IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p574-d199943.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Stakeholder Salience Model Revisited: Evidence from Agri-Food Cooperatives in Spain

Author

Listed:
  • Cristina Pedrosa Ortega

    (University of Jaén, Campus de Las Lagunillas, s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Mª Jesús Hernández-Ortiz

    (University of Jaén, Campus de Las Lagunillas, s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Elia García Martí

    (University of Jaén, Campus de Las Lagunillas, s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

  • Manuel Carlos Vallejo Martos

    (University of Jaén, Campus de Las Lagunillas, s/n, 23071 Jaén, Spain)

Abstract

In recent decades, the importance of cooperatives in agri-food markets has been evident. Specifically, in Spain they represent a very important part of the agri-food industry. However, there is no significant evidence of substantial differences in their management, different from the general business case. The main objective of this study is to examine how a certain organizational context influences manager decisions and perceptions. The purpose is studying whether this influence causes changes to the main conclusions of the stakeholder salience original model. The working methodology consists of carrying out an exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (from the data of 352 agri-food cooperatives in Spain) in order to test the psychometric properties of measurement scales, and the hypothesized relationships between attributes and stakeholder salience results are examined using structural equation modeling. Results show that the measurement of the stakeholder salience varies in agri-food cooperatives. The contributions of this study are to confirm that: (1) in agri-food cooperatives legitimacy is the first measurement of stakeholder salience, unlike the general business case where that is power; (2) the attribute of urgency remains unchanged from the proposed model; and (3) add to the original model the attribute of durability because of the permanence of the interest of stakeholders in agri-food cooperatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristina Pedrosa Ortega & Mª Jesús Hernández-Ortiz & Elia García Martí & Manuel Carlos Vallejo Martos, 2019. "The Stakeholder Salience Model Revisited: Evidence from Agri-Food Cooperatives in Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:574-:d:199943
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/574/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/574/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ignacio BRETOS & Carmen MARCUELLO, 2017. "Revisiting Globalization Challenges And Opportunities In The Development Of Cooperatives," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(1), pages 47-73, March.
    2. Xiangyu Wu & Yunlong Ding, 2018. "The Service Supply Effect of Cooperatives under Economic Transformation: A Demand-Supply Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Benjamin Neville & Simon Bell & Gregory Whitwell, 2011. "Stakeholder Salience Revisited: Refining, Redefining, and Refueling an Underdeveloped Conceptual Tool," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 357-378, September.
    4. James Anderson & David Gerbing, 1984. "The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 49(2), pages 155-173, June.
    5. Russell W. Coff, 1999. "When Competitive Advantage Doesn't Lead to Performance: The Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Bargaining Power," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 119-133, April.
    6. Francesco Perrini & Antonio Tencati, 2006. "Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 296-308, September.
    7. Jeff Everett & Dean Neu & Daniel Martinez, 2008. "Multi-Stakeholder Labour Monitoring Organizations: Egoists, Instrumentalists, or Moralists?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 117-142, August.
    8. Milena Parent & David Deephouse, 2007. "A Case Study of Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization by Managers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 1-23, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rashid Maqbool & Yahya Rashid & Saleha Ashfaq, 2022. "Renewable energy project success: Internal versus external stakeholders' satisfaction and influences of power‐interest matrix," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1542-1561, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shahzad Khurram & Sandra Charreire Petit, 2017. "Investigating the Dynamics of Stakeholder Salience: What Happens When the Institutional Change Process Unfolds?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 485-515, July.
    2. Hannah Charlotte Joos, 2019. "Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 3-37, February.
    3. Adele Santana, 2012. "Three Elements of Stakeholder Legitimacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 105(2), pages 257-265, January.
    4. Conaty, Frank & Robbins, Geraldine, 2021. "A stakeholder salience perspective on performance and management control systems in non-profit organisations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. Thomas Thijssens & Laury Bollen & Harold Hassink, 2015. "Secondary Stakeholder Influence on CSR Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Salience Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 873-891, December.
    6. Gregory D. Saxton & Charlotte Ren & Chao Guo, 2021. "Responding to Diffused Stakeholders on Social Media: Connective Power and Firm Reactions to CSR-Related Twitter Messages," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(2), pages 229-252, August.
    7. Qian, Wei & Parker, Lee & Zhu, Jingyu, 2024. "Corporate environmental reporting in the China context: The interplay of stakeholder salience, socialist ideology and state power," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1).
    8. van Dijk, T.S. (Tessa) & van der Scheer, W.K. (Wilma) & Janssen, R.T.J.M. (Richard), 2021. "Power, legitimacy and urgency: Unravelling the relationship between Dutch healthcare organisations and their financial stakeholders," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(8), pages 1077-1084.
    9. Cristina Gianfelici & Andrea Casadei & Federica Cembali, 2018. "The Relevance of Nationality and Industry for Stakeholder Salience: An Investigation Through Integrated Reports," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 541-558, June.
    10. Wei Jiang & Liwen Wang & Kevin Zhou, 2022. "Green Practices and Customer Evaluations of the Service Experience: The Moderating Roles of External Environmental Factors and Firm Characteristics," Post-Print hal-04015637, HAL.
    11. Millo, Yuval & Barman, Emily & Hall, Matthew, 2016. "Accounting measurement tools and their impact on managerial decision making," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 17(2), pages 17-23.
    12. Shyhrete Muriqi & Maria Fekete-Farkas & Zsolt Baranyai, 2019. "Drivers of Cooperation Activity in Kosovo’s Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-12, May.
    13. Merja Lähdesmäki & Marjo Siltaoja & Laura J. Spence, 2019. "Stakeholder Salience for Small Businesses: A Social Proximity Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 373-385, August.
    14. Carmelo Cennamo & Pascual Berrone & Luis Gomez-Mejia, 2009. "Does Stakeholder Management have a Dark Side?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 491-507, November.
    15. Matthew Hall & Yuval Millo & Emily Barman, 2015. "Who and What Really Counts? Stakeholder Prioritization and Accounting for Social Value," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 907-934, November.
    16. Hall, Matthew & Millo, Yuval & Barman, E, 2015. "Who and what really counts? Stakeholder prioritization and accounting for social value," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62354, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Keysa Manuela Cunha de Mascena & Adalberto Americo Fischmann & João Maurício Gama Boaventura, 2018. "Stakeholder Prioritization in Brazilian Companies Disclosing GRI Reports," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 15(1), pages 17-32, January.
    18. Dan Prud’homme & Tony W. Tong & Nianchen Han, 2021. "A stakeholder-based view of the evolution of intellectual property institutions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(4), pages 773-802, June.
    19. Wei Jiang & Liwen Wang & Kevin Zheng Zhou, 2023. "Green Practices and Customer Evaluations of the Service Experience: The Moderating Roles of External Environmental Factors and Firm Characteristics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 237-253, February.
    20. Kirsten Martin & Robert Phillips, 2022. "Stakeholder Friction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 519-531, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:574-:d:199943. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.