Labor-Friendly Corporate Practices: Is What is Good for Employees Good for Shareholders?

As corporate managers interact with non-shareholder stakeholders, potential tradeoffs emerge and questions arise as to how these interactions impact shareholder value. We argue that this shareholder–stakeholder debate is an important issue within the overall corporate governance and corporate policy domain and examine one such stakeholder group – employees – by studying labor-friendly corporate practices. We find that announcements of labor-friendly policies are associated with positive abnormal stock returns. Labor-friendly firms also outperform otherwise similar firms, both in terms of long-run stock market returns and operating results. In addition, we find that the probability and benefits of labor-friendliness increase with the demand for highly skilled labor. Our analysis of excess executive compensation suggests that top management derives no pecuniary benefits from labor-friendly practices. We interpret our results as consistent with a genuine concern for employees translating into higher productivity and profitability, which in turn facilitate value creation. It appears that the benefits of labor-friendly practices significantly outweigh the costs and that what is good for employees is good for shareholders.     

Stakeholder theory and the knowledge problem: A Hayekian perspective

This paper explores the potential for stakeholder theory to illuminate what F.A. Hayek called “the knowledge problem”, pertaining to how a society manages to utilize “knowledge not given to anyone in its totality”. According to Hayek, this problem is addressed by the price system, which induces economic actors to harness local and dispersed pieces of knowledge that would not be available to a central planner. The present paper argues that the growing turbulence in the business environment, as pointed out by stakeholder theorists, poses a challenge to the ability of corporate managers to harness local knowledge. Stakeholder theory is shown to imply that, in a turbulent environment, managers’ ability to do so is increasingly dependent on their access to the knowledge held by corporate stakeholders. This argument suggests that the building of stakeholder relationships is a crucial institutional solution to the knowledge problem.     

Internal Effects of Stakeholder Management Devices

Stakeholder management devices (SMDs) are the mechanisms through which organizations respond to stakeholder concerns. Given that SMDs serve as organizational control systems for employees and managers, this research investigates the internal rather than the external effects of a firm's SMDs. Unlike most previous research, I examined the effects of these formal structures, processes, and procedures in the aggregate, rather than focusing attention on a single type of device. The study investigates the effects of a firm's stakeholder management devices, in the aggregate, on three factors that influence individual behavior in organizations: expectations, attitudes, and perceived organizational climates. Respondents were managers in 112 for-profit businesses located throughout the United States. Results suggest that a firm's stakeholder management devices affect the perceived moral climates in the firm, and affect managers' expectations about the consequences of good corporate social performance, but do not affect organization members' attitudes about corporate social responsibility.     

利益相关者与公司治理

企业是一系列不完全契约的集合体,企业不仅是股东的企业,也应成为全体利益相关者的企业。利益相关者理论在逐渐完善的过程中,对传统股东至上的治理模式提出了挑战和质疑,并相应地提出了利益相关者治理模式。但利益相关者治理模式也并非完美的治理模式,依然存在着一些不足和改进的必要。     

An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Change in Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective

Stakeholder theory provides a framework for investigating the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance. This relationship is investigated by examining how change in CSP is related to change in financial accounting measures. The findings provide some support for a tenet in stakeholder theory which asserts that the dominant stakeholder group, shareholders, financially benefit when management meets the demands of multiple stakeholders. Specifically, change in CSP was positively associated with growth in sales for the current and subsequent year. This indicates that there are short-term benefits from improving CSP. Return on sales was significantly positively related to change in CSP for the third financial period, indicating that long-term financial benefits may exist when CSP is improved.     

Transfer pricing for aligning divisional and corporate decisions

Discussions about transfer pricing normally presume the firm's objective is to maximize profit while making the best use of existing capacity. This article differs by exploring the impact of transfer pricing on capital budget decisions. In decentralized firms, decision authority for investment is assigned to division managers whose capital budgets include revenues from internal transfers. When a selling division is under capacity, economic theory recommends a transfer price based on differential cost. Here the seller generates sufficient revenues to recoup operating costs, but not enough to recover capital costs. Consequently, division managers will reject some investments that otherwise would have increased corporate shareholder value. Market-based transfer pricing overcomes this conflict by allocating savings on inter-company transactions to the selling division. However, market transfer pricing may result in shortfalls to corporate profit. Nonetheless, we argue in favor of the use of transfer pricing on the presumption that long-term value creation takes precedence over short-term profit.     

