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.     

Responsible Leadership in a Stakeholder Society – A Relational Perspective

We understand responsible leadership as a social-relational and ethical phenomenon, which occurs in social processes of interaction. While the prevailing leadership literature has for the most part focussed on the relationship between leaders and followers in the organization and defined followers as subordinates, we show in this article that leadership takes place in interaction with a multitude of followers as stakeholders inside and outside the corporation. Using an ethical lens, we discuss leadership responsibilities in a stakeholder society, thereby following Bass and Steidelmeier’s suggestion to discuss “leadership in the context of contemporary stakeholder theory” (1999: 200). Moreover, from a relational and stakeholder perspective we approach the questions: What is responsible leadership? What makes a responsible leader? What qualities are needed? Finally, we propose a so-called “roles model” of responsible leadership, which gives a gestalt to a responsible leader and describes the different roles he or she takes in leading stakeholders and business in society.     

Brand Power Relationships: A Co-Evolutionary Conceptual Framework

Abstract

In the era of the Internet and networking, stakeholders increasingly acquire power by influencing brand value and meanings. However, this does not imply that marketing managers have lost their power over brand creation and management. Thus, the aim of this study is to explore brand power relationships taking the co-evolutionary perspective as conceptual lenses. In particular, this article seeks to address the competitive relationship between the corporation and its stakeholders in determining the corporate brand evolution over time, suggesting that corporate brand management is successful when co-evolving power relationships are established. The relational interplay between managers and stakeholders is framed into the Brand Power Relationship Model that suggests four potential evolutionary paths. It offers new brand typologies supported by examples from business practices, which mirror four different ways of managing and adapting brands over time; namely, through the None’s Brand, the Managers’ Brand, the Stakeholders’ Brand, and the Co-Evolutionary Brand. Focusing on the latter, this study depicts managers and stakeholders as having reciprocal influences and co-determining themselves, thus triggering interrelated relational effects that influence corporate brand evolution over time. The bilateral power of managers and stakeholders is framed into a further model, focused on corporate brand co-evolution. It is proposed that corporate brands can successfully co-create their value and meanings over time only if corporations co-evolve with their environment—in this study, multiple external stakeholders.     

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.     

Cooperation in Stakeholder Networks: Firms’ ‘Tertius Iungens’ Role

In stakeholder theory, most research on cooperation has been focused on inter-organizational collaboration field centered at the dyadic level, excluding the relational or network data. Relational or network data are important as the firms do not simply respond to each stakeholder individually but to an interaction of influences from the entire stakeholder set. The purpose of this article is to analyze the cooperation process among the firm and its stakeholders by considering the relational data and to describe the role of the firm in such cooperation processes. The empirical evidence is provided by an inductive in-depth case study on the company ‘Gas-Nat’ and its stakeholders cooperating on the ‘natural gas pipeline program’ in Argentina. To do so, I combined both quantitative sociometric data and qualitative data from grounded theory and ethnographic observations. This research suggests a stakeholder cooperation model based on structural (stakeholder’s position) and relational factors (framing process). The results indicate that stakeholder cooperation is not just determined by stakeholder position, but they can vary depending on the political opportunity structure in the network and on the framing process. It was found that network structure may create a context for selective cooperation but doesn’t explicitly determine it which is different from the previous research in stakeholder network literature. The role of the firm in the cooperation process was found as a tertius iungens role which implies to join, unite, or connect, and it is different from the existing prominent network literature of tertius gaudens.     

Enough chit-chat,strike! Deliberation and agonism in corporate governance

This conceptual paper contributes to the critique of a body of literature that will be named ‘deliberative corporate governance’ by defending non-deliberative acts performed by stakeholders. It first argues that this literature introduces to the corporation a decision-making process where it does not belong, given the corporation's economic role. This leads to an ‘efficiency constraint’ on any attempt to justify deliberation – deliberative governance theorists must show that it is the most efficient and cost-effective way to address the issues that concern them. A real case example where deliberation would have been counter-productive in that regard will show that this is not the case. Building on this example, the paper uses the theory of democratic agonism to argue that non-deliberative acts should be part of governance. A sketch of managerial duties vis-à-vis such acts is attempted as well. The paper does not seek to reject deliberative corporate governance entirely, but rather to defend the importance of non-deliberative practices in addressing its theoretical concern. It makes a conceptual contribution to corporate governance theory, from which it draws practical implications for stakeholders-oriented management.     

