IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/poicbe/v14y2020i1p225-235n21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the shareholder salience influence the corporate social responsibility of entities from energy sector?

Author

Listed:
  • Ionescu Bogdan-Ștefan

    (Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Feleagă Liliana

    (Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Dumitraşcu Luminița-Mihaela

    (Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

The stakeholder salience framework has become, over the past two decades, a tool often used to identify, asses and prioritize stakeholders and has demonstrated considerable theoretical and managerial implications. The objective of this paper is to determine to what extent stakeholder salience influences how different stakeholder categories are represented in the sustainability reports of entities from energy sector. In this respect, an interpretative content-based analysis of the social and environmental information disclosed by entities is used. The sample encompasses six energy entities that are comprised of Dow Jones Sustainability Europe Index (DJSI) constituent’s list on September 19, 2016. The results highlight that stakeholders who hold power have a high score of salience, being followed by those who possess legitimacy and then by those who possess urgency. The obtained results suggest the need to continue to focus on the normative theory of the stakeholders. The results also highlight that there is a link between the stakeholder salience, on the one hand, and the number and type of attributes held by each category of stakeholders, on the other hand. Stakeholders who hold power have a high score of salience, being followed by those who possess legitimacy and by those who possess urgency.

Suggested Citation

  • Ionescu Bogdan-Ștefan & Feleagă Liliana & Dumitraşcu Luminița-Mihaela, 2020. "Does the shareholder salience influence the corporate social responsibility of entities from energy sector?," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 225-235, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:poicbe:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:225-235:n:21
    DOI: 10.2478/picbe-2020-0021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2020-0021
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/picbe-2020-0021?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/406 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Vanessa Magness, 2008. "Who are the Stakeholders Now? An Empirical Examination of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood Theory of Stakeholder Salience," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(2), pages 177-192, December.
    3. Kristel Buysse & Alain Verbeke, 2003. "Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 453-470, May.
    4. Charles Cho, 2009. "Legitimation Strategies Used in Response to Environmental Disaster: A French Case Study of Total SA's Erika and AZF Incidents," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 33-62.
    5. 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.
    6. Samuel Mercier, 2004. "L'Ethique dans les entreprises," Post-Print hal-00156446, HAL.
    7. Salma Damak-Ayadi & Yvon Pesqueux, 2005. "stakeholder theory in perspective," Post-Print halshs-00154129, HAL.
    8. Beck, A. Cornelia & Campbell, David & Shrives, Philip J., 2010. "Content analysis in environmental reporting research: Enrichment and rehearsal of the method in a British–German context," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 207-222.
    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. Bogdan-Ștefan Ionescu & Liliana Feleagă & Luminița-Mihaela Dumitrașcu & Ioana Ignat, 2019. "Does The Shareholder Salience Influence The Corporate Social Responsibility Of Entities From Energy Sector?," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 13(1), pages 247-257.
    2. 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.
    3. Shahzad Khurram & Sandra Charreire Petit, 2017. "Investigating the Dynamics of Stakeholder Salience: What Happens When the Institutional Change Process Unfolds?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 485-515, July.
    4. Päivi Myllykangas & Johanna Kujala & Hanna Lehtimäki, 2010. "Analyzing the Essence of Stakeholder Relationships: What do we Need in Addition to Power, Legitimacy, and Urgency?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 65-72, August.
    5. Conaty, Frank & Robbins, Geraldine, 2021. "A stakeholder salience perspective on performance and management control systems in non-profit organisations," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    6. Akrum Helfaya & Tantawy Moussa, 2017. "Do Board's Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy and Orientation Influence Environmental Sustainability Disclosure? UK Evidence," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1061-1077, December.
    7. Gregory D. Saxton & Charlotte Ren & Chao Guo, 2021. "Responding to Diffused Stakeholders on Social Media: Connective Power and Firm Reactions to CSR-Related Twitter Messages," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(2), pages 229-252, August.
    8. 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.
    9. Qian, Wei & Parker, Lee & Zhu, Jingyu, 2024. "Corporate environmental reporting in the China context: The interplay of stakeholder salience, socialist ideology and state power," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1).
    10. van Dijk, T.S. (Tessa) & van der Scheer, W.K. (Wilma) & Janssen, R.T.J.M. (Richard), 2021. "Power, legitimacy and urgency: Unravelling the relationship between Dutch healthcare organisations and their financial stakeholders," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(8), pages 1077-1084.
    11. Xiaohua Meng & Saixing Zeng & Xuemei Xie & Hailiang Zou, 2019. "Beyond symbolic and substantive: Strategic disclosure of corporate environmental information in China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 403-417, February.
    12. Wei Jiang & Liwen Wang & Kevin Zhou, 2022. "Green Practices and Customer Evaluations of the Service Experience: The Moderating Roles of External Environmental Factors and Firm Characteristics," Post-Print hal-04015637, HAL.
    13. Millo, Yuval & Barman, Emily & Hall, Matthew, 2016. "Accounting measurement tools and their impact on managerial decision making," economic sociology. perspectives and conversations, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, vol. 17(2), pages 17-23.
    14. Merja Lähdesmäki & Marjo Siltaoja & Laura J. Spence, 2019. "Stakeholder Salience for Small Businesses: A Social Proximity Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 373-385, August.
    15. Hannah Charlotte Joos & Dodo zu Knyphausen-Aufseß & Ulrich Pidun, 2020. "Project Stakeholder Management as the Integration of Stakeholder Salience, Public Participation, and Nonmarket Strategies," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(3), pages 447-477, July.
    16. Carmelo Cennamo & Pascual Berrone & Luis Gomez-Mejia, 2009. "Does Stakeholder Management have a Dark Side?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 491-507, November.
    17. Xiangan Ding & Ying Qu & Mohsin Shahzad, 2019. "The Impact of Environmental Administrative Penalties on the Disclosure of Environmental Information," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-24, October.
    18. Todd, Louise & Leask, Anna & Ensor, John, 2017. "Understanding primary stakeholders' multiple roles in hallmark event tourism management," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 494-509.
    19. Matthew Hall & Yuval Millo & Emily Barman, 2015. "Who and What Really Counts? Stakeholder Prioritization and Accounting for Social Value," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(7), pages 907-934, November.
    20. Charles H. Cho & Michele Fabrizi & Silvia Pilonato & Federica Ricceri, 2024. "Not all bad news is harmful to a good reputation: evidence from the most visible companies in the US," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(1), pages 9-36, March.

    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:vrs:poicbe:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:225-235:n:21. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.