Building Trust in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships: Critical Emotional Incidents and Practices of Engagement

Sloan, Pamela; Oliver, David

doi:10.1177/0170840613495018

Cited by 102 publications

(106 citation statements)

References 76 publications

(248 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding that inequality deteriorates trust takes on particular importance when one considers the fundamental role that trust plays in the formation of the type of protest organizations and new forms discussed in the first two sections of this article. Previous research shows that trust is critical in making collective action possible (Kramer et al, 1996), driving protest participation (Benson and Rochon, 2004) and allowing multi-stakeholder partnerships to form (Sloan and Oliver, 2013).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Income inequality ignored? An agenda for business and strategic organization

Bapuji

Neville

2015

Strategic Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a vibrant body of scholarship and a growing public discourse around the socio-political consequences of rising income inequality around much of the world, very little is known about the organizational consequences of societal-level income inequality. In this essay, we draw upon previous literature on the socio-political consequences of high income inequality to help identify its potential business consequences. In particular, we suggest that high levels of income inequality can give rise to (1) social movements that coerce and constrain firms' actions, (2) alternative organizational forms that displace existing organizations and (3) new political and regulatory risks that undermine firms' performance or survival. Using this argument, we emphasize the broader point that income inequality matters to firms and markets and that the study of inequality needs to be 'brought in from the cold' by organizational researchers. Furthermore, we outline a specific research agenda aimed at better understanding income inequality and how organizations can respond to it.There is a vibrant body of scholarship and a growing public discourse about the socio-political consequences of rising income inequality in much of the world. From the front-page press coverage of Occupy Wall Street in the early 2010s to Thomas Piketty's emergence as a talk-show fixture, there is a sense that citizens and scholars alike share a concern about income inequality. This concern is rooted in a belief that high levels of inequality are bad for society -bad for democracy, bad for health and well-being and bad for the cohesion of our cities and communities. These beliefs are borne out in a range of academic research showing that high income inequality has deleterious effects on the polity, public health, civic life and human development in general (see Neckerman and Torche, 2007, for a comprehensive review). In other words, we know how inequality affects

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Income inequality ignored? An agenda for business and strategic organization

Bapuji

Neville

2015

Strategic Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Literature highlights that challenges in partnership co‐operation are a longstanding issue, especially in multi‐stakeholder partnerships, and that these remain difficult and poorly understood (Mohr and Spekman ; Riggs et al . ; Sloan and Oliver ). Telecare, as already outlined, requires knowledge from different disciplines and sectors, thus partnership working appears to be necessary for its implementation.…”

Section: Trust In Multi‐stakeholder Partnershipmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Telecare is predicted to play an important role in future health and social service plans in several European countries, the USA and Japan (Kubitschke et al 2010). This article uses Sloan and Oliver's definition of multi-stakeholder partnerships (Sloan andOliver 2013: 1827): 'formalized arrangements in which organizations from diverse sectors (private, public and not-for profit) commit to work together in mutually beneficial ways to accomplish goals they could otherwise not achieve alone'. This definition recognizes both potential diversity between the stakeholders and their interdependence in aspiring to achieve mutually beneficial goals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do We Understand Partnership Working? Experiences from a Telecare Project

Berge

2016

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementing telecare requires experience and knowledge from different disciplines and sectors; business, technology and care. The uptake of telecare has been slow, which is assumed to be caused by difficulties in co-operation within telecare partnerships. This article presents a new approach to improve understanding of telecare partnerships. The approach builds on theories of trust and partnership working and is informed by rational choice theory. Within this article the approach is applied to recent experiences from a telecare project in Norway, to demonstrate how different ways of interpreting the complex social interactions in telecare partnerships yield new insight and understanding. Examples from the Norwegian project illustrate how different understandings of actions and choices affected trust and caused either improved or deteriorated co-operation in the partnership. The partners that were able to develop trust through a common evaluation of the problems co-operated better. However, when partners lacked or had insufficient knowledge, either of each other or of the situation, this led to disparate understandings that threatened trust and affected further co-operation. The new approach presented here is helpful in analyzing and understanding the actions of different partners within a telecare partnership and identifying why things worked well or went wrong. The approach may have wider relevance for other partnerships

show abstract

“…design of product innovations, identification of challenges in business development) (Andriof & Waddock, 2002;Harrison & Freeman, 2004;Payne & Calton, 2002). In this regard the activation of multi-stakeholder dialogue has been posited as a mechanism to facilitate stakeholder activation and to inspire companies to solve social problems and improve social welfare (Sloan & Oliver, 2013). More specifically, multi-stakeholder dialogues are learning environments that enable the firm to tackle with complex problems felt both by the company and its stakeholders, leveraging their participation in the formulation and implementation of business decisions.…”

Section: Stakeholder Engagement: Current Dominant Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns

Biraghi¹,

Gambetti²,

Romenti³

2017

IJBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper digs into the existing controversial literature on stakeholder engagement (SE) to understand and critically confront with ambivalence in the concept. This is done by exploring how SE is conceptually framed and pragmatically pursued in the representations of current business practices. The study is designed according to a qualitative interpretive approach based on depth interviews with a purposively selected theoretical sample of key informants with established expertise in stakeholder relationship management practices. According to our findings, SE appears torn between an idealistic impetus on the fringe of a utopian vision of the business, and its often trivial translation into practice urged by the pragmatic necessity to meet accountability requirements. This tension stems from corporate governance logics and organizational business models of firms, which are often not prone to guarantee the participatory and genuinely dialogic exchange between company and stakeholders advocated by the idealistic mandate of SE. In terms of contribution the paper provides a critical inductive reconstruction of current meanings and clashes embedded in enacting SE.

show abstract

Building Trust in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships: Critical Emotional Incidents and Practices of Engagement

Cited by 102 publications

References 76 publications

Income inequality ignored? An agenda for business and strategic organization

Income inequality ignored? An agenda for business and strategic organization

How Do We Understand Partnership Working? Experiences from a Telecare Project

Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About