Assessing the Accountability of the Benefit Corporation: Will This New Gray Sector Organization Enhance Corporate Social Responsibility?

In recent years the benefit corporation has emerged as a new organizational form dedicated to legitimizing the pursuit of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Eschewing traditional governmental authority, the benefit corporation derives its moral legitimacy from the values of its owners and the oversight of a third party evaluator. This research identifies the benefit corporation as a new type of gray sector organization (GSO) and applies extant theory on GSOs to analyze its design. In particular, it shows how the theory of GSO accountability can be used to assess the potential of benefit corporations for enhancing CSR. This research first examines the statutes that have established benefit corporations in five states in the US, along with bills in other states, to show how legislation defines their specific public benefits and holds them accountable for delivering these benefits. It then compares the accountability of the benefit corporation with that of other corporate-centric GSOs, e.g., GSOs that closely resemble traditional corporations. It concludes with significant design-based concerns about the utility of the benefit corporation as an effective organization for implementing CSR.     

Corporate Social Responsibility,Utilitarianism, and the Capabilities Approach

This article explores the possible convergence between the capabilities approach and utilitarianism to specify CSR. It defends the idea that this key issue is related to the anthropological perspective that underpins both theories and demonstrates that a relational conception of individual freedoms and rights present in both traditions gives adequate criteria for CSR toward the company’s stakeholders. I therefore defend “relational capability” as a means of providing a common paradigm, a shared vision of a core component of human development. This could further lead to a set of indicators aimed at assessing corporate social performance as the maximization of the relational capability of people impacted by the activities of companies. In particular, I suggest a way of evaluating the contribution of extractive companies to the communities close to their industrial sites in extremely poor areas, not from the viewpoint of material resources and growth, but from the viewpoint of the quality of the social environment and empowerment.     

The artisans' dilemma: Artisan entrepreneurship and the challenge of firm growth

An increasing number of entrepreneurial ventures are growing at exponential rates despite their founders' professed intentions not to grow their firms. We refer to these individuals as artisan entrepreneurs. Through an inductive, phenomenon-based research approach, we explore how artisan entrepreneurs subscribe to a counter-institutional identity yet engage in a divergent set of behaviors. We discover that artisans' counter-institutional identity contains two sides—promoting the exclusion of ‘who we are not’ (oppositional identity) or providing support for ‘who we are’ (relational identity). We theorize that artisan entrepreneurs' differing views regarding their independence led to very different approaches to growth. When artisans either do not see forms of external control as impinging on their independence or sense that serving stakeholders is a means to perform relational identity work, they embrace growth. Thus, artisans may find that growth serves stakeholders, but funding growth brings about financial pressures, which may force the artisan down a path of growth.     

Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle: The Link Between Ethics and Politics

Stakeholder theory is an important part of modern business ethics. Many scholars argue for a normative instead of an instrumental approach to stakeholder theory. Recent examples of such an approach show that problems appear with respect to the ethical foundation as well as the specification of the norms and the relation between corporate and individual responsibilities. This paper argues for the relevance of Aristotle's ideas on ethics and politics, and especially the link between them, for stakeholder theory. An Aristotelian approach suggests that the corporation should be considered as existing to allow the decision maker, who normally is a manager, to live a complete and good life and to make decisions that involve the interests of different stakeholders. This approach leads to a number of implications regarding the role of organizational politics and the managerial function.     

