MGMT3102 Chap.7 Indigenous Stakeholders and Relational Accountability
Indigenous Stakeholders and Relational Accountability
The Week 5 guest seminar examined the changing relationship between business and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
It began with pre-colonial trade, removal from land and economies, and the Mabo decision, then showed that Indigenous people are not one stakeholder group: they can be owners, decision makers, regulators, investors and business partners as well as community members.
The chapter then examines Reconciliation Action Plans, from Reflect to Elevate, and the critique by Leersen and colleagues that many corporate plans serve reputation more than reconciliation.
It closes with four evaluation questions for judging any plan and with the policy tools, such as the Indigenous Procurement Policy, that sit alongside voluntary commitments.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Trade, dispossession and the Mabo decision
- 02
Indigenous people as more than one stakeholder group
- 03
A spectrum from consultation to shared decision-making
- 04
The four RAP levels
- 05
Five frames in corporate reconciliation plans
- 06
Four questions for judging a plan
- 07
Indigenous procurement and Closing the Gap
Worked example · free
Placing a company's relationship on the consultation spectrum
- +1Locate it. Consultation before decisions plus scholarships places the relationship between consultation and engagement.
- +1Explain why. Native title holders are informed and asked, but have no share in site decisions, so they are recipients rather than decision makers.
- +1Link to salience. Native title gives them legitimacy and potential power, so their claim deserves more weight than the arrangement gives it.
- +1Move it. A joint committee with agreed authority over heritage and land-use decisions would shift the relationship towards shared decision-making.
Key terms
- Reflect RAP
- The entry level of Reconciliation Action Plan, which prepares an organisation to engage in reconciliation by building strong foundations.
- Elevate RAP
- The highest level of Reconciliation Action Plan, aimed at transformational change and active support for self-determination.
- Native title
- The recognition in Australian law of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' rights and interests in land, made possible after the Mabo decision rejected terra nullius.
- Indigenous Procurement Policy
- A Commonwealth policy introduced in 2015 that sets participation requirements, set-asides and purchasing targets for Indigenous businesses.
- Instrumental reconciliation
- A frame in which a plan treats reconciliation mainly as a tool for legitimacy, branding or risk management.
Indigenous Stakeholders and Relational Accountability FAQ
Why does the seminar say Indigenous people are not one stakeholder group?
Because the roles vary. Indigenous people may hold native title, run businesses, invest, hold land through land councils, sit on boards or be community members, and each role brings different claims, power and legitimacy. Treating them as a single box hides those differences and weakens any salience analysis.
What are the four levels of Reconciliation Action Plan?
Reflect builds strong foundations, Innovate implements change, Stretch demonstrates reconciliation leadership by embedding commitments in everyday business, and Elevate aims at transformational change. Reconciliation Australia, an independent not-for-profit, runs the program, which began in 2006 with eight organisations and now counts around 3,300.
What did Leersen and colleagues find about corporate plans?
Analysing 40 commercial organisations' Stretch and Elevate plans, they found commitments framed mainly around legitimacy, branding and employment, with little power-sharing and limited transparency. They describe frames such as instrumental reconciliation and truth signalling, and found substantive recognition of colonisation rare. Only one organisation reported a First Nations executive.
How should I compare two organisations' reconciliation plans?
Ask four questions of each: what it commits to and how close that is to the core business, what has actually changed in hiring, purchasing or operations, who holds decision rights, and how an outsider could check the results. Look for evidence rather than promises, and note where Indigenous people hold decision rights rather than receive programmes.
What policy tools support Indigenous businesses alongside voluntary plans?
The guest seminar highlighted the Indigenous Procurement Policy, introduced in 2015, which sets participation requirements, mandatory set-asides and annual purchasing targets, and the Indigenous Business Sector Strategy. It described procurement as a tool for economic self-determination rather than welfare, because it gives Indigenous businesses access to markets they were excluded from.
Exam move
Learn the four RAP levels in order with one phrase each, and the five frames from Leersen and colleagues with one sign of each you could spot in a plan. Then practise the four evaluation questions on a real plan from a company you know. Finish by placing its relationship on the spectrum from consultation to shared decision-making and saying what would move it.
Practise one sentence that links a plan's promises to an outcome Indigenous stakeholders could check.
Working through Indigenous Stakeholders and Relational Accountability in MGMT3102? Sia is AskSia’s AI Management tutor — ask any MGMT3102 Indigenous Stakeholders and Relational Accountability question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how MGMT3102 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.