IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v109y2012i1p53-65.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the Nature of Stakeholder Relationships: An Empirical Examination of a Conflict Situation

Author

Listed:
  • Johanna Kujala
  • Anna Heikkinen
  • Hanna Lehtimäki

Abstract

This article examines stakeholder relationships in a conflict situation. The focus of analysis is on how to understand stakeholder relationships as both ethical and strategic, and further, how the interests of different stakeholders become justified. To describe stakeholder relationships, we use media texts reporting on the case of a foreign investment project. The description shows how relationships evolve and how they constitute different episodes related to the conflict. We address the episodes by analysing stakeholder relationships and their salience. Furthermore, we examine how different stakeholder interests are justified in relation to the conflict. By providing a rich detailed qualitative analysis, we elaborate on the strategic and ethical nature of stakeholder relationships. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Johanna Kujala & Anna Heikkinen & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2012. "Understanding the Nature of Stakeholder Relationships: An Empirical Examination of a Conflict Situation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 53-65, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:109:y:2012:i:1:p:53-65
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1379-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-012-1379-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-012-1379-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Neville & Bulent Menguc, 2006. "Stakeholder Multiplicity: Toward an Understanding of the Interactions between Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 377-391, July.
    2. Elisabet Garriga, 2009. "Cooperation in Stakeholder Networks: Firms’ ‘Tertius Iungens’ Role," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 623-637, December.
    3. Lisa Calvano, 2008. "Multinational Corporations and Local Communities: A Critical Analysis of Conflict," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 793-805, November.
    4. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    5. Adele Santana & Antonino Vaccaro & Donna Wood, 2009. "Ethics and the Networked Business," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 661-681, December.
    6. Julia Roloff, 2008. "Learning from Multi-Stakeholder Networks: Issue-Focussed Stakeholder Management," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 82(1), pages 233-250, September.
    7. Edward Freeman, R. & Evan, William M., 1990. "Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 337-359.
    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. Diego F. Uribe & Isabel Ortiz-Marcos & Ángel Uruburu, 2018. "What Is Going on with Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature? A Symbiotic Relationship for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    2. Eastmure, Elizabeth & Cummins, Steven & Sparks, Leigh, 2020. "Non-market strategy as a framework for exploring commercial involvement in health policy: A primer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    3. Carola Hillenbrand & Kevin Guy Money & Chris Brooks & Nicole Tovstiga, 2019. "Corporate Tax: What Do Stakeholders Expect?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 403-426, August.
    4. Kabelo Esther Rathobei & Helena Ranängen & Åsa Lindman, 2024. "Stakeholder integration in sustainable business models to enhance value delivery for a broader range of stakeholders," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3687-3706, May.
    5. Liu, Wentong & Kwong, Caleb C.Y. & Kim, Young-Ah & Liu, Hongfei, 2021. "The more the better vs. less is more: Strategic alliances, bricolage and social performance in social enterprises," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 128-142.
    6. Sefa Hayibor & Colleen Collins, 2016. "Motivators of Mobilization," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 351-374, December.
    7. Laura Corazza & Dario Cottafava & Daniel Torchia & Amandeep Dhir, 2024. "Interpreting stakeholder ecosystems through relational stakeholder theory: The case of a highly contested megaproject," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 2384-2412, March.
    8. Monfardini, Patrizio & Barretta, Antonio D. & Ruggiero, Pasquale, 2013. "Seeking legitimacy: Social reporting in the healthcare sector," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 54-66.
    9. Sargiacomo, Massimo & Corazza, Laura & D'Andreamatteo, Antonio & Torchia, Daniel, 2024. "Megaprojects and hybridity. Accounting and performance challenges for multiple diverse actors and values," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(5).
    10. Maili Marjamaa & Hanna Salminen & Johanna Kujala & Riikka Tapaninaho & Anna Heikkinen, 2021. "A Sustainable Circular Economy: Exploring Stakeholder Interests in Finland," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 10(1), pages 50-62, April.
    11. Edwin Rühli & Sybille Sachs & Ruth Schmitt & Thomas Schneider, 2017. "Innovation in Multistakeholder Settings: The Case of a Wicked Issue in Health Care," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 289-305, June.

    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. Edwin Rühli & Sybille Sachs & Ruth Schmitt & Thomas Schneider, 2017. "Innovation in Multistakeholder Settings: The Case of a Wicked Issue in Health Care," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 289-305, June.
    2. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    3. Andrew Crane & Trish Ruebottom, 2011. "Stakeholder Theory and Social Identity: Rethinking Stakeholder Identification," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 77-87, March.
    4. Alejandra Marin & Ronald Mitchell & Jae Lee, 2015. "The Vulnerability and Strength Duality in Ethnic Business: A Model of Stakeholder Salience and Social Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(2), pages 271-289, August.
    5. Silvana Signori & Yves Fassin, 2023. "Family Members’ Salience in Family Business: An Identity-Based Stakeholder Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 191-211, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Bazlur RAHMAN, & Idris ALI, & Alexandru Mircea NEDELEA, 2017. "Greenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claimsgreenwashing In Canadian Firms: An Assessment Of Environmental Claims," EcoForum, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 6(2), pages 1-8, july.
    8. Samantha Miles, 2017. "Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 437-459, May.
    9. David Carassus & Khaled Albouaini & Marie Caussimont, 2013. "Une analyse de l'Audit Expectation Gap dans le contexte français," Post-Print hal-02432110, HAL.
    10. Oluyomi A. Osobajo & David Moore, 2017. "Who is Who? Identifying the Different Sub-groups of Secondary Stakeholders within a Community: A Case Study of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria Communities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 188-209, September.
    11. Michal Zdziarski & Robert G. Boutilier, 2016. "Strategic Challenges in Stakeholder Networks (Strategiczne wyzwania w sieciach interesariuszy)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(64), pages 62-79.
    12. Anna Heikkinen & Johanna Kujala & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2013. "Managing Stakeholder Dialogue: The Case of Botnia in Uruguay," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 2(1), pages 25-37, June.
    13. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    14. Joseph Heath, 2011. "Business Ethics and the ‘End of History’ in Corporate Law," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 5-20, March.
    15. Kévin Pastier & François Silva, 2020. "Objet, raison d’être et praxis : les coopératives et le commun au secours de l’entreprise ?," Post-Print hal-02872799, HAL.
    16. Y. Fassin, 2008. "The Stakeholder Model Refined," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/529, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. 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.
    18. Michael O. Erdiaw-Kwasie & Khorshed Alam & Md. Shahiduzzaman, 2017. "Towards Understanding Stakeholder Salience Transition and Relational Approach to ‘Better’ Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case for a Proposed Model in Practice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 85-101, August.
    19. Silke Machold & Pervaiz Ahmed & Stuart Farquhar, 2008. "Corporate Governance and Ethics: A Feminist Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 665-678, September.
    20. Enrico Fontana & Niklas Egels-Zandén, 2019. "Non Sibi, Sed Omnibus: Influence of Supplier Collective Behaviour on Corporate Social Responsibility in the Bangladeshi Apparel Supply Chain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 1047-1064, November.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:109:y:2012:i:1:p:53-65. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.