The Environment as a Stakeholder? A Fairness-Based Approach

Stakeholder theory is often unable to distinguish those individuals and groups that are stakeholders from those that are not. This problem of stakeholder identity has recently been addressed by linking stakeholder theory to a Rawlsian principle of fairness. To illustrate, the question of stakeholder status for the non-human environment is discussed. This essay criticizes a past attempt to ascribe stakeholder status to the non-human environment, which utilized a broad definition of the term "stakeholder." This paper then demonstrates how, despite the denial of stakeholder status, the environment is nonetheless accounted for on a fairness-based approach through legitimate organizational stakeholders. In addition, since stakeholder theory has never claimed to be a comprehensive ethical scheme, it is argued that sound reasons might exist for managers to consider their organization's impact on the environment that are not stakeholder-related.     

Responsible Leadership: Pathways to the Future

After defining the essential elements of Aristotelian citizenship, the article proposes to apply these criteria in its search for the equivalent of a citizen within the corporate polis. It argues that shareholding managers are the best positioned among a firm’s constituents or stakeholders in fulfilling the role of corporate citizens. Greater participation by management not only in the control but also in the ownership of firms brings about benefits for the firm as a whole and for the managers themselves, as organizational citizenship behavior literature, among others, suggests.     

Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting

This paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requirements, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission, values, and management systems. Habermas’ theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse. MaryAnn Reynolds is an Associate Professor of Accounting in the College of Business and Economics at Western Washington University. Dr. Reynolds teaches intermediate financial accounting and is published in the areas of corporate social, environmental and ethical reporting. Kristi Yuthas is the Swigert Endowed Information Systems Professor in the School of Business Administration at Portland State University. Dr. Yuthas teaches accounting and information systems and is published in the areas of social and ethical impacts of management information systems.     

Designing transformative learning experiences for managerial transition to integrative CSR

Business leaders have increasingly committed to redefining corporate purpose in terms of corporate social responsibility (CSR). The challenge now is to enact this commitment. This article argues that to do so, managers must adopt a new cognitive frame (or mental lens). Specifically, managers must disengage from their existing instrumental frames, under which they consider CSR only instrumentally as a means to drive profit and pay only peripheral attention to external stakeholder goals, and instead engage with an integrative frame, in which CSR goals are intrinsic to business plans and are considered equivalent to, and simultaneously with, the firm’s financial goals. To enable managerial transition from the established instrumental frame to a novel, challenging, integrative frame, this article presents a transformative learning experience (TLE). In the TLE, managers first are immersed in a business initiative explicitly designed to expose the inadequacies of the instrumental frame for the redefined corporate purpose. This activates disorienting dilemmas in which the instrumental frame no longer applies but a new frame is not yet apparent. In the second phase, firms provide managers with heuristics such as metaphorical reasoning to enable experimentation with an integrative frame. This article provides guidelines for the structure in which this process should be embedded, how this process can be activated, and the process and learning outcomes to measure.     

All animals are equal,but …: management perceptions of stakeholder relationships and societal responsibilities in multinational corporations

The stakeholder approach has become a popular perspective in mainstream management and the corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature. However, it remains an open question as to how real‐life managers actually view stakeholders and what rationales and logics are used for explaining the relationship between the firm and its constituencies. This article examines whom managers in multinational corporations (MNCs) consider to be their important stakeholders, and how they describe the societal responsibilities towards these groups and individuals. It is concluded that managers still tend to hold a rather narrow (managerial) view of the firm and generally give priority to stakeholder groups who are directly involved in the firm's core transformation system. The conclusions are derived from interview and survey data from 647 managers in four MNCs. The paper is based on data collected as part of project RESPONSE: a European Union‐ and corporate‐funded initiative on CSR.     

Managerial Talent and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): How Do Talented Managers View Corporate Social Responsibility?

