IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v31y2021i1p1-36_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Creating Value by Sharing Values: Managing Stakeholder Value Conflict in the Face of Pluralism through Discursive Justification

Author

Listed:
  • Schormair, Maximilian J. L.
  • Gilbert, Dirk Ulrich

Abstract

The question of how to engage with stakeholders in situations of value conflict to create value that includes a plurality of conflicting stakeholder value perspectives represents one of the crucial current challenges of stakeholder engagement as well as of value creation stakeholder theory. To address this challenge, we conceptualize a discursive sharing process between affected stakeholders that is oriented toward discursive justification involving multiple procedural steps. This sharing process provides procedural guidance for firms and stakeholders to create pluralistic stakeholder value through the discursive accommodation of diverging stakeholder value perspectives. The outcomes of such a discursive value-sharing process range from stakeholder value dissensus to low (agreement to disagree) and increasing levels of stakeholder value congruence (value compromise) to stakeholder value consensus (shared values). Hence, this article contributes to the emerging literature on integrative stakeholder engagement by conceptualizing a procedural framework that is neither overly oriented towards dissensus nor consensus.

Suggested Citation

  • Schormair, Maximilian J. L. & Gilbert, Dirk Ulrich, 2021. "Creating Value by Sharing Values: Managing Stakeholder Value Conflict in the Face of Pluralism through Discursive Justification," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 1-36, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:31:y:2021:i:1:p:1-36_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X20000123/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Radka MacGregor Pelikánová & Robert Kenyon MacGregor & Martin Èernek, 2021. "New trends in codes of ethics: Czech business ethics preferences by the dawn of COVID-19," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 12(4), pages 973-1009, December.
    2. Sorola, Matthew, 2022. "Q methodology to conduct a critical study in accounting: A Q study on accountants’ perspectives of social and environmental reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    3. Gorgi Krlev, 2023. "Let’s Join Forces: Institutional Resilience and Multistakeholder Partnerships in Crises," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(3), pages 571-592, September.
    4. Awad, Mohamed Hassan & Sanchez, Mabel & Abikenari, Matthew A., 2022. "The values work of restorative ventures: The role of founders’ embodied embeddedness with at-risk social groups," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    5. Julia Grimm & Rebecca C. Ruehle & Juliane Reinecke, 2024. "Building Common Ground: How Facilitators Bridge Between Diverging Groups in Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 194(3), pages 583-608, October.
    6. Dirk Ulrich Gilbert & Stephanie Schrage & Michael Behnam, 2024. "Advancing the Moral legitimacy of digital platforms as gatekeepers: a critical analysis from a political corporate social responsibility perspective," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 94(7), pages 1115-1145, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:31:y:2021:i:1:p:1-36_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.