IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v157y2019i4d10.1007_s10551-018-3963-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder Theory Through the Lenses of Catholic Social Thought

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Luis Retolaza

    (University of Deusto)

  • Ricardo Aguado

    (University of Deusto)

  • Leire Alcaniz

    (University of Deusto)

Abstract

Beyond different starting points, stakeholder theory (ST) and Catholic Social Thought (CST) share many compatible perspectives when analyzing the role of the firm in economic activity, especially regarding the attention of the firm to different social and economic actors. Additionally, ST bears limitations regarding its ethical and anthropological foundation, and also about the legitimation of the different stakeholders’ interests. Therefore, ST lacks clear criteria to solve possible conflicts of interest between stakeholders. This paper analyzes the potentiality of ST, widely accepted in corporate management, to integrate CST principles in order to solve those conflicts. At the same time, the paper studies the possibility of finding in the principles of CST an anthropological and ethical foundation for ST. This foundation could be the source of criteria to discuss the levels of legitimation and prioritization between stakeholders´ interests, especially when those interests collide.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Luis Retolaza & Ricardo Aguado & Leire Alcaniz, 2019. "Stakeholder Theory Through the Lenses of Catholic Social Thought," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 157(4), pages 969-980, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:157:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-018-3963-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-3963-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-018-3963-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-018-3963-6?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. Andrew C. Wicks & R. Edward Freeman, 1998. "Organization Studies and the New Pragmatism: Positivism, Anti-positivism, and the Search for Ethics," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(2), pages 123-140, April.
    2. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    3. Vivek Narain Mathur & Andrew Price & Simon Austin, 2008. "Conceptualizing stakeholder engagement in the context of sustainability and its assessment," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(6), pages 601-609.
    4. Agle, Bradley R. & Donaldson, Thomas & Freeman, R. Edward & Jensen, Michael C. & Mitchell, Ronald K. & Wood, Donna J., 2008. "Dialogue: Toward Superior Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 153-190, April.
    5. Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 409-421, October.
    6. Sison, Alejo José G. & Fontrodona, Joan, 2012. "The Common Good of the Firm in the Aristotelian-Thomistic Tradition," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 211-246, April.
    7. Freeman, R. Edward, 2000. "Business Ethics at the Millennium," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 169-180, January.
    8. Robert Strand & R. Freeman, 2015. "Scandinavian Cooperative Advantage: The Theory and Practice of Stakeholder Engagement in Scandinavia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(1), pages 65-85, March.
    9. Solomon, Robert C., 1994. "The Corporation as Community a Reply to Ed Hartman," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 271-285, July.
    10. R. Edward Freeman, 2010. "Managing for Stakeholders: Trade-offs or Value Creation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 7-9, August.
    11. Dunham, Laura & Freeman, R. Edward & Liedtka, Jeanne, 2006. "Enhancing Stakeholder Practice: A Particularized Exploration of Community," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 23-42, January.
    12. Baviera, Tomás & English, William & Guillén, Manuel, 2016. "The ‘Logic of Gift’: Inspiring Behavior in Organizations Beyond the Limits of Duty and Exchange," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(2), pages 159-180, April.
    13. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    14. Lex Donaldson & James H. Davis, 1991. "Stewardship Theory or Agency Theory: CEO Governance and Shareholder Returns," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 16(1), pages 49-64, June.
    15. Freeman, Edward & Liedtka, Jeanne, 1997. "Stakeholder capitalism and the value chain," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 286-296, June.
    16. R. Edward Freeman & Andrew C. Wicks & Bidhan Parmar, 2004. "Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 364-369, June.
    17. R. Freeman & Kirsten Martin & Bidhan Parmar, 2007. "Stakeholder Capitalism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 303-314, September.
    18. Monika Kostera & Michael Pirson, 2017. "Dignity and the organization," Post-Print hal-03520855, HAL.
    19. Robert Strand & R. Freeman, 2015. "Erratum to: Scandinavian Cooperative Advantage: The Theory and Practice of Stakeholder Engagement in Scandinavia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(1), pages 87-87, March.
    20. Freeman, R. Edward & Liedtka, Jeanne, 1991. "Corporate social responsibility: A critical approach," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 92-98.
    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. Iñigo Calvo-Sotomayor & Ekhi Atutxa & Ricardo Aguado, 2020. "Who Is Afraid of Population Aging? Myths, Challenges and an Open Question from the Civil Economy Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Kamran Shafique & Cle-Anne Gabriel, 2022. "Vulnerable Stakeholders’ Engagement: Advancing Stakeholder Theory with New Attribute and Salience Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    3. Michael R. Carey & Dung Q. Tran, 2023. "Deconstruction, Choice, Reconstruction, and Integration: Insights from Ignatius of Loyola’s Conversion Process on the Professional Formation of Organizational Leaders," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 181-190, August.
    4. Ana María Gómez-Bezares & Fernando Gómez-Bezares, 2020. "Catholic Social Thought and Sustainability. Ethical and Economic Alignment," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, December.
    5. Gregorio Guitián & Alejo José G. Sison, 2023. "Offshore Outsourcing from a Catholic Social Teaching Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 595-609, July.
    6. Ricardo Zózimo & Miguel Pina e Cunha & Arménio Rego, 2023. "Becoming a Fraternal Organization: Insights from the Encyclical Fratelli Tutti," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 383-399, March.

