IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/accfor/v33y2009i2p162-175.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder prioritization and reporting: Evidence from Italy and the US

Author

Listed:
  • Giacomo Boesso
  • Kamalesh Kumar

Abstract

This study investigates the considerations that might be made by managers when choosing between mutually exclusive stakeholder expectations and reaching and engaging in a dialogue with them. In addition, the study also examines if there are systematic differences across countries (Italy and the US) in the decision to address the concerns of various stakeholder groups. Data was collected from 244 managers and 72 companies simultaneously in two different national business contexts, Italy and the US. The results of the study provide some evidence that managerial perception of three stakeholder group characteristics – power, legitimacy, and urgency – form a parsimonious group of variables that explain the process of stakeholder prioritization. However, only limited support was found for the relationship between salience accorded to a stakeholder group and engagement efforts directed toward the group. The results of the study also show that the managerial decision as to which of the stakeholder groups’ demands to address will be influenced by society-specific expectations. The significance of this study lies in investigating the stakeholder prioritization and engagement process, as it is being practiced, which, one could argue, would help in developing guidelines for effective stakeholder management that stands a realistic chance of being adapted and followed.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:accfor:v:33:y:2009:i:2:p:162-175
    DOI: 10.1016/j.accfor.2008.07.010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1016/j.accfor.2008.07.010
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.accfor.2008.07.010?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.

    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:taf:accfor:v:33:y:2009:i:2:p:162-175. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/racc .

    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.