IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/buseth/v34y2025i4p1432-1449.html

How to have the best of both worlds: Value‐based decision‐making through stakeholder value trade‐offs

Author

Listed:
  • Aveed Raha
  • Seyed Hosein Kazemi

Abstract

By accounting for stakeholders' conflicting values, in this study, we argue that the conceptualization of stakeholder value trade‐offs can theoretically explain how stakeholder‐oriented managers can make value‐based decisions in pursuit of long‐term value creation for all stakeholders. Specifically, drawing on prospect theory and the value trade‐offs framework, we develop a value‐based decision‐making perspective when organizations manage for their stakeholders. Our framework encompasses four types of trade‐offs: taboo, routine, virtuous, and tragic each plays an important role in the value‐creating decision process. This interdisciplinary study proposes that managers should ground their value‐based decisions on the extent to which the chosen trade‐offs are morally justifiable. The study contributes to the current understanding of relationships between organizations and stakeholders from a decision‐making perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Aveed Raha & Seyed Hosein Kazemi, 2025. "How to have the best of both worlds: Value‐based decision‐making through stakeholder value trade‐offs," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 1432-1449, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:buseth:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:1432-1449
    DOI: 10.1111/beer.12717
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12717
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/beer.12717?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. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & l’Haridon, Olivier, 2013. "Prospect theory in the health domain: A quantitative assessment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1057-1065.
    3. Arthur E. Attema & Werner B.F. Brouwer & Olivier l'Haridon, 2013. "A quantification of prospect theory in the health domain," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 201321, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
    4. Chorus, Caspar G., 2015. "Models of moral decision making: Literature review and research agenda for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 69-85.
    5. Jones, Thomas M. & Felps, Will, 2013. "Shareholder Wealth Maximization and Social Welfare: A Utilitarian Critique," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 207-238, April.
    6. Christopher Wickert, 2021. "Corporate Social Responsibility Research in the Journal of Management Studies: A Shift from a Business‐Centric to a Society‐Centric Focus," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(8), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Jonathan Bundy & Ryan M. Vogel & Miles A. Zachary, 2018. "Organization–stakeholder fit: A dynamic theory of cooperation, compromise, and conflict between an organization and its stakeholders," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 476-501, February.
    8. Carroll, Archie B., 1991. "The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 39-48.
    9. Scott L. Newbert, 2018. "Achieving Social and Economic Equality by Unifying Business and Ethics: Adam Smith as the Cause of and Cure for the Separation Thesis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(3), pages 517-544, May.
    10. Dubinsky, Alan J. & Loken, Barbara, 1989. "Analyzing ethical decision making in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 83-107, September.
    11. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Hilda Kammoun, 2013. "Do financial professionals behave according to prospect theory? An experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 411-429, March.
    12. Kenneth De Roeck & Assâad El Akremi & Valérie Swaen, 2016. "Consistency Matters! How and When Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Employees’ Organizational Identification?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(7), pages 1141-1168, November.
    13. Jeffrey S. Harrison & Andrew C. Wicks, 2021. "Harmful Stakeholder Strategies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 405-419, March.
    14. Zhi Da & Joseph Engelberg & Pengjie Gao, 2011. "In Search of Attention," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1461-1499, October.
    15. Jill Brown & William Forster, 2013. "CSR and Stakeholder Theory: A Tale of Adam Smith," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 112(2), pages 301-312, January.
    16. Mark Schwartz, 2006. "God as a Managerial Stakeholder?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(2), pages 291-306, June.
    17. Malcolm Baker & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2007. "Investor Sentiment in the Stock Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 129-152, Spring.
    18. Burton, Brian K. & Dunn, Craig P., 1996. "Feminist Ethics as Moral Grounding for Stakeholder Theory 1," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 133-147, April.
    19. K de Roeck & Valérie Swaen & Assâad El Akremi, 2016. "Consistency matters! How and when does Corporate Social Responsibility affect employees’ organizational identification? Journal of Management Studies," Post-Print halshs-01520879, HAL.
    20. Jimena Gonzalez-Ramirez & Poonam Arora & Guillermo Podesta, 2018. "Using Insights from Prospect Theory to Enhance Sustainable Decision Making by Agribusinesses in Argentina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    21. 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.
    22. 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.
    23. Sanjay Sharma & Irene Henriques, 2005. "Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 159-180, February.
    24. Bowie, Norman E., 1998. "A Kantian Theory of Capitalism," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(S1), pages 37-60, January.
    25. Edward Freeman, R. & Evan, William M., 1990. "Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation," Journal of Behavioral Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 337-359.
    26. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    27. Moris S. Strub & Duan Li, 2020. "Failing to Foresee the Updating of the Reference Point Leads to Time-Inconsistent Investment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 199-213, January.
    28. Jay B. Barney, 2018. "Why resource‐based theory's model of profit appropriation must incorporate a stakeholder perspective," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(13), pages 3305-3325, December.
    29. Birte Freudenreich & Florian Lüdeke-Freund & Stefan Schaltegger, 2020. "A Stakeholder Theory Perspective on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 3-18, September.
    30. Patt, Anthony & Zeckhauser, Richard, 2000. "Action Bias and Environmental Decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 45-72, July.
    31. Edwin Micewski & Carmelita Troy, 2007. "Business Ethics – Deontologically Revisited," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 17-25, April.
    32. Harris, Jared D. & Sapienza, Harry J. & Bowie, Norman E., 2009. "Ethics and entrepreneurship," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 407-418, September.
    33. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    34. Katarzyna M. Werner & Horst Zank, 2019. "A revealed reference point for prospect theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 67(4), pages 731-773, June.
