IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijsaem/v15y2024i9d10.1007_s13198-024-02405-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework for analysis of stakeholder dynamics and value creation in industrial maintenance projects: the stakeholder ipot

Author

Listed:
  • Mufaro Masarira

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Kassandra A. Papadopoulou

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Amir Rahbarimanesh

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Jyoti K. Sinha

    (The University of Manchester)

  • Uday Kumar

    (Luleå University of Technology)

Abstract

This paper proposes a methodological approach that can be applied in practice for evaluating stakeholder dynamics and assessing projects against appropriate value propositions within an industrial maintenance project context. A conceptual framework is proposed and is demonstrated through a case analysis. It is expected that the proposed methodology, the Stakeholder Interdependent Performance Opportunities and Threats, (Stakeholder iPOT), can advance project management practice by offering a mechanism for analysing stakeholder expectations and responses to the opportunities and threats that different project events present. This study highlights the need for continued investigation not only within the context of industrial maintenance projects but also in other sectors to improve our understanding and ability to effectively manage stakeholder dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Mufaro Masarira & Kassandra A. Papadopoulou & Amir Rahbarimanesh & Jyoti K. Sinha & Uday Kumar, 2024. "A framework for analysis of stakeholder dynamics and value creation in industrial maintenance projects: the stakeholder ipot," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 15(9), pages 4229-4251, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijsaem:v:15:y:2024:i:9:d:10.1007_s13198-024-02405-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s13198-024-02405-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-024-02405-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13198-024-02405-9?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. 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.
    2. Tim Postema & Aard Groen & Koos Krabbendam, 2012. "A Model To Evaluate Stakeholder Dynamics During Innovation Implementation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-20.
    3. Aaltonen, Kirsi & Kujala, Jaakko, 2010. "A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in global projects," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 381-397, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Miriam F. Bongo & Charlle L. Sy, 2024. "Can diverse and conflicting interests of multiple stakeholders be balanced?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 339(3), pages 1813-1837, August.
    2. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    3. Scholtens, Bert, 2008. "A note on the interaction between corporate social responsibility and financial performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 46-55, December.
    4. Marc Bollecker & Pierre Mathieu & Claude Clementz, 2006. "Le Comportement Socialement Responsable Des Entreprises : Une Lecture Des Travaux En Comptabilite Et Contrôle De Gestion Dans Une Perspective Neo-Institutionnaliste," Post-Print halshs-00769052, HAL.
    5. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 937-952, July.
    6. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    7. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    8. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    9. Bert Scholtens & Feng‐Ching Kang, 2013. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Earnings Management: Evidence from Asian Economies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 95-112, March.
    10. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    11. Shai Levi & Benjamin Segal, 2015. "The Impact of Debt-Equity Reporting Classifications on the Firm's Decision to Issue Hybrid Securities," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 801-822, December.
    12. 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.
    13. Pascual Berrone & Jordi Surroca & Josep Tribó, 2007. "Corporate Ethical Identity as a Determinant of Firm Performance: A Test of the Mediating Role of Stakeholder Satisfaction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(1), pages 35-53, November.
    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. Werner Hediger, 2013. "From Multifunctionality and Sustainability of Agriculture to the Social Responsibility of the Agri-food System," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 6(1), pages 59-80.
    16. Mădălina Viorica MANU & Ilie VASILE, 2019. "Challenging the status quo: Steel producer case study on the enterprise value for M&A," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(3(620), A), pages 99-114, Autumn.
    17. 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.
    18. Andreas G. F. Hoepner & Lisa Schopohl, 2020. "State Pension Funds and Corporate Social Responsibility: Do Beneficiaries’ Political Values Influence Funds’ Investment Decisions?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 489-516, September.
    19. Zhou, Taiyun & Liu, Mingxuan & Zhang, Xiyu & Qi, Zheng & Qin, Ni, 2024. "Does institutional ownership affect corporate social responsibility? Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 84-98.
    20. Thilini Cooray & Samanthi Senaratne & A. D. Nuwan Gunarathne & Roshan Herath & Dileepa Samudrage, 2020. "Does Integrated Reporting Enhance the Value Relevance of Information? Evidence from Sri Lanka," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-25, October.

    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:spr:ijsaem:v:15:y:2024:i:9:d:10.1007_s13198-024-02405-9. 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.