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.     

Beyond Stakeholder Utility Function: Stakeholder Capability in the Value Creation Process

In spite of the thousands of articles on stakeholder theory, research on value creation has had a shorter history and narrower breadth. Only a few studies have researched value creation from stakeholder perspective looking at how stakeholders appropiate value or the processes or activities by which stakeholders create value. Consequently to date, certain questions still remain unanswered regarding how a firm should treat stakeholders in order to create value. Several questions arise specifically from the stakeholder's side: What does "value" mean for a particular group of stakeholders and how do firms create these different types of value? How do we measure the value created by stakeholders? The purpose of this paper is to answer these questions from Amartya Sen's Capability Approach, identifying and measuring stakeholders' capabilities in the value creation process. Stakeholder Capability is the adequate concept for understanding stakeholder welfare rather than the utility function concept. The empirical evidence comes from an in-depth case study of the company The Grobo Group and its stakeholders. According to the results, the following stakeholder capabilities are relevant to value creation: being employable, being autonomus, being innovative, being entreprenurial, being responsive, being socially integrated, being emphatic, being "green" and being healthy.     

Enhancing frontline employee support during a product-harm crisis: Evidence and strategic managerial implications for firms

Product-harm crises can negatively affect a firm's corporate image, reputation, and credibility. This research investigates antecedents and factors that can impact the extent to which frontline employees will be supportive of their organization when the firm faces such a crisis. Leveraging social exchange theory and its focus on reciprocal exchanges, we theorize and test processes using regression models, which shed light on how managers can solicit employee support during crises situations by providing the frontline employees with ethical and supportive working conditions. To offer convergent validity across multiple methodologies, we also test the influence of experimental effects of the relative severity of a crisis and whether a firm was quick or slow in its response on frontline employee support. Furthermore, our research demonstrates that the firm's strengths in corporate social responsibility, the employees' organizational citizenship behavior, and employee organizational identification serially mediate the supportive relationship, which provides a unique contribution to the marketing literature. Finally, we provide managerial implications to further enhance frontline employee support.     

Stakeholder theory: A process-ontological perspective

Advocates of stakeholder theory have long known that grasping its key insights requires a specific worldview that is, unfortunately, still not prevalent within the community of strategic management scholars. We argue that this worldview encompasses a process ontology that is radically different from the substance-ontological outlook typical of the mainstream approaches to strategic management. The unquestioned commitment of strategic management scholarship to a substance ontology leads to the viewing of corporations as macro-entities comprising aggregations of discrete autonomous actors each relying on individual choice and instrumental rationality. In contrast, within a process-ontological worldview, corporations and their stakeholders are seen to be sustained and attenuated through social practices and relationships involving interlocking chains of coping actions taken in everyday interactions. We show that adopting a process-ontological worldview presents a much-needed step that may help strategic management scholars reach a better understanding of how stakeholder theory deals with three problems of today's capitalism, those value creation and trade, ethics of capitalism, and managerial mindsets. On this basis, we discuss how to process ontology may lead stakeholder theory to further refine its understanding of business strategy, corporate social responsibility, and the common ground between the firm and stakeholders.     

Selective Engagement in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Stakeholder Perspective

This paper attempts to understand selective engagement in corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR involves various issues that can meet demands from multiple stakeholders. A firm can focus on certain CSR issues to satisfy a particular stakeholder while ignoring the demands from other stakeholders, or it can take a more balanced approach to CSR by addressing a wider range of social issues. In this paper, I investigate how stakeholder pressures from three types of primary stakeholders (customer, supplier, and employee) shape selective engagement in CSR. The empirical results based on a representative sample of more than 1,000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the early 2000s suggest that firms prioritize their stakeholders based on instrumental considerations. Those stakeholders who have greater power over the focal firm will exert a larger impact on a firm’s CSR engagement. Constrained by limited managerial resources, firms accord attention to a limited range of issues most relevant to salient stakeholders. Specifically, MNCs as major customers pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for product quality, as well as on a wider range of social issues; SOEs as both major customers and major suppliers pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for employee welfare; employees with higher education pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for employee welfare, and for a wider range of social issues. This study contributes to stakeholder theory and research on the CSR of SMEs, and has important implications for CSR practitioners.     

