A dynamic perspective in Freeman’s stakeholder model
Stakeholder literature has acknowledged the need to complement the extant theory on stakeholder management by more dynamic perspectives. This article makes use of the recent terminology of stakewatcher and stakeseeker to illustrate the dynamic aspect of stakeholder theory transposed in the graphical representation of Freeman’s stakeholder model. Presenting a few selected case studies, it applies the scheme on the concept of value responsibility chain; it exemplifies the role of stakeseekers in various forms of activism, from shareholders, NGOs and government, in the stakeholder mobilization process. The paper clarifies how stakewatchers and stakeseekers can profoundly affect stakeholder salience, especially in crises. The transposition and integration of the dynamic aspect of stakeholder theory into the graphical representation strengthen the forceful pedagogical value of the Freeman’s stakeholder graphical model.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Hoveniersberg 4, B-9000 Gent|
Phone: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 34 61
Fax: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 35 92
Web page: http://www.ugent.be/eb
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Elms, Heather & Phillips, Robert A., 2009. "Private Security Companies and Institutional Legitimacy: Corporate and Stakeholder Responsibility," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(03), pages 403-432, July.
- Langtry, Bruce, 1994. "Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(04), pages 431-443, October.
- Marcoux, Alexei M., 2003. "A Fiduciary Argument Against Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(01), pages 1-24, January.
- Phillips, Robert, 2003. "Stakeholder Legitimacy," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(01), pages 25-41, January.
- Doh, Jonathan P. & Teegen, Hildy, 2002. "Nongovernmental organizations as institutional actors in international business: theory and implications," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 665-684, December.
- Yves Fassin, 2008. "Imperfections and Shortcomings of the Stakeholder Model’s Graphical Representation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(4), pages 879-888, July.
- Salma Damak-Ayadi & Yvon Pesqueux, 2005. "stakeholder theory in perspective," Post-Print halshs-00154129, HAL.
- repec:dau:papers:123456789/406 is not listed on IDEAS
- Phillips, Robert & Freeman, R. Edward & Wicks, Andrew C., 2003. "What Stakeholder Theory is Not," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(04), pages 479-502, October.
- Christopher Stoney, 2001. "Stakeholding: Confusion or Utopia? Mapping the Conceptual Terrain," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 603-626, 07.
- 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, 07.
- Orts, Eric W. & Strudler, Alan, 2002. "The Ethical and Environmental Limits of Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(02), pages 215-233, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:11/727. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.