Author:
Boesso Giacomo,Kumar Kamalesh
Abstract
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to examine the association between stakeholder culture, stakeholder salience and firm response to stakeholder demands, based on the stakeholder culture framework.
Design/methodology/approach
– The study was conducted in a field setting involving 292 mid-level managers who completed measures of stakeholder culture and stakeholder engagement activities (SEAs) in their organizations.
Findings
– Results show that managers in organizations with different stakeholder cultures differentially ascribe and weigh the three attributes of power, legitimacy, and urgency when determining stakeholder salience. In addition, stakeholder culture is also associated with how managers respond to stakeholder issues in terms of SEAs.
Research limitations/implications
– Findings of the study justify the need to extend the stakeholder salience theory beyond the values of senior managers to include organization-level factors. This study is largely exploratory and the relationships that have been observed are associational in character.
Practical implications
– Results show that both ascription of stakeholder salience and the nature of SEAs are associated with stakeholder culture prevalent in an organization. This implies that managers may face constraints in managing stakeholder relationships, regardless of their personal values and beliefs, and may have to make deliberate efforts to modify the culture.
Originality/value
– Despite the fact that researchers have been urged to examine how organization-level phenomena guide managerial thinking and decision making with respect to stakeholder relationships, empirical research on the topic is lacking. This study contributes to the emerging research on firm-level perspective on stakeholder management.
Subject
Management Science and Operations Research,General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference34 articles.
1. Agle, B.R.
,
Mitchel, R.K.
and
Sonnenfeld, J.A.
(1999), “What matters to CEO? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values”,
Academy of Management Journal
, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 507-525.
2. Arendt, S.
and
Brettel, M.
(2010), “Understanding the influence of corporate social responsibility on corporate identity, image, and firm performance”,
Management Decision
, Vol. 48 No. 10, pp. 1469-1492.
3. Boesso, G.
and
Kumar, K.
(2009), “Stakeholder prioritization and reporting: evidence from Italy and the US”,
Accounting Forum
, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 162-175.
4. Boesso, G.
,
Kumar, K.
and
Michelon, G.
(2013), “Descriptive, instrumental and strategic approaches to corporate social responsibility: do they drive the financial performance of companies differently?”,
Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal
, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 399-422.
5. Brower, J.
and
Mahajan, V.
(2013), “Driven to be good:a stakeholder theory perspective on the drivers of corporate social performance”,
Journal of Business Ethics
, Vol. 117 No. 2, pp. 313-331.
Cited by
22 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献