    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. Vladislav Valentinov, 2023. "Stakeholder Theory: Toward a Classical Institutional Economics Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Miguel Alzola, 2011. "The Reconciliation Project: Separation and Integration in Business Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 99(1), pages 19-36, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Giovanni Ferri & Angelo Leogrande, 2015. "Was the Crisis due to a shift from stakeholder to shareholder finance? Surveying the debate," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 108, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    6. Dutordoir, Marie & Strong, Norman C. & Sun, Ping, 2018. "Corporate social responsibility and seasoned equity offerings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 158-179.
    7. Bidhan (Bobby) L. Parmar & Andrew C. Wicks & R. Edward Freeman, 2022. "Stakeholder Management & The Value of Human‐Centred Corporate Objectives," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 569-582, March.
    8. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.
    9. Jose-Luis Godos-Díez & Roberto Fernández-Gago & Laura Cabeza-García, 2015. "Business Education and Idealism as Determinants of Stakeholder Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 439-452, October.
    10. Domènec Melé, 2012. "The Firm as a “Community of Persons”: A Pillar of Humanistic Business Ethos," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 89-101, March.
    11. Claus Dierksmeier, 2016. "What is ‘Humanistic’ About Humanistic Management?," Humanistic Management Journal, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 9-32, September.
    12. Kim, Rebecca Chunghee & Yoo, Kate Inyoung & Uddin, Helal, 2018. "The Korean Air nut rage scandal: Domestic versus international responses to a viral incident," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 533-544.
    13. Chakraborty, Atreya & Gao, Lucia Silva & Sheikh, Shahbaz, 2019. "Managerial risk taking incentives, corporate social responsibility and firm risk," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 58-72.
    14. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    15. Jill Brown & William Forster, 2013. "CSR and Stakeholder Theory: A Tale of Adam Smith," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 301-312, January.
    16. Jesús Mauricio Flórez Parra, 2016. "El gobierno corporativo en el ámbito del sector público: un estudio bibliométrico en las revistas ubicadas en el área de Administración Pública," Revista Facultad de Ciencias Económicas, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, vol. 25(1), pages 161-175, December.
    17. Bidhan L. Parmar & Adrian Keevil & Andrew C. Wicks, 2019. "People and Profits: The Impact of Corporate Objectives on Employees’ Need Satisfaction at Work," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 13-33, January.
    18. Naeem Tabassum & Satwinder Singh, 2020. "Corporate Governance and Organisational Performance," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-030-48527-6, October.
    19. Heino, Noora & Tuominen, Pasi & Jussila, Iiro, 2020. "Listed Family Firm Stakeholder Orientations: The Critical Role of Value-creating Family Factors," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4).
    20. Allen Kaufman & Ernie Englander, 2011. "Behavioral Economics, Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 421-438, September.

    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:157:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10551-018-3963-6. 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.