The projects
CIMIC Group is one of the major international public, private partnership groups that engage in the activities of mining and infrastructural construction. The company was formerly known as Leighton Holdings before it changes its name in the year 2015. The company is known for environmental service, mining, building and property, engineering and infrastructure as well as telecommunication industries. It operates in some countries including Australia, South East Asia, New Zealand, and the Middle East. The core values of the company are innovation, delivery, accountability, and integrity. One of the projects that the company is currently handling is the Metro Tunnel RailWorks.
Mackellar Mining, like its counterpart CIMIC Group, also takes part in Mining services. Other than that, the company also does stockpile management, workshop maintenance services and haul road maintenance. The company has an operation record of over 40 years and has carried out some projects that have helped the company build a reputation for high-quality service delivery. The company was initially known as Jalgrid and Jalagrid WA Pty Ltd when it was founded in the year 1972. The entity made use of the initial name until the year 2003 when the company rebranded and adopted the current name. One of the most recent projects that the company had to work on is the Paddington Gold Mine project.
This paper entails a comparative analysis of the Malak Coal Mine Project by the CIMIC Group and the Paddington Gold Mine Project of the Mackellar Mining Company. The study takes into consideration the community engagement by both companies.
The Paddington Gold Mine project is a long-term project under the management of Mackellar Mining Company. The side of the project is located in the Western parts of Australia. The project description involves the excavation of ore and waste mining as well. The total output of the process is approximated at 2M BCM each month, and the project is projected to take seven years. However, the transition of the seven-year term can only be initiated by the owner of the miner. The project uses dry hire of more than thirty machines with maintenance. The Malak Coal Mine Project has its site in Indonesia. The client in this project is the Bayan Resource group, and the role of the company is to deliver targeted quantities to the client daily. At the initial stages of the project, the target production was two million tons per year. The current mining target for the company is at 2.2 million tons in a year. The project is valued at $A180 million.
The host Communities
In carving out a project such as mining, it is essential to include the local community is the process as they form a vital part of the stakeholders. It is required of the companies to develop a stakeholder engagement plan that includes the local communities to help with the development of a good rapport between the mining company and the local community. It is therefore vital to include a community liaison officer in the leadership structure of the project management. The liaison officer should come from the community to help in the creation of a connection between the local community and the company. The inclusion of a member of the local community in the project management helps in understanding the peoples’ culture and believes as well as expectations from the company. In most instances, the interests of the local community are always anchored on jobs and corporate social responsibility of the company. Through the development of a stakeholder engagement plan, the company can strategically manage some of the expectations of the community.
In the case of Melak Coal Mine Project, the local community in Eastern Kalimantan, Indonesia has been friendly and supportive to the miners. The company has not reported any incidences of hostility from the local community. The peaceful environment that the community has provided the miners has enabled them to operate peacefully without the worry of hostile reactions or actions from the community. The only security measure that the company has had to take is the use of multi-media communication among the works which have proven to be not only effective but also efficient in the course of the mining process. The peaceful coexistence between the project managers and the community is also experienced in the case of the Paddington Gold Mine project. The company has also not recorded any scenarios of hostility from the community which is an indication of amicable coexistence between the miner and the community.
The two companies have incorporated the community into the project through the employment of some of the community members as laborers while some as research assistants. The community liaison officers in both companies are locals from the various communities in which the companies operate. The two companies also involve the community in the stakeholder engagement meetings to get the views of the communities on the projects and register any rinsing complaints. The companies have invested in corporate social responsibilities at varying magnitudes. For instance, the Paddington Gold Mine project offers scholarships to local students to study subjects of their interest in universities and colleges. On the other hand, Melak Coal Mine Project has invested in the development of infrastructure around the mining site to improve on accessibility to the local social facilities like hospitals and schools. Since the projects have an impact on the environment, the companies developed an approach that helps to monitor the environment and also remain in touch with the relevant bodies concerned with environmental conservation. To ensure constant consultations, the liaison officers not only represent the interests of the people in the project regarding employment opportunities and social development but also monitors and gives recommendations on how the companies can help in conserving the environment during the mining process. The following diagram summarizes the interaction between the community liaison officer and the rest of the project management team of the Melak Coal Mine Project.
Community engagement approach
Fig 1.1
There are two positions reserved for the locals in the project management team. The positions are the post of Community Senior Liaison Officer and that of the community liaison officer. The community liaison officer reports to the Community Senior Liaison Officer who then reports to the Operations Director. The liaison officers should be individuals with knowledge about the cultures and norms of the people as well as conversant with the terrain of the region. The community liaison officers are charged with the responsibility of organizing and conducting community engagement forums and passage of critical information between the project management and the community. While the two companies make use of a similar structure, there exists a slight difference inters of the senior management contact with the community. Melak Coal Mine Project puts the liaison officers at the forefront when it comes to community engagement while the senior management of the Paddington Gold Mine project chooses to do the engagement side by side with the community liaison officers.