Benevolent dictatorship and buyer-supplier exchange

In this research, we identify and advance the concept of benevolence as a key social exchange mechanism in buyer-supplier exchange. Specifically, we (1) advance a theoretical model of benevolence to include affective, calculative, and normative dimensions, (2) highlight specific actions and resources that a focal firm uses to promote the perception of benevolence, including concessions, idiosyncratic investments, and reputation, and (3) identify how these perceptions, mediated by its own rising commitment to the exchange, impact the focal firm's economic response (i.e., concessions and idiosyncratic investments). In particular, we explore the possibility of “benevolent dictators” in exchanges marked by power asymmetry. Our model and conclusions are drawn from the confidential reports of over 500 informants at the boundaries of firms across multiple industries. Our results demonstrate the differential effects of a partner firm's actions and reputation on the three forms of benevolence and find evidence for how powerful partner firms can signal their benevolence to weaker firms through the use of concessions, dedicated investments and marketplace reputation. Moreover, we show that the responses of the partner firm to the focal firm's benevolence are not simply a reciprocation of the focal firm's actions, but are instead mediated through the enhanced commitment of the focal firm with implications for theory and management practice.     

Blame and culpability in explaining changes in perceptions of corporate social responsibility and credibility

This study uses the sequential updating mechanism and draws on several theories, such as the attribution theory, the self-perception theory and the shame theory, to explain the interplay between consumers' perceptions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate credibility. It contends that both CSR and corporate credibility undergo the sequential updating mechanism. A two-stage model (before and after a corporate public relation [PR] crisis) is used to investigate how individuals' perceptions of CSR and credibility are determined by their blame attribution to the firm, their self-culpability, as well as their prior perceptions of CSR and credibility. To test the research hypotheses, four samples were collected from Spain (224 and 244) and the United Kingdom (307 and 236). Respondents had to state their opinions in relation to a Spanish and a British company operating in the fashion industry. For the model estimation, the SmartPLS 3 was used. The results show that consumers' perception of a firm's liability has a significant impact on their feeling of culpability, which in turn strongly and negatively affects their perceptions of the firm's CSR and credibility. In addition, consumers' prior perceptions of CSR and credibility play a relevant role in regulating and offsetting the final effect of a corporate PR crisis.     

The impact of informal social interaction on innovation capability in the context of buyer-supplier dyads

Although many studies employ social network theory to explain firm innovation, how individual-level factors lead to a firm's collective innovation capability remains under-researched. Building on studies that use the work boundary to define formal and informal social interactions, this research aims to illuminate how informal buyer-supplier employee interactions influence buyer firms' innovation capabilities through knowledge acquisition. Integrating the literatures on absorptive capacity and social interaction, the analysis of survey data from 273 Chinese manufacturing firms suggests that employees' informal interactions are positively associated with knowledge acquisition and enhance firms' innovation capabilities. Furthermore, the indirect effects of informal interactions on innovation capability are moderated by knowledge application.     

Does community and environmental responsibility affect firm risk? Evidence from UK panel data 1994–2006

The question of how an individual firm's social and environmental performance impacts its firm risk has not been examined in any empirical UK research. Does a company that strives to attain good environmental performance decrease its market risk or is environmental performance just a disadvantageous cost that increases such risk levels for these firms? Answers to this question have important implications for the management of companies and the investment decisions of individuals and institutions. The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between corporate environmental performance and firm risk in the British context. Using the largest dataset assembled so far, with community and environmental responsibility (CER) rankings for all rated UK companies between 1994 and 2006, we show that a company's environmental performance is inversely related to its systematic financial risk. However, an increase of 1.0 in the CER score is associated with only a 0.028 reduction in its β.     

Business Ethics and the Management of Non-Profit Institutions

The core of business ethics literature is based upon the stakeholder theory of the firm. The normative function of this theory is to internalise the concept of social responsibility into the definition of the firm (the firm as a social contract) and into the managerial practice (participative management, social and ethical audit). But why should we introduce this business ethics approach into the field of the non-profit sector, which by its origin and mission has already a strong social dimension? Is there a genuine dilemma of social responsibility in non-profjt institutions? The first part of the paper will give a more theoretical answer to this question. The second part will illustrate the relevance of the business ethics approach by presenting an empirical application of the stakeholer theory in the Belgian-Flemish non-profit sector.     

Motivation and ability in the decision to acquire

This study considers the decision to undertake an acquisition using a framework built around the concepts of motivation and ability to acquire. The paper develops an integrative model to examine how firm characteristics contribute to motivation and ability in predicting the likelihood of an acquisition and draws on two streams of literature to motivate the model: behavioral theory of the firm to explain a firm's motivation to acquire, and absorptive capacity to explain a firm's ability to acquire. Results from a publicly traded sample show that firms failing to meet aspirations (i.e., those with motivation) are more likely to acquire, as are firms that have a high absorptive capacity (i.e., those with ability). Most interestingly, absorptive capacity moderates the influence of performance shortfalls in the decision to acquire and is most important when the motivation to acquire is low.     