Motivated by the ongoing debate on the costs and benefits of corporate social responsibility (CSR), we explore how talented managers view CSR investments. Based on nearly 20,000 observations across 17 years, our evidence reveals a nonmonotonic effect of managerial talent on CSR. Exploiting a novel measure of managerial ability, we find that talented managers view CSR investments favorably. However, only those with especially strong talent are in favor of CSR investments. For executives ranked above the 75th percentile in terms of managerial talent, an increase in managerial ability leads to more CSR investments, suggesting that these strongly talented managers perceive CSR as enhancing firm performance. In contrast, for those with weaker talent, CSR investments are negatively associated with managerial ability, implying that these weakly talented managers view CSR as a wasteful deployment of resources. Further evidence shows that our conclusion is unlikely confounded by endogeneity.     

The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on Financial Performance: Evidence from the GCC Islamic Banking Sector

We examine corporate governance diversity within a Coasian framework of stakeholder rights, where the central role of governance is to ensure that necessary firm-specific investments are made. This Coasian perspective on stakeholder theory offers a unifying framework towards a global theory of comparative corporate governance, bridging the gap between economic theories of the firm and stakeholder theory, also offering an economics-based alternative to agency theory that explicitly accounts for stakeholder rights. The Coasian perspective encompasses a diversity of corporate governance systems, but does not imply a unique global corporate governance benchmark. We posit that governance is firm dependent and endogenous conditional on the constraints imposed by a national governance system; consequently, there should be no systematic relationship between governance and firm performance once the national constraints are controlled for. However, the same national corporate governance system constraints confer comparative advantages to firms whose efficient levels of firm-specific investments are favored.     

Stakeholders Pressures and Strategic Prioritisation: An Empirical Analysis of Environmental Responses in Argentinean Firms

This article focusses on corporate attitudes to stakeholder environmental pressures in Argentina. It uses a cross section survey of 505 CEOs of Argentinean firms to gather information on environmental attitudes and a stakeholder theory framework to design and interpret the statistical analyses. It is underpinned by theoretical and empirical findings in the literature on stakeholder management, targeting in particular studies that deal with corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Latin America. Its general aim is to gain a deeper empirical understanding of the coherence between managers’ perceptions of stakeholder pressures and the importance they are given in corporate CSR strategies through an empirical investigation of environmental management (EM) decisions. In doing so, it uncovers general differences in the way firms perceive and treat groups of stakeholders. It also detects variations across firms, observing that some are typically proactive in their response to stakeholder pressures whilst others are less responsive. Profiling the various stakeholder networks and the corporate response strategies in this way encourages the development of stakeholder-focussed policies and corporate strategies that emphasise communications, awareness and a clear sense of direction. It concludes that CSR appears to be more effective in the protection of the environment than previously reported. Although this study focusses on EM in Argentina, the findings are more generally applicable.     

Innovative ways of raising funds and adding value: A stakeholder approach to whole business securitization

Whole business (WB) securitization is a corporate fundraising strategy that allows companies to realize the full value of their operating assets in cooperation with their stakeholders. In a WB securitization, the company raises funds by issuing securitization bonds backed by its operating assets. A characteristic feature of this funding strategy is that it allows investors to impose operating conditions which obligate the company to develop its business strategy and operations. Hence, investors can influence the branding and customer service practices, as well as the stakeholder relationships of the company. Herein, we outline how managers of the securitized assets and investors can add value by adopting a stakeholder approach to whole business securitization.     

Corporate Argumentation for Acceptability: Reflections of Environmental Values and Stakeholder Relations in Corporate Environmental Statements

This article studies argumentation for acceptability of corporate environmental actions in corporate environmental statements, with emphasis on stakeholder relations and environmental values. Stakeholder theory is commonly taken as the basis for corporate environmental management, and rhetoric typical of the stakeholder approach dominates the field. Although environmental issues are strongly charged with values, the dominant stakeholder approach does not stress the value dimension. The data of the study consists of environmental statements by Finnish forerunning business corporations in the forefront of corporate environmental responsibility. The results of the study indicate that the statements argue for the acceptability of corporate environmental actions through three power-related rhetorical forms that are competing ways to produce acceptability in the data: dominance, subordination and equality, and joint action. Each rhetorical form describes a power-based relationship between stakeholders and the corporation and leans on a specific value type producing legitimacy for that rhetoric form.     