Furthermore, the companies have to connect with the relevant environmental bodies to ensure that they abide by all the environmental conservation laws concerning the mining process. While there are different bodies in the two localities of operations, the structure of engagement is similar in the two projects. The following diagram summarizes the company’s engagement with environmental conservation bodies.
Fig 1.2
Even though community liaison officers are vital for the representation of the community’s opinion on the environmental issues, the companies also rely on the analysis of the environmental bodies and organizations that operate within the locality.
The two have similar reporting mechanisms for the community activities that they carry out. The first common reporting technique that both the companies if the inclusion of the community projects in the companies’ regular reports. Furthermore, the regular stakeholder meetings create a good avenue for the companies to present a verbal explanation of their intended community development project and also elaborate on what they can comfortably do for the community and what they cannot do. The expectations of the community in most instances are always beyond what the company can deliver to the community. It is therefore essential that the community liaison officers aid in the shaping of the community expectations to avoid cases of discontent and hostility among the community members.
Conclusion
The two projects, the Paddington Gold Mine project, and Melak Coal Mine Project are implemented by two different Australian companies in different geographical locations. Moreover, there is also a variance between the natures of the two projects as they deal with two different products and the clients are also different. However, the projects exhibit a wide range of similarities regarding community engagements. Both projects have structures in place that allows communities’ participation in the projects. They have management structures that allow for community liaison officers in the project management chain. The role of the community liaison offices is similar in the two projects. The difference only comes in the level of community engagement of the senior project management officers and the community. While one company prefers to put the liaison officers at the forefront of the community engagement, the other chooses to work side by side with the liaison officers to achieve the project goals and objectives. Other than that, the concept of community engagement and community project is the same applied by the projects. The corporate responsibility projects selected in the two scenarios are different but based on the same concept.
Campbell, John L. 2018. “2017 Decade Award Invited Article Reflections on the 2017 Decade Award: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Financial Crisis.” Academy of Management Review 43 (4): 546–56. doi:10.5465/amr.2018.0057.
Chia, Kerryn, John Koch, Rohan Sadler, and Shane Turner. 2016. “Re-Establishing the Mid-Storey Tree Persoonia Longifolia (Proteaceae) in Restored Forest Following Bauxite Mining in Southern Western Australia.” Ecological Research 31 (5): 627–38. doi:10.1007/s11284-016-1370-y.
CIMIC annual report. 2017. Retreved through https://www.cimic.com.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/35843/4-Annual-Report-to-shareholders.pdf
CIMIC Group Limited SWOT Analysis.” 2018. CIMIC Group Limited SWOT Analysis, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=131348345&site=ehost-live.
Haalboom, B 2011, ‘Framed Encounters with Conservation and Mining Development: Indigenous Peoples’ use of Strategic Framing in Suriname’, Social Movement Studies, 10 (4), pp. 387–406, viewed 17 October 2018, <https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=67366739&site=ehost-live>.
Herremans, Irene1, [email protected], Jamal2, [email protected] Nazari, and Fereshteh, [email protected] Mahmoudian. 2016. “Stakeholder Relationships, Engagement, and Sustainability Reporting.” Journal of Business Ethics 138 (3): 417–35. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2634-0.
Kullenberg, Janosch. 2016. “Community Liaison Assistants: A Bridge between Peacekeepers and Local Populations.” Forced Migration Review 1 (53): 44–47. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=119163575&site=ehost-live.
Lunstrum, Elizabeth, Pablo Bose, and Anna Zalik. 2016. “Environmental Displacement: The Common Ground of Climate Change, Extraction and Conservation.” Area 48 (2): 130–33. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=115403930&site=ehost-live.
Maciej, Nowak, Targiel S. Krzysztof, B?aszczyk Bo?ena, and Kania Sebastian. 2018. “Stakeholders in Mining Projects.” Project Management Development – Practice & Perspectives, January, 66–74. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=130498229&site=ehost-live.
Marsh, Jillian K. 2013. “Decolonising the Interface between Indigenous Peoples and Mining Companies in Australia: Making Space for Cultural Heritage Sites.” Asia Pacific Viewpoint 54 (2): 171–84. doi:10.1111/apv.12017.
Patzer, Moritz, Christian Voegtlin, and Andreas Georg Scherer. 2018. “The Normative Justification of Integrative Stakeholder Engagement: A Habermasian View on Responsible Leadership.” Business Ethics Quarterly 28 (3): 325–54. doi:10.1017/beq.2017.33.
Provasnek, Anna Katharina1, [email protected], Erwin1, [email protected] Schmid, and Gerald2,3, [email protected], [email protected] Steiner. 2018. “Stakeholder Engagement: Keeping Business Legitimate in Austria’s Natural Mineral Water Bottling Industry.” Journal of Business Ethics 150 (2): 467–84. doi:10.1007/s10551-016-3121-y.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