企业战略管理的信息范式

传统的企业战略管理理论是基于安德鲁斯的把战略管理过程分为制订和实施的两阶段模型,沿着企业外部环境和企业内部因素两个维度展开的广泛研究,形成战略管理各理论流派。结合博弈论与信息经济学理论提出一种新战略管理理论范式,使得当前各主要理论被整合在这一范式之下,使战略管理理论沿着科学化方向发展成为可能。     

Accounting as a Facilitator of Extreme Narcissism

We add texture to the conclusion of Duchon and Drake (Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 2009, 301) that extreme narcissism is associated with unethical conduct. We argue that the special features possessed by financial accounting facilitate extreme narcissism in susceptible CEOs. In particular, we propose that extremely narcissistic CEOs are key players in a recurring discourse cycle facilitated by financial accounting language and measures. Such CEOs project themselves as the corporation they lead, construct a narrative about the corporation and themselves using financial accounting measures, and then reflect on how their accounting-constructed performance is perceived by stakeholders. We do not present empirical evidence about whether the use of accounting language and measures leads to unethical behaviour by extreme narcissistic CEOs – although the conclusions of Duchon and Drake (2009) suggest empirical support is probable. Rather, we focus on developing alertness to the potential for accounting, when engaged by an extremely narcissistic CEO, to be a precursor or implement of unethical behaviour.     

Criteria for Evaluating the Legitimacy of Corporate Social Responsibility

The goal of this paper is to provide a general discussion about the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility. Given that social responsibility projects entail costs, it is not always obvious under what precise conditions managers will have a responsibility to engage in activities primarily designed to promote societal goals.In this paper we discuss four distinct criteria for evaluating the legitimacy of corporate projects for institutionalizing social responsibility:(1) local knowledge(2) level of responsibility(3) shared consensus, and(4) relationship to financial performance.We conclude our discussion by noting that in those cases where the firm possesses knowledge about a specific problem and its solution, is directly responsible for causing harm, where a shared consensus among all relevant stakeholders exists, and financial performance will be enhanced, social responsibility projects are ideal. Obviously, no program will meet all of the criteria. In fact, our model specifically suggests that there is often a trade-off between the first three criteria and the last. For example, in those situations where the corporation directly imposes harm on third parties, and where a high degree of consensus exists among all stakeholders, there is little need to link the social responsibility program to financial performance. By contrast, as the corporation seeks proactive solutions to problems which are only incidental to the corporation, and where little consensus exists, the predicted relationship to financial performance becomes more crucial. By formally examining the trade-offs among these four criteria we more fully understand the complex relationship between social responsibility and financial impacts.     

Relational Norms in Interfirm Exchanges: From Transactional Cost Economics to the Service-Dominant Logic

Purpose: This article investigates the implication and importance of the service-dominant (S-D) logic to the increasingly relevant study and practice of Interorganizational relational exchange. It points out that relational exchange theory (norms) is an earlier reflection of the S-D logic. Recognizing a need for the transactional cost economics (TCE) framework to address bilateral or hybrid types of exchanges, marketing channel researchers have for over twenty years incorporated relational exchange theory (RET) and TCE to investigate problems of formal contract, environmental uncertainty, power/dependency, and opportunism. However, some theoreticians view relational modes of exchange to be broader in scope than that studied within TCE. We propose a conceptual framework that incorporates TCE constructs with S-D logic principles in order to provide a rich contemporary guide for future relational exchange research and practice.

Methodology/Approach: We first expose the essential elements of the S-D logic and describe relational exchange theory and the problems generated by TCE. Database searches reveal a continuous stream of fifty empirical studies between 1988 and 2009 in which Macneil's relational norms were operationalized in the context of interfirm exchanges. The studies are analyzed from the viewpoint of TCE and the emerging S-D logic. The empirical findings were also discussed in terms of their contribution to validating a fundamental premise of the S-D logic. Subsequently, using S-D logic's conception of operant resources, we suggest several avenues for developing questions and conducting future relational norms research.