Stakeholder Perspectives on CSR of Mining MNCs in Argentina

This article examines the conceptualisation of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the context of mining multinationals (MNCs) in Argentina. It explores the suitability of CSR for addressing social, environmental and economic issues associated with mining in the country. The study is based on interviews with four stakeholder groups in the country: government, civil society, international financial organisations, and mining industry. These are analysed using content and interpretative techniques and supplemented by the content analysis of secondary data from headquarters of mining MNCs. Using the concept of corporate social responsibility orientation (CSRO), the study contrasts the perceptions of major stakeholders and examines adaptation of mining companies’ CSRO to local context. It reveals that the CSRO of mining managers in Argentina differs from CSRO developed by global headquarters; and in Argentina companies “negotiate” economic, environmental and legal dimensions of CSR with the government. Although companies “negotiate” philanthropic responsibilities with the communities, ethical responsibilities are defined by the headquarters and not negotiated locally. The analysis suggests that environmental duties are the critical element of CSR in the mining sector in Argentina. This study treats environment as a separate dimension of corporate responsibility defined as to do “what is safe for the environment”.     

Does It Matter What Managers Do?

After half a century of research, we now have a fair idea of what managers do. This differs both from the "heroic self-image" idealisation and from the sanitised "management science" idealisation. Despite IT and all the talk of empowerment, management as a profession in its own right is, if anything, becoming more, not less, widespread. What managers do therefore matters simply because so many people are doing "management" as their main role. But does what managers do matter in terms of its effects on the people being managed, and, if so, how? The answer is obviously yes, but the central message of this article is how little we know through systematic research about this – particularly given how much preaching there is on how to do it well.     

Engaging and marketing to stakeholders in World Heritage Site management: a United Kingdom multiple case study perspective

ABSTRACT

This research addresses the limited studies which apply stakeholder theory to World Heritage Site (WHS) management and managerial theory to heritage management. WHS management highlights a context where sites rely on numerous interests uniting through goodwill. This is intensified by the multiple-ownership patterns which characterise many WHSs, necessitating a need for collective action. This study aims to explore how managers attempt to manage stakeholders and generate involvement and support. This study adopts a multiple case study approach, exploring three United Kingdom WHSs. Data were collected through interviews, documentation and physical artefacts. The analysis found that through representation, raising awareness and support, managers were able to generate stakeholder patronage. However, this required managers to look beyond informative engagement toward participatory means. Furthermore, the findings highlight the importance of the facilitators, time and money in successful stakeholder engagement. Lastly, conclusions, limitations and future research are offered. Underpinned by stakeholder theory, this paper contributes to the understanding of stakeholder engagement within WHS management and adds to limited empirical studies on multiple sites. This investigation found that engagement is constrained by managers’ limited time and resources. Furthermore, participatory engagement is essential in fostering stakeholders’ responsibility for site management and developing relationships with managers.     

See What We Want to See? The Effects of Managerial Experience on Corporate Green Investments

How impartial are managerial decisions? This question is particularly concerning when it comes to making green investment decisions in the face of stakeholder pressures. When managers respond to stakeholder pressures, their personal cognition, judgment, and past experiences play a role in determining their responses. The salience of particular stakeholder claims may be determined by deeply rooted individual preferences. This research investigates how a manager’s past experiences can influence green investments. Data are gathered from 247 managers about their past experience and their employer’s performance data. These data are combined with managerial responses to a vignette-based experiment, which required managers to make green investments based on a decision scenario where they are exposed to different types and strength of stakeholder pressure (from consumers and the community). Results suggest that managers’ years of experience, their employers’ financial performance, and their employers’ market performance influence investment decisions even when making decisions under new and different set of circumstances. While the employers’ financial performance influences managers to invest more, the employers’ market performance only influences managers’ investment in the presence of either high consumer or high community pressure. Compared to less-experienced managers, experienced managers invest more in response to consumer pressure but less in response to community pressure. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings in green management are explored.