IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rau/jisomg/v5y2011i2.1p551-560.html

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," Journal of Information Systems & Operations Management, Romanian-American University, vol. 5(2.1), pages 551-560, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:rau:jisomg: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. 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.
    2. Marguerite Schneider, 2002. "A Stakeholder Model of Organizational Leadership," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 209-220, April.
    3. Janita F.J. Vos & Marjolein C. Achterkamp, 2006. "Stakeholder identification in innovation projects," European Journal of Innovation Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(2), pages 161-178, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Boesso, Giacomo & Kumar, Kamalesh, 2009. "Stakeholder prioritization and reporting: Evidence from Italy and the US," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 162-175.
    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. repec:rau:journl:v:5:y:2011:i:2.1:p:551-560 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Quintelier, Katinka J.P. & Vock, Marlene, 2024. "The effect of mixing stakeholder value and profit on cooperation: You can't have your cake and eat it too," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 255-265.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Loopamudra Baruah & N. M. Panda, 2021. "The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Reputation: A Study on Top 100 Companies Operating in India," Metamorphosis: A Journal of Management Research, , vol. 20(2), pages 99-105, December.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Matthew W. Sherwood & Julia L. Pollard, 2018. "The risk-adjusted return potential of integrating ESG strategies into emerging market equities," Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 26-44, January.
    13. Stellner, Christoph & Klein, Christian & Zwergel, Bernhard, 2015. "Corporate social responsibility and Eurozone corporate bonds: The moderating role of country sustainability," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 538-549.
    14. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    15. Gallear, David & Ghobadian, Abby & Chen, Weifeng, 2012. "Corporate responsibility, supply chain partnership and performance: An empirical examination," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 83-91.
    16. Mario Vaupel & David Bendig & Denise Fischer-Kreer & Malte Brettel, 2023. "The Role of Share Repurchases for Firms’ Social and Environmental Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 401-428, March.
    17. Feng, Jingwen & Goodell, John W. & Shen, Dehua, 2022. "ESG rating and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PB).
    18. Danny Cassimon & Peter-Jan Engelen & Luc Liedekerke, 2016. "When do Firms Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility? A Real Option Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 15-29, August.
    19. La Rosa, Fabio & Bernini, Francesca & Terzani, Simone, 2022. "Does corporate and country corruption risk affect CEO performance? A study of the best-performing CEOs worldwide," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 234-246.
    20. Muhammad Suhail Rizwan & Asifa Obaid & Dawood Ashraf, 2017. "The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Default Risk: Empirical evidence from US Firms," Business & Economic Review, Institute of Management Sciences, Peshawar, Pakistan, vol. 9(3), pages 36-70, September.
    21. Naomi Haefner & Maximilian Palmié & Petteri T. Leppänen, 2023. "With(Out) a Little Help From My Friends? Reconciling Incongruous Findings on Stakeholder Management, Innovation, and Firm Performance," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(1), pages 142-171, January.

    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:rau:jisomg: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.