Stakeholder Approach: What Effects Should We Take into Account in Contemporary Societies?

Abstract

In recent years, the stakeholder approach has been widely applied in the debate on corporate social responsibility (CSR). Although many authors of this approach have reviewed many elements of the model, they have unconditionally accepted several criteria assumed by Freeman (1984) to identify stakeholders. In general, stakeholder authors have assumed that (a) the company establishes dyadic relationships with other agents, and (b) decisions made by a company only have foreseen and direct effects on other agents. These criteria have enabled researchers to understand simple processes. However, they have also prevented researchers from explaining how action comes about, and how responsibility is shared, in many complex processes taking place in contemporary societies. Such complex processes involve many agents, and each decision can generate unexpected effects which accumulate or disseminate. Furthermore, the normative structure governing these processes can affect and/or be affected by the actions of agents. In this study, we propose new criteria to expand the stakeholder model and facilitate the study of CSR in such processes.

The Antecedents of Corporate Social and Environmental Irresponsibility

“…One, rooted in shareholder theory, is that managers should make decisions that maximize the wealth of their firms' stockholders (Levitt, 1958;Friedman, 1984;Bessong & Tapang, 2012). The other, rooted in stakeholder theory, is that firms have a duty to society that goes well beyond simply maximizing the wealth of their owners (Carroll, 1979;Frooman, 1999;Kassinis & Vafeas, 2006;Lopez-De-Pedro & Rimbau-Gilabert, 2012). This debate has gradually shifted from whether or not socially responsible actions are appropriate to how much a firm should spend in the interest of acting responsibly (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001;Campbell, 2007).…”

CSR in India: Critical Review and Exploring Entrepreneurial Opportunities

“…We critically examined the CSR programmes offered by many corporates in the region and developed a method to gauge the perception and response from the community. While we add to the stakeholder theory (Lopez-De-Pedro & Rimbau-Gilabert, 2012), our article also establishes a way for setting a common ground for the development of a theory on CSR. Hence, we submit that the definitional debate should now move away from generic discussions on social responsibility and focus on specifics that address social issues, which in our case are age, education and caste, with a view to generating economic engagement and entrepreneurial outcomes.…”

Corporate Tax: What Do Stakeholders Expect?

“…This third category of ''how'' firms need to engage with stakeholders in the tax debate seems to matter significantly to stakeholders, and particularly emotionally to community groups, which perceive that they are being excluded, not listened to, and not engaged with in the process (Colquitt et al 2013;Shin et al 2015). In other words, the perceived norms and narratives surrounding corporate tax activities may act as a catalyst to interpret firm behavior either positively or negatively (Helmig et al 2016;Lopez-De-Pedro and Rimbau-Gilabert 2012;Roloff 2008;Siltaoja and Lähdesmäki 2015;Svendsen and Laberge 2005).…”

“…As such, a dialogue between business and society on issues related to corporate tax needs to be facilitated and conducted in a sensitive and appreciative manner (Kujala et al 2012;Mitchell et al 2016;Money et al 2012). However, multi-stakeholder engagement in practice is described as a long-term process that requires an open mind-set, significant emotional and cognitive effort, and a sense of goodwill toward groups with different backgrounds and agendas-hence it requires a genuine desire and engagement by business and community representatives to participate in such a process (Helmig et al 2016;Lopez-De-Pedro and Rimbau-Gilabert 2012;Mackey et al 2007;Roloff 2008;Siltaoja and Lähdesmäki 2015). The findings in this study show a strong desire from community groups to be listened to and to be included in a debate with all parties affecting and affected by corporate tax payments.…”