From Voids to Sophistication: Institutional Environment and MNC CSR Crisis in Emerging Markets

Why do multinational corporations (MNCs) frequently encounter corporate social responsibility (CSR) crises in leading emerging markets in the new century? Existing research about institutional impacts on MNC CSR has developed a void-based account about how the flawed institutional system allows misdeeds to happen. But the fact that such misdeeds have turned into increasing CSR crises in the new century along with institutional change is rarely taken into account. This paper combines studies of institutional voids, institutional entrepreneurship, and stakeholder theory to develop a concept of institutional sophistication, which refers to both the top-down maturation of the regulatory system that standardizes firm behavior and the bottom-up diversification and intensification of grassroots initiatives that redefine stakeholder membership. Based on this concept, we developed a framework to comprehensively demonstrate how both institutional voids and sophistication drive the MNC CSR crisis in leading emerging markets. Empirically, we established an original database that includes 309 publicized CSR crises encountered by major foreign MNCs in China, India, and Russia, 2000–2011. Through a content analysis, the paper reveals six common sophistication processes that drive the MNC crisis across contexts and also specifies stakeholder strategies that make these processes happen and vary by social problems and national contexts. We also discussed the value of studying corporate social irresponsible behavior in understanding the institution–MNC relationship.     

Corporate responsibility perceptions in change: Finnish managers' views on stakeholder issues from 1994 to 2004

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the changes in Finnish managers' corporate responsibility perceptions from 1994 to 2004. Following earlier research, the concept of corporate responsibility is operationalised using the stakeholder approach. Empirically, we ask how managers' views on stakeholder issues have changed during the 10‐year research period, and how managers' stakeholder orientation compares with their economic orientation. The data were collected using a survey research instrument in the years 1994, 1999 and 2004. The research results show a positive change in managers' corporate responsibility perceptions during this time period. In addition, managers' stakeholder orientation seems to be in balance with their economic orientation. However, the economic context – in terms of both their own company's economic position and the general economic situation – has an effect on managers' stakeholder orientation.     

Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility

Stakeholder theory advocates that firms bear responsibility for the implications of their actions. However, while a firm affects or can affect stakeholders, stakeholders can also affect the corporation. Previous stakeholder theorising has neglected the reciprocal nature of responsibility. The question can be asked whether??in a spirit of reciprocity, loyalty and fairness??stakeholders should treat the corporation in a fair and responsible way. This study based on different definitions of stakeholders argues that various stakeholder attributes differ for different categories of stakeholders. This analysis presumes that the attribute of stakeholder reciprocity can probably be restricted to real stakeholders, labelled stakeowners: genuine stakeholders with a legitimate stake, the loyal partners who strive for mutual benefits. Stakeowners own and deserve a stake in the firm. Stakeholder reciprocity could be an innovative criterion in the corporate governance debate as to who should be accorded representation on the board. Corporate social responsibility should imply corporate stakeholder responsibility.     

How do standard setters define materiality and why does it matter?

Material information is a core aspect of a firm's governance and reporting activities. If corporate information is material, then the firm has a responsibility to disclose it. Currently, firms must judge information as material largely based on a confusing set of standard setters’ definitions. I analyze the particular conditions laid out by each standard setter and explain the ethical implications that result from materiality judgments made by firms using these varied standards. Importantly, this analysis underscores that regulators, firms, and researchers alike must consider the impact of these implications on the fiduciary duty and promise-keeping that firms make as well as the potential for unfairness and financial harm to others’ welfare that could result.     

A Stakeholder Perspective on Buyer–Supplier Conflict

This study seeks to investigate how stakeholder power and an organization's pursuit of legitimacy influence its reaction to conflict with a supplier. We conducted an empirical study among travel agents and tour operators to test the relationship between conflict and stakeholder power and legitimacy derived from three different stakeholders. Our findings imply that power has a dual role. Whereas supplier power reduces buyer–supplier conflict, stakeholder power increases it. Moreover, this study shows that the quest to achieve greater legitimacy from the firm's competitive arena increases conflict. This study is one of the few that test stakeholder theory empirically. We demonstrate that stakeholder theory provides additional explanations above the hitherto taken dyadic approach toward understanding conflict. This study also shows that power can simultaneously reduce and increase conflict depending on which party possesses power. Greater supplier power decreases conflict, while greater stakeholder power and stakeholder-derived legitimacy increases it. Therefore, organizations have to balance their stakeholder and supplier interests.     

