Stakeholder Theory Classification: A Theoretical and Empirical Evaluation of Definitions

Journal of Business Ethics 142 (3):437-459 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Stakeholder theory is widely accepted but elementary aspects remain indeterminate as the term ‘stakeholder’ is an essentially contested concept, being variously describable, internally complex and open in character. Such contestability is highly problematic for theory development and empirical testing. The extent of essential contestability, previously unknown, is demonstrated in this paper through a bounded systematic review of 593 different stakeholder theory definitions. As an essentially contested concept, the solution does not lie in a universal stakeholder definition, but in debating the boundaries of stakeholder identification. To this end, this paper presents the first major attempt at sorting, filtering and ordering stakeholder theory and stakeholder definitions to produce a comprehensive, multi-dimensional classification of stakeholder theory. The constructs of the classification model juxtapose existing stakeholder theories and contributions from across the multi-contextual applications of stakeholder theory, thereby providing an invaluable overview of what we know about stakeholder theory in one model. The classification model is then tested with positive results. The paper concludes with a comprehensive discussion of the implications of classification stakeholder theory definitions, which has for future research.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 105,907

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Stakeholder: Essentially Contested or Just Confused? [REVIEW]Samantha Miles - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 108 (3):285-298.
The Stakeholder Model Refined.Yves Fassin - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 84 (1):113-135.
A Dynamic Perspective in Freeman’s Stakeholder Model.Yves Fassin - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 96 (S1):39-49.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-03

Downloads
160 (#152,119)

6 months
17 (#181,053)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

IX.—Essentially Contested Concepts.W. B. Gallie - 1956 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56 (1):167-198.
The Politics of Stakeholder Theory.R. Edward Freeman - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (4):409-421.
Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis.Kenneth E. Goodpaster - 1991 - Business Ethics Quarterly 1 (1):53-73.
Business & society: ethics and stakeholder management.Archie B. Carroll - 2002 - Cincinnati, Ohio: South-Western College Pub./Thomson Learning. Edited by Ann K. Buchholtz.
Ethics and the Conduct of Business.John Raymond Boatright - 2009 - Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall. Edited by Jeffery David Smith.

View all 53 references / Add more references