Explore the vast range of titles available.

Stakeholder theory is widely accepted but elementary aspects remain indeterminate as the term 'stakeholder' is an essentially contested concept (Miles, J Bus Ethics 108:285-298, 2012; Mitchell, Organ Stud 33:1407-1411, 2012), being variously describable, internally complex and open in character (Gallie, Proc Aristot Soc 56:167-198, 1956). Such contestability is highly problematic for theory development and empirical testing. The extent of essential contestability, previously unknown, is demonstrated in this paper through a bounded systematic review of 593 different stakeholder theory definitions. As an essentially contested concept, the solution does not lie in a universal stakeholder definition, but in debating the boundaries of stakeholder identification. To this end, this paper presents the first major attempt at sorting, filtering and ordering stakeholder theory and stakeholder definitions to produce a comprehensive, multi-dimensional classification of stakeholder theory. The constructs of the classification model juxtapose existing stakeholder theories and contributions from across the multicontextual applications of stakeholder theory, thereby providing an invaluable overview of what we know about stakeholder theory in one model. The classification model is then tested with positive results. The paper concludes with a comprehensive discussion of the implications of classification stakeholder theory definitions, which has for future research.

Though the customer journey (CJ) is gaining traction, its limited customer focus overlooks the dynamics characterizing other stakeholders’ (e.g., employees’/suppliers’) journeys, thus calling for an extension to the stakeholder journey (SJ). Addressing this gap, we advance the SJ, which covers any stakeholder’s journey with the firm. We argue that firms’ consideration of the SJ, defined as a stakeholder’s trajectory of role-related touchpoints and activities, enacted through stakeholder engagement, that collectively shape the stakeholder experience with the firm, enhances their stakeholder relationship management and performance outcomes. We also view the SJ in a network of intersecting journeys that are characterized by interdependence theory’s structural tenets of stakeholder control, covariation of interest, mutuality of dependence, information availability, and temporal journey structure, which we view to impact stakeholders’ journey-based engagement and experience, as formalized in a set of Propositions. We conclude with theoretical (e.g., further research) and practical (e.g., SJ design/management) implications.

Research summary: In this study, we propose and test a multi-stakeholder perspective to address variation in innovation performance across firms. Specifically, we analyze how a focal firm's innovation performance is shaped by its political stakeholders (local and central governments) and economic stakeholders (suppliers, buyers, and competitors). Using a data set consisting of over 26,400 Chinese firms, we first find support for our predictions that a focal firm's innovation performance will be enhanced by both its government connections and the innovativeness of its economic stakeholders. We then analyze whether the interdependent effect of these political and economic stakeholders is more likely to be synergistic versus antagonistic, and find evidence consistent with the antagonistic view. Managerial summary: We show how a firm's innovativeness is influenced strongly by its relationships to external stakeholders. Specifically, we examine the potentially dual-edged role of political stakeholders (local and central governments) and economic stakeholders (suppliers, buyers, and competitors). Using extensive data on Chinese firms, we find: (a) that the higher the level of government connections, the greater a firm's innovativeness; (b) that firms located in proximity with more innovative economic stakeholders also tend to have higher innovation performance. We also look beyond these independent positive effects to examine the joint effect of these two forms of stakeholder influence, and here we see that more influence is not always better. Specifically, we find that the innovation benefit that typically accrues to firms in proximity to more innovative economic stakeholders is weakened when those firms also have higherlevel government connections.

Despite the growing importance of stakeholder management, few studies have empirically examined the influence of stakeholder relationship capability (SRC) on firm innovation, especially in emerging economies. This study investigates how SRC relates to firm innovation in the presence of governmental intervention and in combination with firm-level characteristics. Using a survey and multiple secondary datasets on the listed Chinese firms, our findings indicate that SRC is positively associated with firm innovation. Moreover, advanced legal development and high-tech status strengthen the positive link between SRC and innovation, whereas state ownership and firm age weaken this relationship. These findings provide novel insights into how firms use stakeholder management to enhance innovation that is beneficial for economic growth.

Building on the theoretical argument that a firm's ability to profit from social responsibility depends upon its stakeholder influence capacity (SIC), we bring together contrasting literatures on the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance (CFP) to hypothesize that the CSP-CFP relationship is U-shaped. Our results support this hypothesis. We find that firms with low CSP have higher CFP than firms with moderate CSP, but firms with high CSP have the highest CFP. This supports the theoretical argument that SIC underlies the ability to transform social responsibility into profit.

