Rethinking the salience of not-for-profit and for-profit stakeholders of a firm
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compare two organizational populations, i.e., for-profit and not-for-profit, which are distinguishable from one another based on the dominant institutional logic that each endorses.
Abstract: Purpose
Although Mitchell et al. (1997) recognize salience attributes as variables, the salience framework based on a dichotomous representation of salience attributes does not explain why, in some instances, a latent stakeholder is assigned more salience than a definitive stakeholder. This paper explains this riddle by bringing the debate to the organizational population level and suggests a new perspective for understanding the process of stakeholder identification and prioritization.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors compare two organizational populations, i.e. “for-profit and not-for-profit” which are distinguishable from one another based on the dominant institutional logic that each endorses. The authors, therefore, mobilize the institutional theory and bring the debate of the stakeholder salience to the organizational population level.
Findings
The authors propose that members of an organizational population endorsing similar institutional logic develop salience attributes of similar potential values, which are radically different from those of the members of other organizational populations; these potential values act as precursors that determine the perceived values of salience attributes for a manager; and dominant and recessive salience attributes work, at the organizational population level, to determine stakeholder prioritization.
Originality/value
The original model of Mitchell et al. (1997) has been cited more than 9,000 times, but the process of stakeholder evaluation remains a black box (Bundy et al., 2013; Tashman and Raelin, 2013). This paper contributes to the debate and suggests a change in the level of analysis (to the organizational population) and a focus on the institutional logic perspective.
Citations
More filters
Dissertation•
01 Jan 2018
15 citations
01 Feb 2019
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide a comprehensive and structured overview to clarify terms and accelerate future research in the area of stakeholder saliency. But, the influence of contextual factors on managerial perceptions is less developed than topics such as stakeholder attributes and underlying assumptions.
Abstract: Mitchell et al.’s (Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886, 1997) theory of stakeholder salience is still the leading theory for stakeholder identification and prioritization. However, the influence of contextual factors on managerial perceptions is less developed than topics such as stakeholder attributes and underlying assumptions. Further, the existing literature is scattered and not summarized systematically. Therefore, this review aims at providing a comprehensive and structured overview to clarify terms and accelerate future research. With the help of a research framework, I structured the identified literature into a manager’s individual “inner context” (i.e., position, knowledge and cognition, and personality) and their “outer context” (i.e., environment, organization, and passive stakeholder characteristics). Research gaps were identified not only in every category, but also in the used focal organization, geography, methodologies, and underlying theories. These results suggest new paths such as a focus on projects and interdisciplinary research with other fields such as personnel psychology or design thinking.
13 citations
01 Jan 2015
TL;DR: This paper conducted a systematic review of articles on stakeholder theory and stakeholder salience and identified 121 relevant research articles and consolidated and synthesized the existing contributions into three mutually discernible themes: assessment of the salience framework, the refinement and development of the model and the integration of contextual factors.
Abstract: Mitchell et al.’s (1997) stakeholder salience theory is one of the most prominent contributions to the management literature. Although the stakeholder salience theory is a powerful tool to identify and prioritize stakeholders and is one of the most frequently cited works, efforts to take stock of research in the stakeholder salience tradition have remained limited. In this paper, therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review of articles on stakeholder theory and stakeholder salience and identified 121 relevant research articles. The review shows that following Mitchell et al.’s (1997) original model, the concept of stakeholder salience has evolved remarkably and is being applied in various fields. The authors consolidated and synthesized the existing contributions into three mutually discernible themes: assessment of the salience framework, the refinement and development of the model and the integration of contextual factors. This study provides an organized map to scholars in the stakeholder salie...
9 citations
01 Jan 2019
TL;DR: In this article, the authors consolidate and synthesize 57 relevant research articles into three mutually discernible topics (assessment of Mitchell et al.'s (1997) model, refinement of Mitchell's model and integration of contextual factors) and identified areas in which research into stakeholder salience has contributed to overcoming the shortcomings of broader stakeholder thinking.
Abstract: Mitchell, Agle and Wood’s (1997) stakeholder salience theory is
one of the most prominent contributions to the management literature.
Although the stakeholder salience theory is a powerful tool for identifying
and prioritizing stakeholders and is one of the most frequently cited works,
efforts to take stock of research in the stakeholder salience tradition have
remained limited. Therefore, in this article, we consolidated and
synthesized 57 relevant research articles into three mutually discernible
themes (assessment of Mitchell et al.’s (1997) model, refinement of the
model and integration of contextual factors) and identified areas in which
research into stakeholder salience has contributed to overcoming the
limitations of broader stakeholder thinking. Moreover, grounded in a
historical perspective, we present several avenues for future research that
also helped us to make theoretical, methodological and thematic
contributions.
5 citations
References
More filters
01 Mar 2010
18,472 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1984TL;DR: The Stakeholder Approach: 1. Managing in turbulent times 2. The stakeholder concept and strategic management 3. Strategic Management Processes: 4. Setting strategic direction 5. Formulating strategies for stakeholders 6. Implementing and monitoring stakeholder strategies 7. Conflict at the board level 8. The functional disciplines of management 9. The role of the executive as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Part I. The Stakeholder Approach: 1. Managing in turbulent times 2. The stakeholder concept and strategic management 3. Stakeholder management: framework and philosophy Part II. Strategic Management Processes: 4. Setting strategic direction 5. Formulating strategies for stakeholders 6. Implementing and monitoring stakeholder strategies Part III. Implications for Theory and Practice: 7. Conflict at the board level 8. The functional disciplines of management 9. The role of the executive.
17,404 citations
TL;DR: This article synthesize the large but diverse literature on organizational legitimacy, highlighting similarities and disparities among the leading strategic and institutional approaches, and identify three primary forms of legitimacy: pragmatic, based on audience self-interest; moral, based upon normative approval; and cognitive, according to comprehensibility and taken-for-grantedness.
Abstract: This article synthesizes the large but diverse literature on organizational legitimacy, highlighting similarities and disparities among the leading strategic and institutional approaches. The analysis identifies three primary forms of legitimacy: pragmatic, based on audience self-interest; moral, based on normative approval: and cognitive, based on comprehensibility and taken-for-grantedness. The article then examines strategies for gaining, maintaining, and repairing legitimacy of each type, suggesting both the promises and the pitfalls of such instrumental manipulations.
13,229 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1978
TL;DR: The External Control of Organizations as discussed by the authors explores how external constraints affect organizations and provides insights for designing and managing organizations to mitigate these constraints, and it is the fact of the organization's dependence on the environment that makes the external constraint and control of organizational behavior both possible and almost inevitable.
Abstract: Among the most widely cited books in the social sciences, The External Control of Organizations has long been required reading for any student of organization studies. The book, reissued on its 25th anniversary as part of the Stanford Business Classics series, includes a new preface written by Jeffrey Pfeffer, which examines the legacy of this influential work in current research and its relationship to other theories.The External Control of Organizations explores how external constraints affect organizations and provides insights for designing and managing organizations to mitigate these constraints. All organizations are dependent on the environment for their survival. As the authors contend, "it is the fact of the organization's dependence on the environment that makes the external constraint and control of organizational behavior both possible and almost inevitable." Organizations can either try to change their environments through political means or form interorganizational relationships to control or absorb uncertainty. This seminal book established the resource dependence approach that has informed so many other important organization theories.
13,195 citations
12,500 citations