Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance?

Christopher Peace, Victoria Mabin, Carolyn J. Cordery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The failure of boards and individual directors to engage with and accept accountability for work health and safety (WH&S) has frequently been commented on as a contributory cause of high injury and fatality rates. New Zealand has been no exception to this record, having poor fatal accident rates when compared with other OECD countries. One mining accident in New Zealand in 2010 triggered the introduction of new legislation in New Zealand, requiring ‘due diligence’ of ‘officers’ of workplace health and safety. This paper reviews the background to the law change, highlights its focus on due diligence, and explores the meaning of ‘officer’. A decision tree is presented to help show the relationship of the due diligence requirement to companies’ legislation and other requirements. The wider duties of directors are briefly analysed before presenting a range of ‘reasonable steps’ that might enable an officer to claim they had exercised due diligence to ensure compliance with the WH&S responsibilities of a business or undertaking. The relationship of these options to knowledge management and potential for application of management by objectives is described before discussing compliance problems arising for officers in smaller businesses.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)19-37
JournalPolicy and Practice in Health and Safety
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Feb 2017

Fingerprint

Health and safety
Due diligence
Risk governance
New Zealand
Legislation
Accidents
Management by objectives
Work place
Fatality
Responsibility
Decision tree
Accountability
Small business
OECD countries
Knowledge management

Keywords

  • Governance
  • due diligence
  • directors
  • safety management system
  • Australia and New Zealand

Cite this

Peace, C., Mabin, V., & Cordery, C. J. (2017). Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance? Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, 15(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497
Peace, Christopher ; Mabin, Victoria ; Cordery, Carolyn J. / Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance?. In: Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2017 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 19-37.
@article{8884396e13084f0893372c1cafa5943d,
title = "Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance?",
abstract = "The failure of boards and individual directors to engage with and accept accountability for work health and safety (WH&S) has frequently been commented on as a contributory cause of high injury and fatality rates. New Zealand has been no exception to this record, having poor fatal accident rates when compared with other OECD countries. One mining accident in New Zealand in 2010 triggered the introduction of new legislation in New Zealand, requiring ‘due diligence’ of ‘officers’ of workplace health and safety. This paper reviews the background to the law change, highlights its focus on due diligence, and explores the meaning of ‘officer’. A decision tree is presented to help show the relationship of the due diligence requirement to companies’ legislation and other requirements. The wider duties of directors are briefly analysed before presenting a range of ‘reasonable steps’ that might enable an officer to claim they had exercised due diligence to ensure compliance with the WH&S responsibilities of a business or undertaking. The relationship of these options to knowledge management and potential for application of management by objectives is described before discussing compliance problems arising for officers in smaller businesses.",
keywords = "Governance, due diligence, directors, safety management system, Australia and New Zealand",
author = "Christopher Peace and Victoria Mabin and Cordery, {Carolyn J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "2",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "19--37",
number = "1",

}

Peace, C, Mabin, V & Cordery, CJ 2017, 'Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance?', Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 19-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497

Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance? / Peace, Christopher; Mabin, Victoria; Cordery, Carolyn J.

In: Policy and Practice in Health and Safety, Vol. 15, No. 1, 02.02.2017, p. 19-37.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance?

AU - Peace, Christopher

AU - Mabin, Victoria

AU - Cordery, Carolyn J.

PY - 2017/2/2

Y1 - 2017/2/2

N2 - The failure of boards and individual directors to engage with and accept accountability for work health and safety (WH&S) has frequently been commented on as a contributory cause of high injury and fatality rates. New Zealand has been no exception to this record, having poor fatal accident rates when compared with other OECD countries. One mining accident in New Zealand in 2010 triggered the introduction of new legislation in New Zealand, requiring ‘due diligence’ of ‘officers’ of workplace health and safety. This paper reviews the background to the law change, highlights its focus on due diligence, and explores the meaning of ‘officer’. A decision tree is presented to help show the relationship of the due diligence requirement to companies’ legislation and other requirements. The wider duties of directors are briefly analysed before presenting a range of ‘reasonable steps’ that might enable an officer to claim they had exercised due diligence to ensure compliance with the WH&S responsibilities of a business or undertaking. The relationship of these options to knowledge management and potential for application of management by objectives is described before discussing compliance problems arising for officers in smaller businesses.

AB - The failure of boards and individual directors to engage with and accept accountability for work health and safety (WH&S) has frequently been commented on as a contributory cause of high injury and fatality rates. New Zealand has been no exception to this record, having poor fatal accident rates when compared with other OECD countries. One mining accident in New Zealand in 2010 triggered the introduction of new legislation in New Zealand, requiring ‘due diligence’ of ‘officers’ of workplace health and safety. This paper reviews the background to the law change, highlights its focus on due diligence, and explores the meaning of ‘officer’. A decision tree is presented to help show the relationship of the due diligence requirement to companies’ legislation and other requirements. The wider duties of directors are briefly analysed before presenting a range of ‘reasonable steps’ that might enable an officer to claim they had exercised due diligence to ensure compliance with the WH&S responsibilities of a business or undertaking. The relationship of these options to knowledge management and potential for application of management by objectives is described before discussing compliance problems arising for officers in smaller businesses.

KW - Governance

KW - due diligence

KW - directors

KW - safety management system

KW - Australia and New Zealand

UR - https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85021721657&doi=10.1080%2f14773996.2016.1275497&origin=inward&txGid=9c32a8cde6f4395b4225806eeeca881b

UR - https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497

U2 - 10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497

DO - 10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 19

EP - 37

IS - 1

ER -

Peace C, Mabin V, Cordery CJ. Due diligence: A panacea for health and safety risk governance? Policy and Practice in Health and Safety. 2017 Feb 2;15(1):19-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/14773996.2016.1275497