IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jadmsc/v14y2024i4p72-d1371251.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Occupational Health and Safety Reporting in the Top 100 Australian Companies: Does Organisational Risk Profile Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Jodi Oakman

    (Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3083, Australia)

  • Suzanne Young

    (La Trobe Business School, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3083, Australia)

  • Victoria P. Weale

    (Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3083, Australia)

  • Alison Pattinson

    (Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors, School of Psychology and Public Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3083, Australia)

Abstract

Increasingly, good quality and safe working conditions that promote employee health are expected by stakeholders. The aim of this study is to examine the extent and quality of occupational health and safety (OHS) reporting in the Top 100 companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). Method: Publicly available annual reports from the Top 100 ASX companies were reviewed using a policy scorecard against five dimensions drawn from the Australian Work Health and Safety Strategy 2012–2022. The dimensions were: OHS information, legislation, leadership, work health disorders, prevention and best practice. Results: Mean rank scores of high and low-risk industry sectors were compared. High-risk sectors provided more explicit coverage of OHS information across all five domains in comparison to low-risk sectors ( p > 0.05). The Information Technology sector scored the lowest across all five dimensions. Conclusion: Higher quality reporting from those in high-risk sectors may be influenced by stakeholder expectations, as well as industry norms. The current analysis suggests that relying on stakeholders to drive improved reporting may be problematic, as those industries that are perceived to have a low OHS risk profile may not consider the need to provide transparent reporting on their strategies to ensure they are providing good quality working conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jodi Oakman & Suzanne Young & Victoria P. Weale & Alison Pattinson, 2024. "Occupational Health and Safety Reporting in the Top 100 Australian Companies: Does Organisational Risk Profile Matter?," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:72-:d:1371251
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/14/4/72/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3387/14/4/72/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kerry A. Humphreys & Ken T. Trotman, 2022. "Judgment and decision making research on CSR reporting in the COVID‐19 pandemic environment," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(1), pages 739-765, March.
    2. Jan Bebbington & Carlos Larrinaga & Jose M. Moneva, 2008. "Corporate social reporting and reputation risk management," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(3), pages 337-361, March.
    3. Aditya Jain & Stavroula Leka & Gerard Zwetsloot, 2011. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Psychosocial Risk Management in Europe," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(4), pages 619-633, July.
    4. Emiel Duuren & Auke Plantinga & Bert Scholtens, 2016. "ESG Integration and the Investment Management Process: Fundamental Investing Reinvented," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 525-533, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Castaldo, Sandro & Ciacci, Andrea & Penco, Lara, 2023. "Perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction in grocery retail: A comparison between low- and high-productivity stores," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    2. Heidi Reed, 2024. "“When money is more valuable than people…”: The pandemic as a call for business to care," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 435-455, March.
    3. Kaouther Chebbi & Mohammed Abdullah Ammer, 2022. "Board Composition and ESG Disclosure in Saudi Arabia: The Moderating Role of Corporate Governance Reforms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Tamas Barko & Martijn Cremers & Luc Renneboog, 2022. "Shareholder Engagement on Environmental, Social, and Governance Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(2), pages 777-812, October.
    5. Maung, Min & Wilson, Craig & Yu, Weisu, 2020. "Does reputation risk matter? Evidence from cross-border mergers and acquisitions," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    6. Heidi Reed, 2023. "“When money is more valuable than people…”: The pandemic as a call for business to care," Post-Print hal-04461114, HAL.
    7. Francesco Cesarone & Lorenzo Lampariello & Davide Merolla & Jacopo Maria Ricci & Simone Sagratella & Valerio Giuseppe Sasso, 2023. "A bilevel approach to ESG multi-portfolio selection," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 1-23, December.
    8. Annebeth Roor & Karen Maas, 2024. "Do impact investors live up to their promise? A systematic literature review on (im)proving investments' impacts," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3707-3732, May.
    9. Daniel Zdolšek & Sabina Taškar Beloglavec, 2023. "Sustainability Reporting Ecosystem: A Once-in-a-Lifetime Overhaul during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, April.
    10. Mara Cerquetti & Domenico Sardanelli & Concetta Ferrara, 2024. "Measuring museum sustainability within the framework of institutional theory: A dictionary‐based content analysis of French and British National Museums' annual reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 2260-2276, May.
    11. Bravo-Urquiza, Francisco & Moreno-Ureba, Elena, 2021. "Does compliance with corporate governance codes help to mitigate financial distress?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    12. Ramiz ur Rehman & Muhammad Zain ul Abidin & Rizwan Ali & Safwan Mohd Nor & Muhammad Akram Naseem & Mudassar Hasan & Muhammad Ishfaq Ahmad, 2021. "The Integration of Conventional Equity Indices with Environmental, Social, and Governance Indices: Evidence from Emerging Economies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, January.
    13. Li, Yuetong & Wang, Xinyi & Zheng, Xiaojia, 2024. "Data assets and corporate sustainable development: evidence from ESG in China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    14. Irene Wei Kiong Ting & Noor Azlinna Azizan & Rajesh Kumar Bhaskaran & Sujit K Sukumaran, 2019. "Corporate Social Performance and Firm Performance: Comparative Study among Developed and Emerging Market Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    15. Junxiu Sun & Feng Wang & Haitao Yin & Rui Zhao, 2022. "Death or rebirth? How small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises respond to responsible investment," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1749-1762, May.
    16. Bäumer, Marcus, 2020. "What matters to investment professionals in decision making? The role of soft factors in stock selection," EIKV-Schriftenreihe zum Wissens- und Wertemanagement, European Institute for Knowledge & Value Management (EIKV), Luxembourg, volume 44, number 44, September.
    17. Xue, Qinyuan & Jin, Yifei & Zhang, Cheng, 2024. "ESG rating results and corporate total factor productivity," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 95(PA).
    18. Archana Saxena & Rajesh Singh & Anita Gehlot & Shaik Vaseem Akram & Bhekisipho Twala & Aman Singh & Elisabeth Caro Montero & Neeraj Priyadarshi, 2022. "Technologies Empowered Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG): An Industry 4.0 Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    19. Xin Liu, 2019. "The Role of Enterprise Risk Management in Sustainable Decision-Making: A Cross-Cultural Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Mariusz Zieliński & Małgorzata Adamska, 2022. "ESG Assessment from the Perspective of the Management Board and Trade Unions on the Example of the Opole Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-21, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jadmsc:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:72-:d:1371251. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.