Empirical Findings: The findings validate the fundamental assumption of S-D logic, that relational exchange is instrumental in the co-creation of value (exchange performance) whether service is rendered directly or indirectly through goods or a combination of both. Exchange performance is better when the formal contract exists within a relational context. Relational exchange is effective in contexts of both high and low environmental uncertainty, may attenuate the negative effects of power/dependency differences and mitigate opportunistic behavior.

Originality/Value/Contribution: This article is a comprehensive review of relational norms research. It links the empirical findings conducted within the combined conceptual approaches of relational exchange theory and the TCE framework. It provides a comprehensive discussion of the essentials of the S-D logic and its compatibility with previous relational norm research. It outlines an S-D logic inspired framework for future research linking operant resources (knowledge, skills, and technology) to relational norms, facilitators of service-for-service, and value co-creation in interorganizational exchange networks.     

Corporate Governance and the Responsibility of the Board of Directors for Strategic Financial Reporting

One of the fundamental principles of good corporate governance is transparency, i.e., the disclosure of private information to external stakeholders, so that they may make judgments and decisions relating to the corporation. Equally important, but less discussed, is the competing value that corporations need to protect legitimate secrets. Corporations thus need a communication strategy for dealing with external stakeholders which addresses the conflict between disclosure and secrecy. This article focuses on an important element of that communication strategy in the context of financial reporting: the possibility that corporate insiders may consider it in their interest, or in the interest of specific stakeholders, to alter or manipulate the financial information that it discloses publicly. Using concepts from the corporate governance and financial reporting literatures, it addresses the ethical question of who (management or the board of directors) should be responsible for making the fundamental strategic choices whether and (if so) how the corporation alters or manipulates the financial information. This article argues that the board of directors is responsible for formulating (and monitoring) the corporation's communication strategy, and that management is responsible for carrying it out.     

Moral Stress: Considering the Nature and Effects of Managerial Moral Uncertainty

To better illuminate aspects of stress that are relevant to the moral domain, we present a definition and theoretical model of “moral stress.” Our definition posits that moral stress is a psychological state born of an individual’s uncertainty about his or her ability to fulfill relevant moral obligations. This definition assumes a self-and-others relational basis for moral stress. Accordingly, our model draws from a theory of the self (identity theory) and a theory of others (stakeholder theory) to suggest that this uncertainty arises as a manager faces competing claims for limited resources from multiple stakeholders and/or across multiple role identities. We further propose that the extent to which the manager is attentive to the moral aspects of the claims (i.e., moral attentiveness) moderates these effects. We identify several consequences of managerial moral stress and discuss theoretical, empirical, and practical implications of our approach. Most importantly, we argue that this work paves an important path for considering stress through the lens of morality.     

Citizens as Contractualist Stakeholders

This article examines the way that for-profit businesses should take into account the interests of the citizens in the liberal democratic societies in which they operate. I will show how a contractualist version of stakeholder theory identifies the relevant moral interests of both shareholders and citizen stakeholders, and provides a method for giving their interests appropriate consideration. These include (1) the interests that individuals have with respect to private property, (2) the interests citizens have in receiving equitable consideration in the political process, and (3) citizens?? interests which give them the collective right to determine the legal and economic structure of their societies. Using this contractualist analysis, I argue that corporations should consciously take into account the interests of citizen stakeholders when there is no other social mechanism for protecting their interests as citizens.     

Blurring B2C and B2B boundaries: corporate brand value co-creation in B2B2C markets

ABSTRACT

This paper aims to explore how corporate brands co-create value with their multiple stakeholders in a B2B2C marketplace. Main data sources stem from in-depth interviews with top managers of a technology corporation in the financial sector. Findings depict a model that conceptualises the successful value co-creation process as the careful management of six specific drivers, namely: interdependency, direct approach, trust, strategic alignment, adaptive modus operandi, and knowledge sharing. Hence, the study offers new food for thought for scholars and practitioners who wish to improve their knowledge and understanding on brand value co-creation and corporate marketing.