IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/289207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade-offs in stakeholder theory: An ordonomic perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Pies, Ingo
  • Valentinov, Vladislav

Abstract

Purpose: Stakeholder theory understands business in terms of relationships among stakeholders whose interests are mainly joint but may be occasionally conflicting. In the latter case, managers may need to make trade-offs between these interests. The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of managerial decision-making about these trade-offs. Design/methodology/approach: This paper draws on the ordonomic approach which sees business life to be rife with social dilemmas and locates the role of stakeholders in harnessing or resolving these dilemmas through engagement in rule-finding and rule-setting processes. Findings: The ordonomic approach suggests that stakeholder interests trade-offs ought to be neither ignored nor avoided, but rather embraced and welcomed as an opportunity for bringing to fruition the joint interest of stakeholders in playing a better game of business. Stakeholders are shown to bear responsibility for overcoming the perceived trade-offs through the institutional management of social dilemmas. Originality/value: For many stakeholder theorists, the nature of managerial decision-making about trade-offs between conflicting stakeholder interests and the nature of trade-offs themselves have been a long-standing point of contention. The paper shows that trade-offs may be useful for the value creation process and explicitly discusses managerial strategies for dealing with them.

Suggested Citation

  • Pies, Ingo & Valentinov, Vladislav, 2024. "Trade-offs in stakeholder theory: An ordonomic perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 20(5), pages 975-997.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:289207
    DOI: 10.1108/SRJ-06-2023-0321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/289207/1/Pies_2024_Trade-offs_stakeholder_theory.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/SRJ-06-2023-0321?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. Anica Zeyen & Markus Beckmann & Stella Wolters, 2016. "Actor and Institutional Dynamics in the Development of Multi-stakeholder Initiatives," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 341-360, May.
    2. 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.
    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. Kim, Yeonshin & Hur, Won-Moo & Lee, Luri, 2023. "Understanding customer participation in CSR activities: The impact of perceptions of CSR, affective commitment, brand equity, and corporate reputation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    2. 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).
    3. Tarcia Camily Cavalcante Quezado & Nuno Fortes & William Quezado Figueiredo Cavalcante, 2022. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics on Brand Fidelity: The Importance of Brand Love and Brand Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    4. Jens Heidingsfelder & Markus Beckmann, 2020. "A governance puzzle to be solved? A systematic literature review of fragmented sustainability governance," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 70(3), pages 355-390, August.
    5. Anna M. Hansson & Eja Pedersen & Niklas P. E. Karlsson & Stefan E. B. Weisner, 2023. "Barriers and drivers for sustainable business model innovation based on a radical farmland change scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8083-8106, August.
    6. Adam Samborski, 2022. "The Energy Company Business Model and the European Green Deal," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, June.
    7. Evita Milana & Frank Ulrich, 2022. "Do open innovation practices in firms promote sustainability?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1718-1732, December.
    8. Karolina Bähr & Alexander Fliaster, 2023. "The twofold transition: Framing digital innovations and incumbents' value propositions for sustainability," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 920-935, February.
    9. Felipe Lillo-Viedma & Pedro Severino-González & Valentin Santander-Ramírez & Leidy Y. García & Nataly Guiñez-Cabrera & Nicolás Astorga-Bustos, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Network Analysis: Unionized Workers’ Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, April.
    10. Morris, Jonathan & McGuinness, Martina, 2019. "Liberalisation of the English water industry: What implications for consumer engagement, environmental protection, and water security?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Beck, Donizete & Ferasso, Marcos, 2023. "How can Stakeholder Capitalism contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals? A Cross-network Literature Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    12. Yáñez-Valdés, Claudia & Guerrero, Maribel & Barros-Celume, Sebastián & Ibáñez, María J., 2023. "Winds of change due to global lockdowns: Refreshing digital social entrepreneurship research paradigm," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    13. Domenico Dentoni & Verena Bitzer & Greetje Schouten, 2018. "Harnessing Wicked Problems in Multi-stakeholder Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 333-356, June.
    14. Szoke-Burke, Sam & Werker, Eric, 2021. "Benefit sharing, power, and the performance of multi-stakeholder institutions at Ghana's Ahafo mine," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    15. Qiansong Zhang & Taiwen Feng & Long Cheng & Qingsong He, 2022. "Institutional force and firm performance: Do employee green involvement and flexibility‐oriented culture matter?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 950-964, July.
    16. Fabien Martinez, 2023. "Exploring the syncretic dynamics involved in dyadic business–NGO partnerships," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4068-4083, November.
    17. Ramakrishnan Ramanathan & Yanqing Duan & Tahmina Ajmal & Katarzyna Pelc & James Gillespie & Sahar Ahmadzadeh & Joan Condell & Imke Hermens & Usha Ramanathan, 2023. "Motivations and Challenges for Food Companies in Using IoT Sensors for Reducing Food Waste: Some Insights and a Road Map for the Future," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Signe Pedersen & Christian Clausen & Michael Søgaard Jørgensen, 2023. "Navigating value networks to co‐create sustainable business models: An actionable staging approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 240-258, January.
    19. Jingchen Zhao, 2021. "Reimagining Corporate Social Responsibility in the Era of COVID-19: Embedding Resilience and Promoting Corporate Social Competence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-28, June.
    20. Waseem Akhter & Arshad Hassan, 2024. "Does corporate social responsibility mediate the relationship between corporate governance and firm performance? Empirical evidence from BRICS countries," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 566-578, January.

    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:zbw:espost:289207. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.