IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aes/amfeco/v22y2020i54p330.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholders’ Perception Regarding Sustainable Universities

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolae Al. Pop

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania)

  • Steluta Todea

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania)

  • Cristina-Veronica Partenie

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania)

  • Cristina Ott

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Romania)

Abstract

The aim of the study is to determine and confirm the main vectors that define the concept of sustainable university based on the example of a higher education institution that is representative for the Romanian economic higher education system. As objectives the authors defined the following: clarifying the concept of sustainable university based on the literature review; determining the main groups of stakeholders of the university and classifying them tridimensional; researching the perception regarding the vectors needed for the sustainable development of the university. The research stems from the three main stakeholders’ categories, in the authors’ opinion. A quantitative marketing research was undertaken on two main stakeholders’ categories: students, and representatives of the business environment that are part of the Alumni Association of the university. Using the factor analysis, the four vectors that define, in the authors opinion, the sustainable university were validated, which was confirmed. A qualitative research based on a focus group among academia and management counterbalanced the results of the study, confirming through results the stated hypotheses. The limitations of the current study stem from the involvement of only a part of the university’s stakeholders. Future research could investigate the perception of other stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolae Al. Pop & Steluta Todea & Cristina-Veronica Partenie & Cristina Ott, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Perception Regarding Sustainable Universities," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(54), pages 330-330, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:aes:amfeco:v:22:y:2020:i:54:p:330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.amfiteatrueconomic.ro/temp/Article_2896.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goodpaster, Kenneth E., 1991. "Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 53-73, January.
    2. Langtry, Bruce, 1994. "Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 431-443, October.
    3. Dan-Cristian Dabija & Catalin Postelnicu & Nicolae Al. Pop, 2014. "Methodology for Assessing the Degree of Internationalization of Business Academic Study Programmes," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 16(37), pages 726-726, August.
    4. Nicolae Al Pop & Mihaela Roman & Adina Săniuţă & Carmen Petrişoaia, 2012. "Relationship Marketing, Engine of Sustainable Development and Organisational Change in the Romanian Business Environment," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(32), pages 349-364, June.
    5. Schlossberger, Eugene, 1994. "A New Model of Business: Dual-Investor Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 459-474, October.
    6. Nicolae Al. Pop, 2019. "Quo Vadis Romanian Marketing: The Future and Contribution of the Romanian Community," Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics, in: Sebastian A. Văduva & Randolph Wilt & Ioan Fotea & Lois P. Văduva (ed.), Civil Society: The Engine for Economic and Social Well-Being, chapter 0, pages 119-127, Springer.
    7. Paul Pocatilu & Cristian Ciurea, 2011. "Modern Solutions For Economic Higher Education In The Knowledge-Based Society," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 13(30), pages 497-511, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Vasile Dinu, 2010. "Commercial Activity And The Sustainable Development," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 12(27), pages 5-7, February.
    10. Charles W. L. Hill & Thomas M. Jones, 1992. "Stakeholder‐Agency Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 131-154, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Boatright, John R., 1994. "Fiduciary Duties and the Shareholder-Management Relation: or, What's so Special About Shareholders?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(4), pages 393-407, October.
    13. David Counsell, 1998. "Sustainable Development and Structure Plans in England and Wales: A Review of Current Practice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 177-194.
    14. Dan-Cristian Dabija & Raluca Babut, 2013. "An approach to sustainable development from tourists` perspective. Empirical evidence in Romania," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 15(Special 7), pages 617-633, November.
    15. Nicolae Al. Pop & Corina Pelau, 2017. "Correlations within the EFQM Business Excellence Model by Applying a Factor Analysis," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(44), pages 1-28, February.
    16. Philip Vaughter & Tarah Wright & Marcia McKenzie & Lauri Lidstone, 2013. "Greening the Ivory Tower: A Review of Educational Research on Sustainability in Post-Secondary Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-20, May.
    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. Adrian Tantau & Greta Marilena Puscasu & Silvia Elena Cristache & Cristina Alpopi & Laurentiu Fratila & Daniel Moise & Georgeta Narcisa Ciobotar, 2022. "A Deep Understanding of Romanian Attitude and Perception Regarding Nuclear Energy as Green Investment Promoted by the European Green Deal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-14, December.

    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. 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.
    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. Samantha Miles, 2012. "Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 285-298, July.
    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. Francesco Di Maddaloni & Roya Derakhshan, 2019. "A Leap from Negative to Positive Bond. A Step towards Project Sustainability," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Velamuri, Rama & Venkataraman, Sankaran, 2005. "Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: A knightian insight," IESE Research Papers D/591, IESE Business School.
    9. Skip Worden, 2009. "A Genealogy of Business Ethics: A Nietzschean Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 427-456, February.
    10. Dabija Dan-Cristian & Abrudan Ioana-Nicoleta & Postelnicu Cătălin, 2016. "Teachers’ Motivations and Expectations Regarding Lifelong Learning," Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Oeconomica, Sciendo, vol. 61(3), pages 32-42, December.
    11. Adel Aloui & Khaled Saadaoui & Manal Wehbi Sleiman, 2015. "Le concept de parties prenantes : proposition d'une modélisation systémique par le modèle SAGACE," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01870859, HAL.
    12. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    13. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    14. Blanche Segrestin & Armand Hatchuel & Ken Starkey, 2021. "Captains of industry? Value allocation and the partnering effect of managerial discretion," Post-Print hal-03161402, HAL.
    15. Louis Ndjetcheu, 2012. "An African critical interpretation of the positive theory of accounting of Watts and Zimmerman (1978, 1980, 1986)," African Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Finance, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1), pages 25-39.
    16. Lorenzo Dorigo & Giuseppe Marcon, 2014. "A caring interpretation of stakeholder management for the social enterprise. Evidence from a regional survey of micro social cooperatives in the Italian welfare mix," Working Papers 01, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    17. Brink, Alexander, 2011. "Spezifische Investitionen als Legitimationsgrundlage für Stakeholderansprüche," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 65(1), pages 50-68.
    18. Tommy Jensen & Johan Sandström, 2013. "In Defence of Stakeholder Pragmatism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 225-237, May.
    19. Giovanni Ferri & Angelo Leogrande, 2015. "Was the Crisis due to a shift from stakeholder to shareholder finance? Surveying the debate," Mo.Fi.R. Working Papers 108, Money and Finance Research group (Mo.Fi.R.) - Univ. Politecnica Marche - Dept. Economic and Social Sciences.
    20. N. Craig Smith & David Rönnegard, 2016. "Shareholder Primacy, Corporate Social Responsibility, and the Role of Business Schools," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 463-478, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sustainable development; higher education; stakeholders; quantitative and qualitative research; sustainable university.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    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:aes:amfeco:v:22:y:2020:i:54:p:330. 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: Valentin Dumitru (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.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.