IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v262y2017i2p402-410.html

Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent

Author

Listed:
  • Rouwette, Etiënne
  • van Kranenburg, Hans
  • Freeman, Edward

Abstract

The role of stakeholders in organizational decision-making is gaining more and more attention. Managers find that in order to create value sustainably and ethically, it is necessary to balance the interests of various stakeholders. This trend is reflected in the management literature, where much advancement has been made in what is known as stakeholder theory. In the founding years of stakeholder theory there was a close connection and interchange of ideas between stakeholder theorists and operational researchers. Yet in recent years, the stream of papers that includes both fields has dwindled to a trickle. This lack of theoretical integration is surprising, as Operational Research is in nature a collaborative discipline. In this paper, we discuss three topics in stakeholder theory that can inform and improve studies involving working with stakeholders in Operational Research: instrumental versus moral stakeholder theory; focusing on trade-offs versus focusing on avoiding trade-offs; and focusing on the decision-making organization versus focusing on stakeholder engagement. We then conduct a systematic review of 144 Operational Research articles on the topic ‘stakeholders’. Content analysis of these articles reveals four distinct traditions of working with stakeholders: optimizing, balancing, structuring and involving. We compare the four traditions on goals, role of the analyst, type of data used, and results. Our analysis provides the basis for recommendations to Operational Research practitioners on how to work with stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Rouwette, Etiënne & van Kranenburg, Hans & Freeman, Edward, 2017. "Reviewing the role of stakeholders in Operational Research: A stakeholder theory perspectiveAuthor-Name: de Gooyert, Vincent," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(2), pages 402-410.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:262:y:2017:i:2:p:402-410
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2017.03.079
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221717303107
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.03.079?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu & Lite J. Nartey, 2014. "Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1727-1748, December.
    2. Preston, Lee E. & Sapienza, Harry J., 1990. "Stakeholder management and corporate performance," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 361-375.
    3. Michelle Greenwood, 2007. "Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 315-327, September.
    4. Russell L. Ackoff, 1956. "The Development of Operations Research as a Science," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 265-295, June.
    5. Roberto Garcia-Castro & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2015. "Incremental value creation and appropriation in a world with multiple stakeholders," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 137-147, January.
    6. Jaepil Choi & Heli Wang, 2009. "Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 895-907, August.
    7. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    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. Thomas Maak, 2007. "Responsible Leadership, Stakeholder Engagement, and the Emergence of Social Capital," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 329-343, September.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    13. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    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. Ileana Maldonado-Bautista & Peter G. Klein & Kendall W. Artz, 2023. "The Role of Political Values and Ideologies of Entrepreneurs and Financiers," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(1), pages 172-205, January.
    2. Danso, Albert & Adomako, Samuel & Lartey, Theophilus & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Owusu-Yirenkyi, Diana, 2020. "Stakeholder integration, environmental sustainability orientation and financial performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 652-662.
    3. John Manso Frimpong & Jacob Kuutoume & Christiana Abrafi Gyamfi, 2024. "Supply Chain Integration and Organizational Resources and Capabilities: The Moderating Effect of Stakeholders’ Support," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 72-82, July.
    4. Silvana Signori & Leire San-Jose & Jose Luis Retolaza & Gianfranco Rusconi, 2021. "Stakeholder Value Creation: Comparing ESG and Value Added in European Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Wei Jiang & Aric Xu Wang & Kevin Zheng Zhou & Chuang Zhang, 2020. "Stakeholder Relationship Capability and Firm Innovation: A Contingent Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 111-125, November.
    6. Maya Finger & Mosi Rosenboim, 2022. "Going ESG: The Economic Value of Adopting an ESG Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-15, October.
    7. James, Sharon D., 2016. "Strategic bankruptcy: A stakeholder management perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 492-499.
    8. Francesca Iandolo & Antonio La Sala & Lorenzo Turriziani & Francesco Caputo, 2025. "Stakeholder engagement in managing systemic risk management," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 1069-1085, October.
    9. Cle‐Anne Gabriel & Kamran Shafique, 2024. "An ethical salience framework to achieve sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(4), pages 3213-3225, August.
    10. Francesco Perrini & Angeloantonio Russo & Antonio Tencati & Clodia Vurro, 2011. "Deconstructing the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(1), pages 59-76, March.
    11. Sang Won Han & Henrich R. Greve, 2026. "The Categorical Imperative vs. Linguistic Alignment: Organizations Use Language to Modify Environmental Expectations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(1), pages 113-131, January.
    12. Kreiling, Laura & Serval, Sarah & Peres, Raphaële & Bounfour, Ahmed, 2020. "University technology transfer organizations: Roles adopted in response to their regional innovation system stakeholders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 218-229.
    13. Franck Aggeri & Aurélien Acquier, 2005. "La théorie des stakeholders permet-elle de rendre compte des pratiques d'entreprise en matière de RSE ?," Post-Print halshs-00645708, HAL.
    14. Michal Zdziarski & Robert G. Boutilier, 2016. "Strategic Challenges in Stakeholder Networks (Strategiczne wyzwania w sieciach interesariuszy)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 14(64), pages 62-79.
    15. Linda O’Riordan & Jenny Fairbrass, 2014. "Managing CSR Stakeholder Engagement: A New Conceptual Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 121-145, November.
    16. Cedric Dawkins, 2014. "The Principle of Good Faith: Toward Substantive Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 283-295, May.
    17. 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.
    18. Carlos Ferro-Soto & Luz Amparo Macías-Quintana & Paula Vázquez-Rodríguez, 2018. "Effect of Stakeholders-Oriented Behavior on the Performance of Sustainable Business," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-27, December.
    19. Pantano, Eleonora & Priporas, Constantinos-Vasilios & Viassone, Milena & Migliano, Giuseppe, 2020. "Does the stakeholder engagement result in new drinks? Evidence from family owned SMEs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 185-194.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:ejores:v:262:y:2017:i:2:p:402-410. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    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.