    35. 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.
    36. Harris, Jared D. & Freeman, R. Edward, 2008. "The Impossibility of the Separation Thesis: A Response to Joakim Sandberg," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 541-548, October.
    37. Benjamin Neville & Bulent Menguc, 2006. "Stakeholder Multiplicity: Toward an Understanding of the Interactions between Stakeholders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 377-391, July.
    38. Claus Frederiksen, 2010. "The Relation Between Policies Concerning Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Philosophical Moral Theories – An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 357-371, May.
    39. Baker, Malcolm & Pan, Xin & Wurgler, Jeffrey, 2012. "The effect of reference point prices on mergers and acquisitions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 49-71.
    40. Hanselmann, Martin & Tanner, Carmen, 2008. "Taboos and conflicts in decision making: Sacred values, decision difficulty, and emotions," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 51-63, January.
    41. R. Freeman & Kirsten Martin & Bidhan Parmar, 2007. "Stakeholder Capitalism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 303-314, September.
    42. Russell W. Coff, 1999. "When Competitive Advantage Doesn't Lead to Performance: The Resource-Based View and Stakeholder Bargaining Power," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 119-133, April.
    43. 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.
    44. Harrison, Jeffrey S. & Wicks, Andrew C., 2013. "Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 97-124, January.
    45. Martin Hanselmann & Carmen Tanner, 2008. "Taboos and conflicts in decision making: Sacred values, decision difficulty, and emotions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 51-63, January.
    46. Philip E. Tetlock & Barbara A. Mellers & J. Peter Scoblic, 2017. "Sacred versus Pseudo-sacred Values: How People Cope with Taboo Trade-Offs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 96-99, May.
    47. Christopher Wickert & Andreas Georg Scherer & Laura J. Spence, 2016. "Walking and Talking Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications of Firm Size and Organizational Cost," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(7), pages 1169-1196, November.
    48. Adaeze Okoye, 2009. "Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 89(4), pages 613-627, November.
    49. Aguinis, Herman & Glavas, Ante, 2013. "Embedded Versus Peripheral Corporate Social Responsibility: Psychological Foundations," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 314-332, December.
    50. 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.
    51. Caterina Tantalo & Richard L. Priem, 2016. "Value creation through stakeholder synergy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 314-329, February.
    52. Satz, Debra, 2010. "Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale: The Moral Limits of Markets," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195311594.
    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. Sergiy D. Dmytriyev & R. Edward Freeman & Jacob Hörisch, 2021. "The Relationship between Stakeholder Theory and Corporate Social Responsibility: Differences, Similarities, and Implications for Social Issues in Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1441-1470, September.
    3. Adewole Olukorede, 2025. "Stakeholder engagement and participation in environmental contexts, social responsibility and society based on a study conducted in Rome, Italy," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-45, December.
    4. Sophie Bacq & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2022. "Stakeholder Governance for Responsible Innovation: A Theory of Value Creation, Appropriation, and Distribution," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 29-60, January.
    5. Ishrat Ali & Griffin W. Cottle, 2021. "Reconceptualizing Entrepreneurial Performance: The Creation and Destruction of Value from a Stakeholder Capabilities Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(4), pages 781-796, May.
    6. Fracarolli Nunes, Mauro & Lee Park, Camila & Shin, Hyunju, 2021. "Corporate social and environmental irresponsibilities in supply chains, contamination, and damage of intangible resources: A behavioural approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    7. André Laplume & Kent Walker & Zhou Zhang & Xin Yu, 2021. "Incumbent Stakeholder Management Performance and New Entry," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 629-644, December.
    8. Vladislav Valentinov & Robert Chia, 2022. "Stakeholder theory: A process‐ontological perspective," Business Ethics, the Environment & Responsibility, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 762-776, July.
    9. Wójcik Piotr, 2018. "The business case for corporate social responsibility: A literature overview and integrative framework," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 26(1), pages 121-148, March.
    10. Samantha Miles, 2012. "Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(3), pages 285-298, July.
    11. Valentinov, Vladislav & Chia, Robert, 2022. "Stakeholder theory: A process‐ontological perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 31(3), pages 762-776.
    12. Roya Derakhshan & Rashedur Chowdhury, 2025. "Experience of Marginalization in Noncooperative Spaces: The Case of Undocumented Migrant Workers in Italy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 197(2), pages 231-252, March.
    13. Anita M. McGahan, 2023. "The New Stakeholder Theory on Organizational Purpose," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 8(2), pages 245-255, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Andrew West, 2016. "Applying Metaethical and Normative Claims of Moral Relativism to (Shareholder and Stakeholder) Models of Corporate Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 199-215, May.
    16. Ivan Fedorenko & Pierre Berthon, 2017. "Beyond the expected benefits: unpacking value co-creation in crowdsourcing business models," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(3), pages 183-194, December.
    17. Jose-Luis Godos-Díez & Roberto Fernández-Gago & Laura Cabeza-García, 2015. "Business Education and Idealism as Determinants of Stakeholder Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(2), pages 439-452, October.
    18. Vladislav Valentinov, 2025. "Three Problems of Business Addressed by Stakeholder Theory: Insights from the Institutional Economics of John R. Commons," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 201(3), pages 717-733, October.
    19. Kpegli, Yao Thibaut & Corgnet, Brice & Zylbersztejn, Adam, 2023. "All at once! A comprehensive and tractable semi-parametric method to elicit prospect theory components," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    20. Francesco Gangi & Jérôme Méric & Rémi Jardat & Lucia Michela Daniele, 2019. "Business for society," Post-Print hal-02382307, HAL.

    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:wly:buseth:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:1432-1449. 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: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/26946424 .

    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.