IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v121y2014i2p283-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement

Author

Listed:
  • Cedric Dawkins

Abstract

Although stakeholder theory is concerned with stakeholder engagement, substantive operational barometers of engagement are lacking in the literature. This theoretical paper attempts to strengthen the accountability aspect of normative stakeholder theory with a more robust notion of stakeholder engagement derived from the concept of good faith. Specifically, it draws from the labor relations field to argue that altered power dynamics are essential underpinnings of a viable stakeholder engagement mechanism. After describing the tenets of substantive engagement, the paper draws from the labor relations and commercial law literatures to describe the characteristics of good faith as dialogue, negotiation, transparency, and totality of conduct; explains how they can be adapted and applied to the stakeholder context; and suggests the use of mediation and non-binding arbitration. The paper concludes by addressing anticipated objections and shortcomings and discussing implications for theory and research. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:121:y:2014:i:2:p:283-295
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1697-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-013-1697-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-013-1697-z?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. Jack Fiorito, 2001. "Human Resource Management Practices and Worker Desires for Union Representation," Journal of Labor Research, Transaction Publishers, vol. 22(2), pages 335-354, April.
    2. Reed, Darryl, 1999. "Stakeholder Management Theory: A Critical Theory Perspective," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 453-483, July.
    3. Niklas Egels-Zandén & Peter Hyllman, 2007. "Evaluating Strategies for Negotiating Workers’ Rights in Transnational Corporations: The Effects of Codes of Conduct and Global Agreements on Workplace Democracy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 207-223, December.
    4. Michelle Greenwood, 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 315-327, September.
    5. Van Buren, Harry J., 2001. "If Fairness is the Problem, Is Consent the Solution? Integrating ISCT and Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 481-499, July.
    6. Jerry Calton, 2006. "Social Contracting in a Pluralist Process of Moral Sense Making: A Dialogic Twist on the ISCT," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 329-346, October.
    7. Baur, Dorothea & Palazzo, Guido, 2011. "The Moral Legitimacy of NGOs as Partners of Corporations," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 579-604, October.
    8. 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.
    9. Burton, Brian K. & Dunn, Craig P., 1996. "Feminist Ethics as Moral Grounding for Stakeholder Theory 1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 133-147, April.
    10. Dorothea Baur & Hans Schmitz, 2012. "Corporations and NGOs: When Accountability Leads to Co-optation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(1), pages 9-21, March.
    11. Finnemore, Martha & Sikkink, Kathryn, 1998. "International Norm Dynamics and Political Change," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 887-917, October.
    12. Phillips, Robert A., 1997. "Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 51-66, January.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. O’Connell, Lenahan L. & Stephens, Carroll U. & Betz, Michael & Shepard, Jon M. & Hendry, Jamie R., 2005. "An Organizational Field Approach to Corporate Rationality: The Role of Stakeholder Activism," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 93-111, January.
    16. Robert Phillips & Michael Johnson-Cramer, 2006. "Ties that Unwind: Dynamism in Integrative Social Contracts Theory 1," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 283-302, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Unerman, Jeffrey & Bennett, Mark, 2004. "Increased stakeholder dialogue and the internet: towards greater corporate accountability or reinforcing capitalist hegemony?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 685-707, October.
    19. 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.
    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. Ana Clara Borrego & Francisco Alegria Carreira & Pedro Pardal & Rute Abreu, 2022. "Social Responsibility and SDG 8 during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Role of Chartered Accountants in Portugal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Krista Bondy & Aurelie Charles, 2020. "Mitigating Stakeholder Marginalisation with the Relational Self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 67-82, August.
    3. J. Robert Mitchell & Ronald K. Mitchell & Richard A. Hunt & David M. Townsend & Jae H. Lee, 2022. "Stakeholder Engagement, Knowledge Problems and Ethical Challenges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 75-94, January.
    4. Guillermo Casasnovas & Jessica Jones, 2022. "Who Has a Seat at the Table in Impact Investing? Addressing Inequality by Giving Voice," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 951-969, September.
    5. Linda D. Hollebeek & V. Kumar & Rajendra K. Srivastava & Moira K. Clark, 2023. "Moving the stakeholder journey forward," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 23-49, January.
    6. Katja Beyer & Marlen Gabriele Arnold, 2022. "Social sustainability in an evolving circular fashion industry: identifying and triangulating concepts across different publication groups [Soziale Nachhaltigkeit in einer sich entwickelnden zirkul," NachhaltigkeitsManagementForum | Sustainability Management Forum, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 29-54, December.
    7. Jennifer Lees-Marshment & Aimee Dinnin Huff & Neil Bendle, 2020. "A Social Commons Ethos in Public Policy-Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(4), pages 761-778, November.
    8. Silvia Biraghi & Rossella Gambetti & Stefania Romenti, 2017. "Stakeholder Engagement beyond the Tension between Idealism and Practical Concerns," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(2), pages 1-14, January.
    9. Kristian Alm & Mark Brown, 2021. "John Rawls’ Concept of the Reasonable: A Study of Stakeholder Action and Reaction Between British Petroleum and the Victims of the Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(4), pages 621-637, September.
    10. Elena Candelo & Cecilia Casalegno & Chiara Civera & Fabrizio Mosca, 2018. "Turning Farmers into Business Partners through Value Co-Creation Projects. Insights from the Coffee Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, March.
    11. HaeOk Choi, 2020. "Geospatial Data Approach for Demand-Oriented Policies of Land Administration," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, January.
    12. Anne Vijver, 2022. "Morality of Lobbying for Tax Benefits: A Kantian Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 57-68, November.
    13. Mirela POPA & Irina-Iulia SALAN?Ã, 2015. "Business Organizations’ Positive Socio-Economic Impact on Society - a Step Beyond CSR," Economia. Seria Management, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 18(2), pages 244-263, December.
    14. repec:mth:bmh888:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:30-51 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Finsterwalder, Jörg, 2018. "A 360-degree view of actor engagement in service co-creation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 276-278.

