated or minimized. Additionally, whether you are running a small firm or a big agency, the working environment and the entire business is vulnerable, and so there is always a need for a comprehensive risk management framework (Carvalho and Rabechini 2015, 350). Overall, the framework ensures that the company’s capabilities and resources are implemented effectively and efficiently to manage threats and opportunities. 

           Electricity consumption has become a bigger contributor to establishing growing mining grounds. The urgency to reduce the power consumption of high electricity demand is seen as a means of mining profits and having a huge environmental impact. Moreover, there can be natural gas usage since a mining power station takes less time to start up than a coal or electricity fired station the change in renewable sources makes the company a good partner to the environment and the community it operates from as a whole (Giannakis and Papadopoulos 2016, 460). A life tracker of each underground miner is also very vital, and a quick first aid post underground. Overall, all machinery underground should be controlled in an office above the ground to reduce casualty risk.

           A risk management framework is followed in phases and with specific support groups. A taxonomy risk management is incorporated where there is the executive approach at the top of the taxonomy and the support from assessment groups, business continuity, and support service division who belongs to the bottom-up approach to have a flowing framework. The risk management framework involves five major phases. These include;

This assessment is where annual reviews are of business risks that are done by the senior management. Then the risks are identified by the groups and support service division. The risks should be based on particular operational needs and risks. Risks identification plays a critical role both at the operational and strategic levels (Naghdali et al., 2018, 70). The risks can be identified by having focused group discussions to brainstorm on the favorable approaches and develop a reflective SWOT analysis. Moreover, interviews can be conducted by the risk administrator. Notably, all risks must be identified for a proper strategic plan. Overall, this phase only identifies significant risks that could influence the community.

The identified risks are assessed without much control by looking at both the impact and probability. This phase helps identify the minor and major risks and separate them. The sieving is done based on risk arising and the likely consequences that may come with it. Normally, consequences are assessed depending on the operational and financial impact of the mining company. However, it would be better if the mining company assess significant consequences based on their reputation instead of their financial muscles. Overall, the company’s operations shall be determined by how it assesses its reputation effect, safety, and health risks.

           Risk modification actions are needed in this phase to be able to deal with unexpected step backs. Accountability is similarly mandatory with a workable time frame for the risk-taking. Additionally, each risk should have a plan on how to handle it. Moreover, all the identified risks can be through; implement risk management plans, evolving corresponding risk management plans in community and groups that define priorities, and dividing the planning and budgetary requirements to address major risks. Notably, it is important to aim at managing the risk rather than having a negative attitude towards it. Some risks can be avoided by choosing another alternative. Overall, mitigate the consequences by strategizing on their liability strength and their impact on the environment.

A summary of the company’s risk involved in risk management review is done by the risk, finance and resource committees. Significant incidences are reported to both the executive and the review committee; finance, risk, and finance. Additionally, annual reports that include operational services, community, and management risks are done by the respective committees (Andriof, Waddock, and Rahman 2017). The committees consequently do quarterly consultation and tracking to consolidate the issues together. Overall, this phase is where fraud and breaching cases are reported and any other malpractices.

The effectiveness of the risks through the treatment package is monitored in this phase. This segment aids in ensuring there are relevance and currency in the identified risks. Reviews on the actions are done independently to ascertain the strength and weaknesses (Barba et al., 2016, 975). Moreover, reviews on previous event exploration are managed in line with their success, misses, and failures. Overall, monitoring and reporting should be done regularly to ensure its effectiveness.

To avoid reoccurrence of the previous events, the company must set sample questions that might help them in the future. These questions must be logically arranged to at least achieve change. They 

1. WHO? They have to get who are the people directly affected by the company’s activities and initiatives. Who are the people and what role and position do those people hold. After a clear description of roles, which are evaluated by the risk management needed, the team will likely be able to succeed in establishing and growing with the community without backlashes.

