The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine three aspects of the stakeholder theory and critique and integrate important contributions to the literature related to each, concluding that the three aspects are mutually supportive and that the normative base of the theory-which includes the modern theory of property rights-is fundamental.
Abstract: ?The stakeholder theory has been advanced and justified in the management literature on the basis of its descriptive accuracy, instrumental power, and normative validity. These three aspects of the theory, although interrelated, are quite distinct; they involve different types of evidence and argument and have different implications. In this article, we examine these three aspects of the theory and critique and integrate important contributions to the literature related to each. We conclude that the three aspects of stakeholder theory are mutually supportive and that the normative base of the theory-which includes the modern theory of property rights-is fundamental. If the unity of the corporate body is real, then there is reality and not simply legal fiction in the proposition that the managers of the unit are fiduciaries for it and not merely for its individual members, that they are . . . trustees for an institution [with multiple constituents] rather than attorneys for the stockholders.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, a theory of stakeholder identification and saliency based on stakeholders possessing one or more of three relationship attributes (power, legitimacy, and urgency) is proposed, and a typology of stakeholders, propositions concerning their saliency to managers of the firm, and research and management implications.
Abstract: Stakeholder theory has been a popular heuristic for describing the management environment for years, but it has not attained full theoretical status. Our aim in this article is to contribute to a theory of stakeholder identification and salience based on stakeholders possessing one or more of three relationship attributes: power, legitimacy, and urgency. By combining these attributes, we generate a typology of stakeholders, propositions concerning their salience to managers of the firm, and research and management implications.
10,630 citations
TL;DR: This article conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies and found that corporate virtue in the form of social responsibility and, to a lesser extent, environmental responsibility is likely to pay off, although the operationalizations of CSP and CFP also moderate the positive association.
Abstract: Most theorizing on the relationship between corporate social/environmental performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) assumes that the current evidence is too fractured or too variable to draw any generalizable conclusions. With this integrative, quantitative study, we intend to show that the mainstream claim that we have little generalizable knowledge about CSP and CFP is built on shaky grounds. Providing a methodologically more rigorous review than previous efforts, we conduct a meta-analysis of 52 studies (which represent the population of prior quantitative inquiry) yielding a total sample size of 33,878 observations. The meta-analytic findings suggest that corporate virtue in the form of social responsibility and, to a lesser extent, environmental responsibility is likely to pay off, although the operationalizations of CSP and CFP also moderate the positive association. For example, CSP appears to be more highly correlated with accounting-based measures of CFP than with market-based ...
6,493 citations
Cites background from "The Stakeholder Theory of the Corpo..."
...The performance of business organizations is affected by their strategies and operations in market and non-market environments (Baron 2000)....
[...]
...Instrumental stakeholder theory (for example, Clarkson 1995; Cornell and Shapiro 1987; Donaldson and Preston 1995; Freeman 1984; Mitchell et al. 1997 (the classification of these studies as exemplifying ‘instrumental stakeholder theory’ was made ex post)) suggests a positive relationship between…...
[...]
...According to this theory, the satisfaction of various stakeholder groups is instrumental for organizational financial performance (Donaldson and Preston 1995; Jones 1995)....
[...]
TL;DR: In this article, the authors outline a supply and demand model of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and conclude that there is an "ideal" level of CSR, which managers can determine via cost-benefit analysis.
Abstract: We outline a supply and demand model of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Based on this framework, we hypothesize that a firm's level of CSR will depend on its size, level of diversification, research and development, advertising, government sales, consumer income, labor market conditions, and stage in the industry life cycle. From these hypotheses, we conclude that there is an “ideal” level of CSR, which managers can determine via cost-benefit analysis, and that there is a neutral relationship between CSR and financial performance.
6,305 citations
Cites background from "The Stakeholder Theory of the Corpo..."
...According to Donaldson and Preston (1995), three aspect of this theory-normative, instrumental, and descriptive-are "mutually supportive....
[...]
