IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/bstrat/v15y2006i5p296-308.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Perrini
  • Antonio Tencati

Abstract

Corporate sustainability, that is the capacity of a firm to continue operating over a long period of time, depends on the sustainability of its stakeholder relationships. This new stakeholder view of the firm goes beyond previous work on the triple bottom line and balanced scorecard. Companies need appropriate systems to measure and control their own behaviour in order to assess whether they are responding to stakeholder concerns in an effective way and to communicate the results achieved. These sustainability accounting systems should have the purpose of broadening and integrating the traditional financial approaches to corporate performance measurement, taking stakeholder needs into due account. This article presents the sustainability evaluation and reporting system (SERS), an integrated methodology aimed at monitoring and tracking from a qualitative and quantitative viewpoint the overall corporate performance according to a stakeholder framework, in line with small and medium‐sized enterprises' managerial requirements. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Perrini & Antonio Tencati, 2006. "Sustainability and stakeholder management: the need for new corporate performance evaluation and reporting systems," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(5), pages 296-308, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:bstrat:v:15:y:2006:i:5:p:296-308
    DOI: 10.1002/bse.538
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.538
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/bse.538?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. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    2. Pontus Cerin, 2002. "Communication in corporate environmental reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 46-65, March.
    3. Stefan Schaltegger & Marcus Wagner, 2006. "Integrative management of sustainability performance, measurement and reporting," International Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Performance Evaluation, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 1-19.
    4. Pontus Cerin, 2002. "Characteristics of environmental reporters on the OM Stockholm exchange," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 298-311, September.
    5. Frank Figge & Tobias Hahn & Stefan Schaltegger & Marcus Wagner, 2002. "The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – linking sustainability management to business strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 269-284, September.
    6. Michael C. Jensen, 2010. "Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 22(1), pages 32-42, January.
    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. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2016. "The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of Architectures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 193-221, January.
    2. Zabihollah Rezaee, 2018. "Supply Chain Management and Business Sustainability Synergy: A Theoretical and Integrated Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Mathew Kevin Bosi & Nelson Lajuni & Avnner Chardles Wellfren & Thien Sang Lim, 2022. "Sustainability Reporting through Environmental, Social, and Governance: A Bibliometric Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Ivo Hristov & Antonio Chirico, 2023. "The cultural dimension as a key value driver of the sustainable development at a strategic level: an integrated five-dimensional approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7011-7028, July.
    5. Massimiliano Bonacchi & Leonardo Rinaldi, 2007. "DartBoards and Clovers as new tools in sustainability planning and control," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(7), pages 461-473, November.
    6. 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.
    7. Scholtens, Bert, 2008. "A note on the interaction between corporate social responsibility and financial performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 46-55, December.
    8. Marc Bollecker & Pierre Mathieu & Claude Clementz, 2006. "Le Comportement Socialement Responsable Des Entreprises : Une Lecture Des Travaux En Comptabilite Et Contrôle De Gestion Dans Une Perspective Neo-Institutionnaliste," Post-Print halshs-00769052, HAL.
    9. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 937-952, July.
    10. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    11. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2008. "Corporate citizenship as stakeholder management: An ordonomic approach to business ethics," Discussion Papers 2008-4, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    12. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    13. Bert Scholtens & Feng‐Ching Kang, 2013. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Earnings Management: Evidence from Asian Economies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 95-112, March.
    14. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    15. Shai Levi & Benjamin Segal, 2015. "The Impact of Debt-Equity Reporting Classifications on the Firm's Decision to Issue Hybrid Securities," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 801-822, December.
    16. Chakraborty, Atreya & Gao, Lucia Silva & Sheikh, Shahbaz, 2019. "Managerial risk taking incentives, corporate social responsibility and firm risk," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 58-72.
    17. Pascual Berrone & Jordi Surroca & Josep Tribó, 2007. "Corporate Ethical Identity as a Determinant of Firm Performance: A Test of the Mediating Role of Stakeholder Satisfaction," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 76(1), pages 35-53, November.
    18. Danny Zhao‐Xiang Huang, 2022. "An integrated theory of the firm approach to environmental, social and governance performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 1567-1598, April.
    19. Werner Hediger, 2013. "From Multifunctionality and Sustainability of Agriculture to the Social Responsibility of the Agri-food System," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 6(1), pages 59-80.
    20. Mădălina Viorica MANU & Ilie VASILE, 2019. "Challenging the status quo: Steel producer case study on the enterprise value for M&A," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania - AGER, vol. 0(3(620), A), pages 99-114, Autumn.

    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:bla:bstrat:v:15:y:2006:i:5:p:296-308. 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: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0836 .

    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.