2. HOW? After setting the roles based on risks, consequences, and plans needed, there should be policies based on questions such as, and how will the company do different roles and initiatives? How are will the company tackle reviews and feedback about them in the future? These how’s are clearly defining how both the company and the community should act to perform and achieve a conducive favorable environment and relationship. As it is supposed, for example, monitoring and reporting officer should be able to give clear feedback and reports to the executive body for deliberations.   

3. WHAT? What refers to a plan that should be done to achieve the mission of the company? What are the community’s benefits? And what are the long-term plans and the refining guidelines to a resilient company? The “what” questions are pacesetters that can help achieve the company’s goal.

If the organization does not want to believe the proposed risk management, they should come up with their proposals that are risk manageable, and the community can accept that since the community is the sole determinant of a progressive company. The company can similarly organize a one to one dialogue with the people who reached out to them on social media to determine the real problem and the gap that needs to be addressed. Additionally, the organization can come up with its risk management framework and present it to the community and get the people to participate in disseminating the plans. However, it is always advisable to work with what the community wants. They are the community gatekeepers and failure to engage them directly, and firstly to identify the gaps that can lead to closure and collapse of a business in a night. Overall, any formula to address these risks and gaps can be achieved through partnerships between the service provider who is the mining company, and the end-user, who is the community.

1. What is the organization’s most exciting success story? How did your initiative or service impact the community?

2. What is your major setback in your business? What is that change you would make if given a chance to change things?

3. Does the community’s resistance make your business not run smoothly?

4. Was this set back the most significant argument in the company? Employees should reflect and give an opinion on this.

5. What lessons have you learned from this situation? What advice do you think is the best?

6. What is the biggest mistake the company has made? And how does that impact plans?

7. Discuss your market and management strategy. What channels and strategy do you wish to employ?

Andriof, J., Waddock, S., Husted, B. and Rahman, S.S., 2017. Unfolding stakeholder thinking 2: Relationships, communication, reporting and performance. Routledge.

Barba, F.C., Sanchez, G.M.D., Segui, B.S., Darabkhani, H.G. and Anthony, E.J., 2016. A technical evaluation, performance analysis and risk assessment of multiple novel oxy-turbine power cycles with complete CO2 capture. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, pp.971-985.

Bebbington, A 2014. Socio-environmental conflict: an opportunity for mining companies. J. Clean. Prod. 84, 34.

Biesta, G 2005, ‘Against learning. Reclaiming a language for education in an age of learning,’ Nordic Studies in Education, vol. 25, pp. 54-66.

Brereton, D, Arts, D & Sturman, K, 2016. Towards a Vision for Mining in Peru 2030.

Carvalho, M.M.D. and Rabechini Junior, R., 2015. Impact of risk management on project performance: the importance of soft skills. International Journal of Production Research, 53(2), pp.321-340.

documents/peru_mining_vision_15_july_draft.pdf⟩).

Giannakis, M. and Papadopoulos, T., 2016. Supply chain sustainability: A risk management approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 171, pp.455-470.

Haugsbakk, G., & Nordkvelle, Y. (2007). The Rhetoric of ICT and the New Language of Learning: A Critical Analysis of the Use of ICT in the Curricular Field. European Educational Research Journal. 6, 1-12.

Hirschheim, R & Klein, H 1989. Four paradigms of information systems development. Communications of the ACM, 32(10), 1199–1216.

Mohammed, A, Tana, T, Singh, P, Korecha, D, Shad, G, & Molla, A. 2017. Management options for rainfed chickpea in northeast Ethiopia under climate change condition. Climate Risk Management, 16, 222–233.

Naghdali, F., Leva, M.C., Cromie, S. and Balfe, N., 2018. Assessment of available standards for Risk Assessment and human factors at design stage. In Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors 2015 (pp. 67-74). AA Balkema.

Scott, K, 2018. Assess, monitor reputational risks facing your campus. Campus Legal Advisor, 18(8), 6–6.