IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/corsem/v10y2003i3p129-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing performance, accountability and equity in stakeholder relationships: towards more socially responsible HR practice

Author

Listed:
  • John Simmons

Abstract

The paper uses stakeholder analysis to examine issues of performance, accountability and equity in organizations; and to identify implications for more socially responsible HR practice. Its theme is that effective governance can be reconciled with social responsibility, and that incorporating stakeholder views in HR systems enhances organization performance and commitment. A performance management case study confirms the importance of incorporating stakeholder views when HR systems are designed or modified, and the implications for employee commitment and organizational justice if they are ignored. A ‘stakeholder systems’ model of performance management is offered as a means of developing robust and ethical HR systems. This delineates design, operation and evaluation stages, relates these to issues of accountability and organizational justice and suggests measures for assessing system effectiveness. Conclusions are related to research and practitioner agendas regarding stakeholder (and especially employee) ‘voice’. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Suggested Citation

  • John Simmons, 2003. "Balancing performance, accountability and equity in stakeholder relationships: towards more socially responsible HR practice," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(3), pages 129-140, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:corsem:v:10:y:2003:i:3:p:129-140
    DOI: 10.1002/csr.40
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.40
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/csr.40?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. Christopher Stoney & Diana Winstanley, 2001. "Stakeholding: Confusion or Utopia? Mapping the Conceptual Terrain," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 603-626, July.
    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. Dolors Celma & Esther Martínez‐Garcia & Germà Coenders, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibility in Human Resource Management: An analysis of common practices and their determinants in Spain," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(2), pages 82-99, March.
    2. Lei Wang & Heikki Juslin, 2013. "Corporate Social Responsibility in the Chinese Forest Industry: Understanding Multiple Stakeholder Perceptions," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3), pages 129-145, May.
    3. Birca Alic, 2017. "The Evaluation Of The Relationship Level Between Human Resources Managers And Linear Managers Regarding Personnel Management In The Organizations From The Republic Of Moldova," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1, pages 42-51, December.
    4. Ulpiana Kocollari & Maddalena Cavicchioli & Fabio Demaria, 2024. "The 5 E(lements) of employee‐centric corporate social responsibility and their stimulus on happiness at work: An empirical investigation," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 1959-1976, May.
    5. Chi Kin Kwan, 2020. "Socially responsible human resource practices to improve the employability of people with disabilities," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 1-8, January.
    6. Carl Rhodes & Geraint Harvey, 2012. "Agonism and the Possibilities of Ethics for HRM," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(1), pages 49-59, November.

    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. Ciaran Driver & Grahame Thompson, 2002. "Corporate Governance and Democracy: The Stakeholder Debate Revisited," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 6(2), pages 111-130, May.
    2. 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.
    3. James Hine & Lutz Preuss, 2009. "“Society is Out There, Organisation is in Here”: On the Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility Held by Different Managerial Groups," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 381-393, August.
    4. Eleanor O’Higgins, 2010. "Corporations, Civil Society, and Stakeholders: An Organizational Conceptualization," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 157-176, June.
    5. García, Juan A. & Gómez, Mar & Molina, Arturo, 2012. "A destination-branding model: An empirical analysis based on stakeholders," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 646-661.
    6. ATM Adnan & Nisar Ahmed, 2019. "The Transformation Of The Corporate Governance Model: A Literature Review," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 8(3), pages 7-47.
    7. Yves Fassin, 2010. "A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 39-49, August.
    8. Cooper, Stuart M. & Owen, David L., 2007. "Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(7-8), pages 649-667.
    9. Mujtaba Ahsan, 2020. "Entrepreneurship and Ethics in the Sharing Economy: A Critical Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 19-33, January.
    10. Ding, Yuan & Richard, Jacques & Stolowy, Hervé, 2008. "Towards an understanding of the phases of goodwill accounting in four Western capitalist countries: From stakeholder model to shareholder model," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 718-755.
    11. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    12. Hans-Jörg Schlierer & Andrea Werner & Silvana Signori & Elisabeth Garriga & Heidi Weltzien Hoivik & Annick Rossem & Yves Fassin, 2012. "How Do European SME Owner–Managers Make Sense of ‘Stakeholder Management’?: Insights from a Cross-National Study," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 39-51, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Yawson, Robert M. & Greiman, Bradley, 2014. "Stakeholder Analysis as a Tool for Systems Approach Research in HRD," MPRA Paper 61278, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Ayuso, Silvia & Rodriguez, Miguel A. & Garcia, Roberto & Ariño, Miguel A., 2007. "Maximizing stakeholders' interests: An empirical analysis of the stakeholder approach to corporate governance," IESE Research Papers D/670, IESE Business School.
    16. Vlad ROSCA, 2013. "Systemic Relationship Marketing: Co-creating Sports Brand Equity with Fans and Other Stakeholders," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(3), pages 490-499, July.
    17. Craig Deegan & Marita Shelly, 2014. "Corporate Social Responsibilities: Alternative Perspectives About the Need to Legislate," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 499-526, June.
    18. 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.
    19. Martínez Bobillo, Alfredo & Rodríguez Sanz, Juan Antonio & Tejerina Gaite, Fernando, 2021. "Explanatory and predictive drivers of entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capacity: Evidence from family enterprises," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    20. Steffen Westermann & Scott J. Niblock & Michael A. Kortt, 2018. "A Review of Corporate Social Responsibility and Real Estate Investment Trust Studies: An Australian Perspective," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 37(1), pages 92-110, March.

    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:wly:corsem:v:10:y:2003:i:3:p:129-140. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)1535-3966 .

    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.