IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rau/journl/v5y2011i2.1p551-560.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder’S Role In Healthcare Services And New Information Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Maria Bobeica

    (Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest)

Abstract

The purpose of this study on “stakeholder role in healthcare services” is to facilitate our understanding of increasingly unpredictable external environments, thereby facilitating our ability to manage within these environments whether as the Marketing or the IT Manager decision roles. There is agreement in the literature concerning the major steps involved in stakeholder analysis:identification of stakeholder groups (e.g., employees, owners, communities, customers); determination of the stakeholders' interests; and evaluation of the type and level of stakeholder power or salience. Managers perceive the stakeholder to posses, thereby is producing seven categories of relative salience according to the number of attributes: urgency, legitimacy and power. The study is based one is a very comprehensive and internationally accepted classification of “stakeholder” based on Mitchell Theory 1997 with a broad review of five leading general management journals (Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, Journal of Management, Organization Science, Strategic Management Journal) and of two journals in the social issues in management field (Business & Society, and Business Ethics Quarterly). It identifies and repositions the role of the CIO (Chief Information Officer) in the internal structure of the company regarding the stakeholder’s interests and purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Maria Bobeica, 2011. "Stakeholder’S Role In Healthcare Services And New Information Technology," Romanian Economic Business Review, Romanian-American University, vol. 5(2.1), pages 551-560, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:rau:journl:v:5:y:2011:i:2.1:p:551-560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rebe.rau.ro/RePEc/rau/jisomg/WI11-2/JISOM-WI11-2-A14.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marguerite Schneider, 2002. "A Stakeholder Model of Organizational Leadership," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 209-220, April.
    2. Boesso, Giacomo & Kumar, Kamalesh, 2009. "Stakeholder prioritization and reporting: Evidence from Italy and the US," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 162-175.
    3. Vilanova, Laurent, 2007. "Neither Shareholder nor Stakeholder Management:: What Happens When Firms are Run for their Short-term Salient Stakeholder?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 146-162, April.
    4. Giacomo Boesso & Kamalesh Kumar, 2009. "Stakeholder prioritization and reporting: Evidence from Italy and the US," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(2), pages 162-175, June.
    5. Paul M. Collier, 2008. "Stakeholder accountability," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 21(7), pages 933-954, September.
    6. Amy J. Hillman & Gerald D. Keim, 2001. "Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the bottom line?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 125-139, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Kamalesh Kumar & Giacomo Boesso & Rishtee Batra & Jun Yao, 2019. "Explicit and implicit corporate social responsibility: Differences in the approach to stakeholder engagement activities of U.S. and Japanese companies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 1121-1130, September.
    3. André Habisch & Lorenzo Patelli & Matteo Pedrini & Christoph Schwartz, 2011. "Different Talks with Different Folks: A Comparative Survey of Stakeholder Dialog in Germany, Italy, and the U.S," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(3), pages 381-404, May.
    4. Daniela M. Salvioni & Alex Almici, 2020. "Transitioning Toward a Circular Economy: The Impact of Stakeholder Engagement on Sustainability Culture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-30, October.
    5. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Katia Furlotti, 2020. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 470-484, March.
    6. Yongqiang Gao & Haibin Yang & Taïeb Hafsi, 2019. "Corporate giving and corporate financial performance: the S-curve relationship," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 687-713, September.
    7. Zarzycka Ewelina & Krasodomska Joanna & Dobija Dorota, 2021. "Stakeholder Engagement in Corporate Social Practices and Non-Financial Disclosures: A Systematic Literature Review," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 29(1), pages 112-135, March.
    8. Petra F. A. Dilling, 2016. "Reporting on Long-Term Value Creation—The Example of Public Canadian Energy and Mining Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-26, September.
    9. Thomas Thijssens & Laury Bollen & Harold Hassink, 2015. "Secondary Stakeholder Influence on CSR Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Salience Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 132(4), pages 873-891, December.
    10. Torelli, Riccardo & Balluchi, Federica & Furlotti, Katia, 2019. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," OSF Preprints tw6c7, Center for Open Science.
    11. Matthew Johnson & Friederike Redlbacher & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Stakeholder Engagement for Corporate Sustainability: A Comparative Analysis of B2C and B2B Companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(4), pages 659-673, July.
    12. Caichun Chai & Eilin Francis & Tiaojun Xiao, 2021. "Supply chain dynamics with assortative matching," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 179-206, January.
    13. Ioannis Ziogas & Theodore Metaxas, 2021. "Corporate Social Responsibility in South Europe during the Financial Crisis and Its Relation to the Financial Performance of Greek Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    14. Shahzad, Ali M. & Mousa, Fariss T. & Sharfman, Mark P., 2016. "The implications of slack heterogeneity for the slack-resources and corporate social performance relationship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 5964-5971.
    15. 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.
    16. Keysa Manuela Cunha de Mascena & Adalberto Americo Fischmann & João Maurício Gama Boaventura, 2018. "Stakeholder Prioritization in Brazilian Companies Disclosing GRI Reports," Brazilian Business Review, Fucape Business School, vol. 15(1), pages 17-32, January.
    17. Ziogas, Ioannis & Metaxas, Theodore, 2018. "CSR in South Europe during the financial crisis and its relation to the financial states of Greek companies," MPRA Paper 92453, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Franck Brulhart & Sandrine Gherra & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2019. "Do Stakeholder Orientation and Environmental Proactivity Impact Firm Profitability?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 25-46, August.
    19. Nigel Martin & John Rice, 2010. "Analysing emission intensive firms as regulatory stakeholders: a role for adaptable business strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 64-75, January.
    20. Garcia-Meca, Emma & Martinez, Isabel, 2007. "The use of intellectual capital information in investment decisions: An empirical study using analyst reports," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 57-81.

    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:rau:journl:v:5:y:2011:i:2.1:p:551-560. 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: Alex Tabusca (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/firauro.html .

    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.