The notion of a sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem is a novel concept related to entrepreneurial ecosystems that focus on fostering sustainable entrepreneurship. This paper advances our understanding of the topic by investigating the success factors for developing strong sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems. Particularly important aspects in this context are the role of entrepreneurial stakeholders and regional culture for the perceptions of sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems. Using sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems in Graz, Austria, and Wuppertal, Germany, as an empirical base, a quantitative study is carried out. Based on a literature review, a set of hypotheses is developed and tested. The findings highlight the importance of regional entrepreneurial culture as well as tailored stakeholder support and collaboration in sustainable entrepreneurship for creating strong sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems.

The inconclusiveness of previous research on the association between gender diverse boards (GDB) and corporate social performance (CSP) has led us to revisit the question in light of stakeholder management and institutional theories. Given that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a multidimensional concept, we test the influence of GDB on various groups of stakeholders. By considering the interaction between stakeholders' power and directors' personal motivations toward the prioritization of stakeholders' claims, we find that GDB are positively related to CSR dimensions that are related to less powerful stakeholders such as the environment, contractors, and the community. However, GDB do not appear to have a significant impact on CSR dimensions that are associated with stakeholders who benefit from more institutionalized power, such as employees and customers.

Grounded in the upper echelons perspective and stakeholder theory, this study establishes a link between CEO hubris and corporate social responsibility (CSR). We first develop the theoretical argument that CEO hubris is negatively related to a firm's socially responsible activities but positively related to its socially irresponsible activities. We then explore the boundary conditions of hubris effects and how these relationships are moderated by resource dependence mechanisms. With a longitudinal dataset of S&P 1500 index firms for the period 2001-2010, we find that the relationship between CEO hubris and CSR is weakened when the firm depends more on stakeholders for resources, such as when its internal resource endowments are diminished as indicated by firm size and slack, and when the external market becomes more uncertain and competitive. The implications of our findings for upper echelons theory and the CSR research are discussed.

Research Summary: Using arguments derived from transactions cost economics and incomplete contract theory, this article shows that the assumption that shareholders are a firm's only residual claimants is logically inconsistent with resource‐based theory's model of profit generation. It follows from this conclusion that resource‐based theory's model of profit appropriation must incorporate a stakeholder perspective. Some theoretical and empirical implications of this conclusion for resource‐based theory's model of profit generation, profit appropriation, the role of managers and entrepreneurs in resource‐based theory, and how conflicting interests among stakeholders can be resolved are all discussed. Finally, some continuing differences between stakeholder theory and incorporating a stakeholder perspective into resource‐based theory's model of profit appropriation are also discussed. Managerial Summary: Some argue that since shareholders are the only stakeholder who have a claim on a firm's profits, managers should focus only on maximizing shareholder wealth. Not only will this satisfy shareholders, it will also satisfy a firm's other stakeholders, since—in principle—these other stakeholders get paid before shareholders. This article shows that this logic is deeply flawed. In particular, it shows that if the only stakeholder who has a claim on a firm's economic profits is shareholders, then—in most competitive settings—a firm will not be able to attract the kinds of resources it needs to generate these profits. To attract the kinds of resources that can generate profits, managers must recognize that stakeholders, besides shareholders, have claims on the profits that their resources help generate. This, in turn, suggests that managers seeking to generate economic profits must adopt a stakeholder perspective in how they manage their firm. This article explores the managerial implications of this conclusion.

The “business case for sustainability” is a notion often referenced in the corporate sustainability and corporate social responsibility literature. Whereas some see sustainability and the business case as contradictions and thus emphasize the existence of trade-offs, others highlight how (potential) business cases can be created by managing ecological, social, and economic aspects. Both views have in common that the “business case” is implicitly or explicitly seen as creating financial performance, often for one group of stakeholders, only. The fact that a business case is not a given phenomenon but has to be co-created in the exchange between and with contributions from various stakeholders has so far not been analysed in depth. By taking a stakeholder theory perspective, this article extends the existing research on what business and a business case are about and analyses the understanding of business cases for sustainability and how they can be created with and by stakeholders.