Corporate social responsibility for poverty alleviation: An integrated research framework

There is a growing demand by United Nations development agencies and governments for a higher engagement of firms in sustainable development goals, including that of eradicating poverty. Nevertheless, the social issue of poverty has not traditionally been covered by firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. In addition, there is a need to integrate theories in order to better explain pro‐poor CSR in developing countries. Relying on a review of both conceptual and empirical research articles on CSR for poverty alleviation, this study contributes to the CSR research agenda by proposing an integrated research framework for assessing and explaining a firm's contribution to poverty alleviation. Besides discussing the existing evidence, the following issues are critically analysed with the general purpose of obtaining the framework and suggesting avenues for future research: the assessment of a firm's contribution to poverty alleviation, types of pro‐poor CSR initiatives that could be adopted by firms, and the factors influencing a firm's contribution. The framework, which intends to be useful for future research, can also assist the United Nations to increase the firms’ contribution to its alleviating poverty sustainable development goal.     

Are Organisation Researchers too Obsessed with the Economic Responsibility of the Firm?

The original intent of business education in America focused on the development of professional managers who would look after the interests of society. As economic and shareholder theories influenced business education, firm performance became the manager’s top – if not only – priority. The economic responsibility of the firm also appears to be dominating scholarly interest in organisations as well. However, business firms constitute part of the fabric of society and closer attention should be paid by organisation researchers to the social responsibilities of the firm. In doing so, a more balanced research approach can be achieved. In this article, we give evidence that research within the study of the organisation, specifically in the field of management, has predominately turned its attention to the economic responsibility of the firm. We close by demonstrating that other fields within organisation research also appear to be favouring the study of performance and we offer suggestions as to how scholars might better address the firm’s role in society beyond its economic responsibility. Jeremy Galbreath is a Postdoctoral Fellow at Curtin University of Technology where he is studying corporate social responsibility (CSR). He has published extensively, with over 50 articles in print and 3 book chapters. Dr. Galbreath's research and teaching focuses on strategic management, the resource-based view of the firm, corporate social responsibility, stakeholder management, the ethicality of profit making strategies, intellectual capital and information technology.     

Social influence and stakeholder engagement behavior conformity,compliance, and reactance

Following the proliferation of customer engagement behavior research, rising interest is observed in marketing-based stakeholder engagement behavior, which covers any stakeholder's—including a customer's, employee's, firm's, supplier's, competitor's, and so forth—behavioral engagement in his/her role-related interactions, activities, and relationships. However, despite its importance, understanding of the stakeholder engagement behavior concept remains tenuous, is therefore addressed in this paper. We first conceptualize stakeholder engagement behavior as a stakeholder's behavioral manifestation toward his/her role-related interactions, activities, and relationships, followed by an exploration of the effect of influencor-exerted social influence on an influencee's stakeholder engagement behavior. We argue this effect to manifest as stakeholder engagement behavior conformity, -compliance, or -reactance, depending on the influencee's level of acceptance of the influencor's exerted influence. In turn, we propose stakeholder engagement behavior conformity, -compliance, and -reactance to yield cooperation, coopetition, or competition in the influencor/influencee relationship, respectively, as depicted in a conceptual model and an associated set of propositions. By investigating the interface of social influence, stakeholder engagement behavior, and its prevailing relational consequences (i.e., cooperation, coopetition, and competition), our analyses offer novel theoretical acumen and actionable managerial insight.     

Is Fair Treatment Enough? Augmenting the Fairness-Based Perspective on Stakeholder Behaviour

Fairness and justice are core issues in stakeholder theory. Although such considerations receive more attention in the ‘normative’ branch of the stakeholder literature, they have critical implications for ‘instrumental’ stakeholder theory as well. In research in the instrumental vein, although the position has seldom been articulated in significant detail, a stakeholder’s inclination to take action against the firm or, conversely, to cooperate with it, is often taken to be a function of its perceptions concerning the fairness or unfairness (or equity or inequity) of the treatment it receives in its relationship with the firm. Thus, from various works in this domain can be distilled what might be termed a ‘fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour’. This perspective, as it currently stands, assumes a high degree of homogeneity in stakeholders’ responses to fair, unfair, or munificent treatment by the firm. This supposition is itself typically based on a presumption that stakeholders consistently and uniformly adhere to norms of equity and reciprocity in their relationships with firms. However, research developments in equity theory and social exchange theory suggest that such assumptions are likely untenable. Accordingly, in this work, after outlining the fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour, I undertake to augment it by presenting propositions concerning the possible influences of stakeholders’ equity preferences and exchange ideologies on their propensities to sanction or support the firm. Incorporating these stakeholder traits into the fairness-based perspective should enhance the predictive validity of its propositions concerning stakeholder behaviour in response to fairness or unfairness in the firm–stakeholder relationship.