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 and relational factors. 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. (shrink)

Relations between non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and companies have been the subject of a sharply increasing amount of publications in recent years within academic business journals. In this article, we critically assess this fast-developing body of literature, which we treat as forming a ‘business and society discourse’ on NGO–business relations. Drawing on discourse theory, we examine 199 academic articles in 11 business and society, international business, and management journals. Focusing on the dominant articulations on the NGO–business relationship and key signifiers they (...) rely on, we analyze the problem-settings of articles in order to reveal the statements that are acceptable and appropriate within this field. Our threefold aim is to (1) identify dominant articulations of NGO–business relations in business and society discourse, (2) expose those articulations that are silenced or suppressed by these dominant articulations, and (3) critically assess possible power effects of these discursive dynamics in the field of discursivity. While business and society discourse on NGO–business relations overall remains open to many different articulations, we also find that those articulations that focus on NGO–business partnerships and governance initiatives tend to privilege collaborative and deliberative ways of engaging and marginalize more adversarial subject positions. We call for more recognition of the potentially constructive role that can be played by conflict. (shrink)

This article contributes to the literature on legitimacy by highlighting its paradox and constraints. While an optimal level of legitimacy-seeking behaviours may be necessary for organizational effectiveness, an excessive focus on legitimacy may lead to stakeholder mismanagement and have the opposite effect. These insights emerged from a longitudinal qualitative study of large-scale changes in public-sector health care in a Canadian province (1994-2002). In 1994, subordinate health care organizations underwent government-driven reforms to promote market-based logics of efficiency and cost reduction. Initial (...) years post reforms were characterized by a singular focus on government-driven priorities and inattention to other stakeholders. However, instead of giving benefits of legitimacy, these behaviours led to anger and activism from non-institutional stakeholders such as staff and community due to a decline in quality and patient satisfaction. Eventually, greater attention to stakeholder concerns ended the stand-off. These findings also elaborate Suchman's (Academy of Management Review 20(3), 571-610, 1995) framework on legitimacy and explain that legitimacy may occur for reasons other than institutionalization of values and be temporary in nature. (shrink)

Business & Society’s 60th anniversary affords an opportunity to reflect on the journal’s achievements in the context of the wider field. We analyze editorial commentaries to map the evolving mission of the journal, assess the achievement of the journal’s mission through a thematic analysis of published articles, and examine Business & Society’s distinctiveness relative to peer journals using a machine learning approach. Our analysis highlights subtle shifts in Business & Society’s mission and content over time, reflecting variation in the relative (...) emphasis on scholarly quality versus policy/practice relevance, and building the journal and its academic community versus addressing issues of concern to wider society. While Business & Society’s intended missions have been substantially and sequentially achieved, an increased emphasis on the society-business nexus and a critical approach to interdisciplinarity could further enhance Business & Society’s leading role within business and society research and attract new generations of contributors and readers. (shrink)

The sizeable theoretical and empirical literature on corporate social responsibility and business ethics in Western, developed economies indicates that the topic has attracted significant interest from academics and practitioners. There is, however, less evidence of the practice of CSR and business ethics in non-Western, transition economies, as insufficient attention is paid to the contextual specifications and underlying processes that may lead to different versions of CSR. Therefore, this paper examines the practice and sense-making of CSR and business ethics from the (...) perspective of the fertile and under researched post-communist context of Central and Eastern Europe, to join the growing academic debate about the impact of cultural and historical traditions on the practice and sense-making of CSR and business ethics in non-Western contexts. The study adopts a particular focus on the post-communist and under researched context of Bulgaria where CSR is still a relatively new phenomenon. By following an exploratory research design and by collecting qualitative data from 34 executives employed by public and private sector organisations in Bulgaria, the study finds that the local business environment is composed of a complex mix of various institutionalised pressures and challenges that predispose organisations to adopt a particular approach to CSR, ethical misconduct and CSR-washing. Apart from the significant contributions related to the practice, understanding and contextualisation of CSR in non-Western countries, the study also identifies challenges of business ethics in transition economies and adds depth to the emerging literature on CSR-washing by proposing a model for neo-communist CSR-washing. The study also offers contributions for practitioners and policy-makers. (shrink)