TL;DR: The authors argue that companies are increasingly asked to provide innovative solutions to deep-seated problems of human misery, even as economic theory instructs managers to focus on maximizing their shareholders' wealt.
Abstract: Companies are increasingly asked to provide innovative solutions to deep-seated problems of human misery, even as economic theory instructs managers to focus on maximizing their shareholders' wealt
4,666 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors propose an institutional theory of corporate social responsibility consisting of a series of propositions specifying the conditions under which corporations are likely to behave in socially responsible ways, and argue that the relationship between basic economic conditions and corporate behavior is mediated by several institutional conditions: public and private regulation, the presence of nongovernmental and other independent organizations that monitor corporate behaviour, institutionalized norms regarding appropriate corporate behavior, associative behavior among corporations themselves, and organized dialogues among corporations and their stakeholders.
Abstract: I offer an institutional theory of corporate social responsibility consisting of a series of propositions specifying the conditions under which corporations are likely to behave in socially responsible ways. I argue that the relationship between basic economic conditions and corporate behavior is mediated by several institutional conditions: public and private regulation, the presence of nongovernmental and other independent organizations that monitor corporate behavior, institutionalized norms regarding appropriate corporate behavior, associative behavior among corporations themselves, and organized dialogues among corporations and their stakeholders. Concerns about corporate social responsibility have grown significantly during the last two decades. Not only has the issue become commonplace in the business press and among business and political leaders (Buhr & Graf
3,806 citations
Cites background from "The Stakeholder Theory of the Corpo..."
...Indeed, whole fields of economic inquiry, such as the study of economic regulation (e.g., Demsetz, 1968; Stigler,...
[...]
...Instead, most of the stakeholder literature focuses on four other issues (Donaldson & Preston, 1995)....
[...]
References
More filters
[...]
TL;DR: The first conference on the topic of pluralism and ethical theory was held at Hollins College, under the auspices of the Hollins Institute for Ethics and Public Policy and the editors of Ethics as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Many of the concerns about pluralism that pervade political theory and bedevil practical politics have their sources in remote regions of ethical theory. Political debates about multicultural education, assimilation, tolerance, political realism, diplomatic pragmatism, and the justification of liberal democracy and its critique by communitarians can all be connected to debates in ethical theory about relativism and realism, about the plurality of values, about the unity of the virtues, about conflicting principles of right conduct, and about divergent accounts of human good and the good life. The connection between political and ethical theory on these matters is direct and potent. It is also complex. Ethical relativism, for example, has been used both as a warrant for liberalism and as a reason for rejecting it. One side asserts that if there are several equally good ways of life, then democratic political institutions must be neutral between them; the other insists that if our way of life is as good as any other, then we are not obligated to change it in order to accommodate new members, new fashions, or new ideas. On June 7-9, 1991, a conference on the topic of pluralism and ethical theory was held at Hollins College, under the auspices of the Hollins Institute for Ethics and Public Policy and the editors of Ethics. Funding for the conference came from the Jessie Ball duPont Fund. The articles in the symposium published here are descendants of some of the papers given at the Hollins conference. Since these papers are (appropriately enough) quite diverse, a word or two of general introduction is in order.
23 citations
22 citations
TL;DR: The first annual Business Enterprise Trust Awards as discussed by the authors was designed to "shine a spotlight on courageous and principled acts of business responsibility" and was met with skepticism by some members of the business community.
Abstract: In March 1991, the Business Enterprise Trust presented its first annual awards for acts of "courage, integrity and social vision" in business. The stated purpose of the awards is to honor those "who know there9s more to good business than next year9s bottom line." Predictably, an effort designed to "shine a spotlight on courageous and principled acts of business responsibility" would be met with skepticism by some members of the business community. And, even before the award winners were announced, Fortune cynically questioned the motives not only of the Trust but, by extension, of all business executives who claim to do good. This article explores both the validity of the Trust9s efforts to reward business "virtue" and the arguments of those who claim that doing good is bad business.
22 citations