    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. 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.
    2. Samantha Miles, 2012. "Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 285-298, July.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Silvana Signori & Gianfranco Rusconi, 2009. "Ethical Thinking in Traditional Italian Economia Aziendale and the Stakeholder Management Theory: The Search for Possible Interactions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(3), pages 303-318, November.
    6. Ryan Burg, 2009. "Deliberative Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 665-683, October.
    7. 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.
    8. repec:eme:srjpps:v:6:y:2010:i:2:p:381-392 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. David Weitzner & Yuval Deutsch, 2023. "Harm Reduction, Solidarity, and Social Mobility as Target Functions: A Rortian Approach to Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 186(3), pages 479-492, September.
    10. Dirk Gilbert & Michael Behnam, 2009. "Advancing Integrative Social Contracts Theory: A Habermasian Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(2), pages 215-234, October.
    11. Tommy Jensen & Johan Sandström, 2013. "In Defence of Stakeholder Pragmatism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 225-237, May.
    12. Lauren Purnell & R. Freeman, 2012. "Stakeholder Theory, Fact/Value Dichotomy, and the Normative Core: How Wall Street Stops the Ethics Conversation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 109-116, August.
    13. Krista Bondy & Aurelie Charles, 2020. "Mitigating Stakeholder Marginalisation with the Relational Self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 67-82, August.
    14. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    15. Boeddeling, Jann, 2011. "Corporate Social Responsibility: Fundamentalstellung für Kapitalismus und Wirtschaftssoziologie," Wittener Diskussionspapiere zu alten und neuen Fragen der Wirtschaftswissenschaft 17/2011, Witten/Herdecke University, Faculty of Management and Economics.
    16. Anna Remišová & Anna Lašáková & Alexandra Bohinská, 2019. "Reasons of Unethical Business Practices in Slovakia: The Perspective of Non-Governmental Organizations' Representatives," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(2), pages 565-581.
    17. Yves Fassin, 2010. "A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 39-49, August.
    18. Allen Kaufman & Ernie Englander, 2011. "Behavioral Economics, Federalism, and the Triumph of Stakeholder Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 421-438, September.
    19. 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.
    20. Pasi Heikkurinen & Jukka Mäkinen, 2018. "Synthesising Corporate Responsibility on Organisational and Societal Levels of Analysis: An Integrative Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 589-607, May.
    21. Barchiesi, Maria Assunta & Fronzetti Colladon, Andrea, 2021. "Corporate core values and social responsibility: What really matters to whom," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).

    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:121:y:2014:i:2:p:283-295. 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.