Although the possibility that a firm’s stakeholders may take damaging measures against it in response to its activities has been an underlying assumption of stakeholder theory from inception, the conditions that predispose stakeholders to act against firms remain largely unexplored in the literature. Based on work in equity theory, expectancy theory, and resource dependence theory, we present and test hypotheses concerning stakeholders’ propensities to impose sanctions upon—or to support—firms. Using a vignette-based experiment, we found strong confirmation of the criticality of (...) fairness in the firm–stakeholder relationship: stakeholder equity perceptions were unequivocally associated with the proclivity to sanction the firm, or to engage in prosocial behaviours of benefit to it. Stakeholder expectancy perceptions and resource dependence were related to only certain forms of stakeholder action, indicating that researchers should take care to differentiate between types of stakeholder response when investigating questions surrounding stakeholder mobilization. Our results also suggest specific avenues for stakeholder dialogue that could help firms mitigate the likelihood of stakeholders taking damaging action against them. (shrink)

Fairness and justice are core issues in stakeholder theory. Although such considerations receive more attention in the ‘normative’ branch of the stakeholder literature, they have critical implications for ‘instrumental’ stakeholder theory as well. In research in the instrumental vein, although the position has seldom been articulated in significant detail, a stakeholder’s inclination to take action against the firm or, conversely, to cooperate with it, is often taken to be a function of its perceptions concerning the fairness or unfairness of the (...) treatment it receives in its relationship with the firm. Thus, from various works in this domain can be distilled what might be termed a ‘fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour’. This perspective, as it currently stands, assumes a high degree of homogeneity in stakeholders’ responses to fair, unfair, or munificent treatment by the firm. This supposition is itself typically based on a presumption that stakeholders consistently and uniformly adhere to norms of equity and reciprocity in their relationships with firms. However, research developments in equity theory and social exchange theory suggest that such assumptions are likely untenable. Accordingly, in this work, after outlining the fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour, I undertake to augment it by presenting propositions concerning the possible influences of stakeholders’ equity preferences and exchange ideologies on their propensities to sanction or support the firm. Incorporating these stakeholder traits into the fairness-based perspective should enhance the predictive validity of its propositions concerning stakeholder behaviour in response to fairness or unfairness in the firm–stakeholder relationship. (shrink)

Stakeholder theory is one of the most influential theories in business ethics. It is perhaps not surprising that a theory as popular as stakeholder theory should be used in different ways, but when the disparity between different uses becomes too great, it is questionable whether all the ‘stakeholder research’ refers to the same underlying theory. This paper starts to clarify this definitional confusion by distinguishing between three different ways in which different lines of stakeholder research are connected with descriptive and (...) instrumental stakeholder theory. First, a distinction is made between research connected with descriptive and with instrumental stakeholder theory as defined by Donaldson & Preston in the narrow or broad sense. Second, a distinction is made between research that interprets descriptive and instrumental stakeholder theories as either hypotheses or research areas. Third, a distinction is made between research that interprets Donaldson & Preston’s central concept of ‘stakeholder management’ as either behaviour or rationale. Finally, the paper discusses the implications of these differences for empirical research into stakeholder theory. (shrink)

In this paper, I present a systematic approach to stakeholder theory based on social capital: the stakeholder social capital approach. Social capital is a relatively novel concept in stakeholder theory, which in previous research was not properly defined or systematically developed. This paper aims to fill this gap by taking into account the specificities of the stakeholder theory, which implies an explicit consideration of values. Therefore, the stakeholder social capital concept is defined by four dimensions (relational, cognitive, structural and evaluative) (...) instead of three (relational, cognitive and structural). I present the stakeholder social capital approach according to Donaldson and Preston's distinction: the descriptive, instrumental and normative. The descriptive perspective implies mapping the stakeholder networks based on the four dimensions and implies a shift toward relationships rather than groups of stakeholders. The instrumental perspective based on the relational view focuses on the drivers of relational rents within the network (relational assets, knowledge routines, complementary resource endowments and effective governance) and the normative perspective aims to foster a relational view of society. (shrink)

In this paper, I present a systematic approach to stakeholder theory based on social capital: the stakeholder social capital approach. Social capital is a relatively novel concept in stakeholder theory, which in previous research was not properly defined or systematically developed. This paper aims to fill this gap by taking into account the specificities of the stakeholder theory, which implies an explicit consideration of values. Therefore, the stakeholder social capital concept is defined by four dimensions (relational, cognitive, structural and evaluative) (...) instead of three (relational, cognitive and structural). I present the stakeholder social capital approach according to Donaldson and Preston's distinction: the descriptive, instrumental and normative. The descriptive perspective implies mapping the stakeholder networks based on the four dimensions and implies a shift toward relationships rather than groups of stakeholders. The instrumental perspective based on the relational view focuses on the drivers of relational rents within the network (relational assets, knowledge routines, complementary resource endowments and effective governance) and the normative perspective aims to foster a relational view of society. (shrink)