IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v165y2020i1d10.1007_s10551-018-4085-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mitigating Stakeholder Marginalisation with the Relational Self

Author

Listed:
  • Krista Bondy

    (University of Bath)

  • Aurelie Charles

    (University of Bath)

Abstract

Stakeholder theory has been an incredibly powerful tool for understanding and improving organisations, and their relationship with other actors in society. That these critical ideas are now accepted within mainstream business is due in no small part to the influence of stakeholder theory. However, improvements to stakeholder engagement through stakeholder theory have tended to help stakeholders who are already somewhat powerful within organisational settings, while those who are less powerful continue to be marginalised and routinely ignored. In this paper, we argue that one possible obstacle preventing less powerful stakeholders from speaking up and/or being heard by organisations is found at the ontological level, where we have identified an ‘essentialist self’ underpinning the stakeholder concept. By deconstructing the stakeholder concept through how it is defined, discussed and debated, and linking this back to the practical consequences of the theory for the least powerful stakeholders, we are able to make three contributions. One, through our deconstruction, it is clear that at an ontological level, stakeholder theory is underpinned by an implicit, and problematic, assumption of the ‘essentialist self’, where the organisation is treated as the ‘natural, universal self’, and anyone not closely resembling this narrow (and unrealistic) view of self is treated as ‘other’. Two, we build on the work of authors such as Wicks et al. (Bus Ethics Q 4(4):475–497, 1994), who highlight the need for consideration of the self within stakeholder theory. We thus take our findings from contribution one and begin to build a more holistic view of the self within the stakeholder concept, where each self is encouraged to recognise common selves outside and inside the corporation. Third, we link the theoretical discussion to the practical by discussing some imperfect ways in which a more holistic, enriched stakeholder concept might begin to help mitigate marginalisation for some stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Krista Bondy & Aurelie Charles, 2020. "Mitigating Stakeholder Marginalisation with the Relational Self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 67-82, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:165:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-018-4085-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-018-4085-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-018-4085-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-018-4085-x?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. Ellen Auster & R. Freeman, 2013. "Values and Poetic Organizations: Beyond Value Fit Toward Values Through Conversation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 39-49, March.
    2. R. Freeman & Ellen Auster, 2011. "Values, Authenticity, and Responsible Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 15-23, January.
    3. Liedtka, Jeanne M., 1996. "Feminist Morality and Competitive Reality: A Role for an Ethic of Care?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 179-200, April.
    4. Phillips, Robert A., 1997. "Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 51-66, January.
    5. Grosser, Kate & Moon, Jeremy & Nelson, Julie A., 2017. "Guest Editors’ Introduction: Gender, Business Ethics, and Corporate Social Responsibility: Assessing and Refocusing a Conversation," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 541-567, October.
    6. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    7. Richard A. Wolfe & Daniel S. Putler, 2002. "How Tight Are the Ties that Bind Stakeholder Groups?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 64-80, February.
    8. Harry Buren & Michelle Greenwood, 2008. "Enhancing Employee Voice: Are Voluntary Employer–Employee Partnerships Enough?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 209-221, August.
    9. Madsen, Peter M. & Bingham, John B., 2014. "A Stakeholder–Human Capital Perspective on the Link between Social Performance and Executive Compensation," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 1-30, January.
    10. Barrientos, Stephanie & Dolan, Catherine & Tallontire, Anne, 2003. "A Gendered Value Chain Approach to Codes of Conduct in African Horticulture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 1511-1526, September.
    11. Aurélie Charles, 2012. "Exchange Entitlement Mapping," Perspectives from Social Economics, in: Exchange Entitlement Mapping, chapter 0, pages 53-75, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Yves Fassin, 2012. "Stakeholder Management, Reciprocity and Stakeholder Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 83-96, August.
    13. Jem Bendell & Eva Collins & Juliet Roper, 2010. "Beyond partnerism: toward a more expansive research agenda on multi‐stakeholder collaboration for responsible business," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(6), pages 351-355, September.
    14. Rachel Sayers, 2012. "The Cost of Being Female: Critical Comment on Block," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(4), pages 519-524, April.
    15. 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.
    16. Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 479-502, October.
    17. Stephen Bear & Noushi Rahman & Corinne Post, 2010. "The Impact of Board Diversity and Gender Composition on Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Reputation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(2), pages 207-221, December.
    18. Robbin Derry, 2012. "Reclaiming Marginalized Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(2), pages 253-264, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Wicks, Andrew C. & Gilbert, Daniel R. & Freeman, R. Edward, 1994. "A Feminist Reinterpretation of The Stakeholder Concept," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 475-497, October.
    21. Andrew L. Friedman & Samantha Miles, 2002. "Developing Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 1-21, January.
    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. Gro Kvåle & Zuzana Murdoch, 2022. "Making Sense of Stigmatized Organizations: Labelling Contests and Power Dynamics in Social Evaluation Processes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 675-693, July.
    2. Roya Derakhshan, 2022. "Building Projects on the Local Communities’ Planet: Studying Organizations’ Care-Giving Approaches," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(4), pages 721-740, February.
    3. 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.

    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. Kate Grosser & Jeremy Moon, 2019. "CSR and Feminist Organization Studies: Towards an Integrated Theorization for the Analysis of Gender Issues," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 321-342, March.
    2. Layla Branicki & Senia Kalfa & Alison Pullen & Stephen Brammer, 2023. "Corporate Responses to Intimate Partner Violence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 187(4), pages 657-677, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Elise Perrault, 2017. "A ‘Names-and-Faces Approach’ to Stakeholder Identification and Salience: A Matter of Status," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 25-38, November.
    5. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    6. Roya Derakhshan, 2022. "Building Projects on the Local Communities’ Planet: Studying Organizations’ Care-Giving Approaches," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(4), pages 721-740, February.
    7. 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.
    8. Francesco Di Maddaloni & Roya Derakhshan, 2019. "A Leap from Negative to Positive Bond. A Step towards Project Sustainability," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Yafet Yosafet Wilben Rissy, 2021. "The stakeholder model: its relevance, concept, and application in the Indonesian banking sector," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 219-231, September.
    11. Lorenzo Dorigo & Giuseppe Marcon, 2014. "A caring interpretation of stakeholder management for the social enterprise. Evidence from a regional survey of micro social cooperatives in the Italian welfare mix," Working Papers 01, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    12. Karan Sonpar & Federica Pazzaglia & Jurgita Kornijenko, 2010. "The Paradox and Constraints of Legitimacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 1-21, August.
    13. Sefa Hayibor, 2017. "Is Fair Treatment Enough? Augmenting the Fairness-Based Perspective on Stakeholder Behaviour," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 43-64, January.
    14. 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.
    15. Michal Varmus & Milan Kubina & Gabriel Koman & Patrik Ferenc, 2018. "Ensuring the Long-Term Sustainability Cooperation with Stakeholders of Sports Organizations in SLOVAKIA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Krista Bondy & Jeremy Moon & Dirk Matten, 2012. "An Institution of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Multi-National Corporations (MNCs): Form and Implications," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(2), pages 281-299, December.
    17. K. V. James & R. G. Priyadarshini, 2021. "Responsible Leadership: A New Paradigm for Organizational Sustainability," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 46(4), pages 452-470, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Don Clifton & Azlan Amran, 2011. "The Stakeholder Approach: A Sustainability Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(1), pages 121-136, January.
    20. Mohammad A. Ali, 2017. "Stakeholder Salience for Stakeholder Firms: An Attempt to Reframe an Important Heuristic Device," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 153-168, August.

    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:165:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-018-4085-x. 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.