IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jbemgt/v16y2015i4p845-860.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical Insights on Understanding Stakeholder Influence

Author

Listed:
  • Dalia Susnienė
  • Ojaras Purvinis

Abstract

The paper deals with the stakeholder management especially giving focus on the organization's and stakeholder relationships issues. The purpose of the paper is to construct a new methodological approach by developing fuzzy logic model based on experts' knowledge for conceptual insights on possible solutions for measuring stakeholders' influence. The objective of the research includes identification of possible organization stakeholder interactions considering stakeholders' influence according to such attributes/ factors as interest, power, benevolence, and reliability. The results reveal that fuzzy logic technique is a reliable and valid tool for modelling and visualizing knowledge about stakeholders' influence on the organization. Finally, the results were tested on the real business data concerning stakeholders' influence. A contribution of this paper is the application of fuzzy logic model to evaluate and/or predict stakeholders' influence to the issues the organization seeks to solve and to provide relevant information for the stakeholder relationships management.

Suggested Citation

  • Dalia Susnienė & Ojaras Purvinis, 2015. "Empirical Insights on Understanding Stakeholder Influence," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 845-860, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jbemgt:v:16:y:2015:i:4:p:845-860
    DOI: 10.3846/16111699.2013.785974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3846/16111699.2013.785974
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3846/16111699.2013.785974?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 K. Fung, 2009. "Is Innovativeness a Link between Pay and Performance?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 38(2), pages 411-429, June.
    2. Jérôme Méric & Elena Antonacopoulou, 2005. "A critique of stake‐holder theory: management science or a sophisticated ideology of control?," Post-Print hal-01935584, HAL.
    3. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B. & Maines, Laureen A., 2010. "The benefits and costs of corporate social responsibility," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 445-453, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    6. Bradley W. Benson & Wallace N. Davidson III & Hongxia Wang & Dan L. Worrell, 2011. "Deviations from Expected Stakeholder Management, Firm Value, and Corporate Governance," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 40(1), pages 39-81, March.
    7. Irene Sanz-Mendiola & Angel Garcia-Beltran & Rosa María González Tirados, 2013. "Evaluation and implementation of social responsibility," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(9-10), pages 846-858, July.
    8. Jing Yang & Geoffrey Qiping Shen & Lynda Bourne & Christabel Man-Fong Ho & Xiaolong Xue, 2011. "A typology of operational approaches for stakeholder analysis and engagement," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 145-162.
    9. Anne Landin, 2011. "Construction Stakeholder Management," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 107-107.
    10. Amir Barnea & Amir Rubin, 2010. "Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict Between Shareholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 71-86, November.
    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. Mohd. Sadiq & Mohd. Sadim & Azra Parveen, 2021. "Applying statistical approach to check the consistency of pairwise comparison matrices during software requirements prioritization process," 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. 12(3), pages 451-460, June.
    2. Danil V. Bashmakov, 2020. "Innovation linkages in societies with a high power distance," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 21(2), pages 45-59, July.

    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. Bradley W. Benson & Wallace N. Davidson, 2010. "The Relation between Stakeholder Management, Firm Value, and CEO Compensation: A Test of Enlightened Value Maximization," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 929-964, September.
    2. Muhammad Suhail Rizwan & Asifa Obaid & Dawood Ashraf, 2017. "The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Default Risk: Empirical evidence from US Firms," Business & Economic Review, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan, vol. 9(3), pages 36-70, September.
    3. Angus W. H. Yip & William Y. P. Yu, 2023. "The Quality of Environmental KPI Disclosure in ESG Reporting for SMEs in Hong Kong," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-26, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Bigelli, Marco & Mengoli, Stefano & Sandri, Sandro, 2023. "ESG score, board structure and the impact of the non-financial reporting directive on European firms," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Maretno Harjoto & Indrarini Laksmana & Robert Lee, 2015. "Board Diversity and Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 641-660, December.
    7. Kao, Erin H. & Yeh, Chih-Chuan & Wang, Li-Hsun & Fung, Hung-Gay, 2018. "The relationship between CSR and performance: Evidence in China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 155-170.
    8. Pamela Queen, 2015. "Enlightened Shareholder Maximization: Is this Strategy Achievable?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 683-694, March.
    9. Ju Hyoung Park & Hyun-Young Park & Ho-Young Lee, 2018. "The Effect of Social Ties between Outside and Inside Directors on the Association between Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-24, October.
    10. Samuel Mansell, 2013. "Shareholder Theory and Kant’s ‘Duty of Beneficence’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 583-599, October.
    11. 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.
    12. Ali, Tanweer, 2015. "Beyond shareholders versus stakeholders: Towards a Rawlsian concept of the firm," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 126-141.
    13. Amin, Abu & Chourou, Lamia & Kamal, Syed & Malik, Mahfuja & Zhao, Yang, 2020. "It’s who you know that counts: Board connectedness and CSR performance," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    15. Mihret, Dessalegn Getie, 2014. "How can we explain internal auditing? The inadequacy of agency theory and a labor process alternative," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 771-782.
    16. Siew − Peng Lee, 2021. "Environmental responsibility, CEO power and financial performance in the energy sector," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(8), pages 2407-2426, November.
    17. Franz W. Wagner, 2019. "Unternehmensbesteuerung und Corporate Social Responsibility [Business Taxation and Corporate Social Responsibility]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 347-380, November.
    18. 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.
    19. Fornasari, Tommaso, 2020. "Il ruolo dei comitati di responsabilità sociale nella corporate governance [The Role of CSR Committees in Corporate Governance]," MPRA Paper 111192, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Haifeng Huang & Zhenrui Zhao, 2016. "The influence of political connection on corporate social responsibility——evidence from Listed private companies in China," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jbemgt:v:16:y:2015:i:4:p:845-860. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/TBEM20 .

    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.