Skip to main content

Methodological Proposals

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Social Accounting for Sustainability

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Business ((BRIEFSBUSINESS))

  • 1317 Accesses

Abstract

A number of prior assumptions are needed to develop and consolidate any method for monetizing social value. Those assumptions may be implicit or explicit. We believe that explicitly expressing the assumptions that underlie the proposal for monetization is an essential step in enabling discussion to take place on elements that will be determinant in the resulting model. The model proposed here is based generically on two major research frameworks: the analytic-synthetic method, which consists of splitting a problem into its elementary component parts, analyzing them separately and then integrating them into a relational model; and cost-benefit analysis, which entails analyzing the gap between the inputs used and the outputs obtained, which enables efficiency analysis to be incorporate in the form of a ratio which, in the case of multiple factors, is developed in a Data Envelopment Analyst (DEA) framework. Four assumptions are made here: first, action research as a methodological process, with a mixed working team comprising persons who are active as actors in the organization investigated, in progressive improvement cycles normally on an annual basis. The second assumption is stakeholder theory, so each firm is considered as a network of stakeholders who contribute resources and risks for the joint generation of value which is subsequently passed on to the stakeholders as a whole. Social value, strictly speaking, is the value generated for stakeholders. The third assumption is a phenomenological outlook, under which the value variables identified are quantified in line with the value perceived by stakeholders. The fourth and final assumption is fuzzy logic, i.e. the values identified are not exact scores but centroid guidelines in a set of fuzzy data, on which upper and lower bounds of belonging are imposed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Cases in point include financial exclusion, food exclusion and lack of access to medicines. Excessive emphasis on the central role of organizations as social actors can also lead to the responsibilities of the state being given up to lobbies.

  2. 2.

    An example can be found in vehicle insurance in Spain: there is a sectoral organization that acts as the policy holder if no insurer will take you as a client (stakeholder). This mechanism for the sectoral integration of non stakeholders can be useful in other types of exclusion in areas such as finances and healthcare.

References

  • Alzola M (2008) Character and environment: the status of virtues in organizations. J Bus Ethics 78(3):343–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr W, Kemmis S (1986) Becoming critical: education, knowledge and action research. Falmer Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly HE, Cobb JB, Cobb CW (1994) For the common good: redirecting the economy toward community, the environment, and a sustainable future (No. 73). Beacon Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies JT (1973) The scientific approach. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • De Luca A, Termini S (1972) A definition of a nonprobabilistic entropy in the setting of fuzzy sets theory. Inf Control 20(4):301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dembinski PH (2009) Finance: servant or deceiver?. Observatoire de la Finance

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith M, Malina D (1999) Cross-cultural collaborative research: toward reflexivity. Acad Manag J 42(1):76–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith MT, Thrope R, Lowe A (1991) Management research: an introduction. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Echarri J (1977) El mundo del físico. ed. Universidad de Deusto. Bilbao

    Google Scholar 

  • Echarri J (1979) Humanismo científico y humanismo natural. Universidad Deusto, Bilbao

    Google Scholar 

  • Felber C (2012) La economía del bien común. Deusto, Barcelona

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE, Harrison JS, Wicks AC, Parmar BL, De Colle S (2010) Stakeholder theory: the state of the art. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1962) Capitalism and freedom. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1970) A theoretical framework for monetary analysis. J Polit Econ :193–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Aluja J (1999) Elements for a theory of decision in uncertainty, vol 32. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Lafuente A (2001) Nuevas estrategias para el análisis financiero de las empresas; Edición 1, Ariel Económica

    Google Scholar 

  • Giorgi A, Giorgi yB (2003) Phenomenology en Jonathan. In: Smith A (ed) Qualitative psychology. Londres, Sage, pp 25–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurtado I, Toro J (1997) Paradigmas y métodos de investigación en tiempos de cambio. Episteme, Valencia

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurwicz L (1951) Some specification problems and applications to econometric models. Econometrica 19(3):343–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl E (1907) Die Idee der Phanomenologie. Fünf Vorlesungen, Hua II’, traducción al español: Edmund Husserl, La idea de la fenomenología. Cinco lecciones, trad. Por Miguel García-Baró, F.C.E., México, Madrid, Buenos Aires 1982

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann A (1973) Introduction à la théorie des sous-ensembles flous à l’usage des ingénieurs (fuzzy sets theory)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann A, Gil Aluja J (1986) Introducción de la teoría de los subconjuntos borrosos a la gestión de las empresas. Santiago de Compostela. Milladoiro, Spain

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H, Ahlstrand BW, Ahlstrand B, Lampel J (2005) Strategy safari: a guided tour through the wilds of strategic mangament. Simon and Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Moustakas C (1994) Phenomenological research methods. Sage Publications, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega y Gasset J (1914) Ensayo de estética a manera de prólogo. Obras completas 6:1941–1946

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1999) Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annu Rev Polit Sci 2(1):493–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reason P, Bradbury H (eds) (2007) Handbook of action research, 2nd edn. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Retolaza JL, San-Jose L (2011) Social economy and stakeholder theory, an integrative framework for socialization of the capitalism. CIRIEC-España, Revista de Economía Pública, Social y Cooperativa 73:193–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Retolaza JL, Ruiz-Roqueñi M, San-Jose L (2015) An innovation approach to stakeholder theory: application in Spanish transnational corporations. Revista Brasileira de Gestao de Negocios

    Google Scholar 

  • Rifkin J (2014) The zero marginal cost society: the internet of things, the collaborative commons, and the eclipse of capitalism. Palgrave Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Roqueñi M, Retolaza JL (2012) Stakeholder marketing: a new orientation in the discipline and practice of marketing. J Mod Account Auditing 8(6):811–826

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson PA (1954) The pure theory of public expenditure. Rev Econ Stat :387–389

    Google Scholar 

  • Sison AJG, Fontrodona J (2012) The common good of the firm in the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition. Bus Ethics Q 22(02):211–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer H (1896) Principles of ethics. D. Appleton & Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer L, Schmidpeter R (2003) SMEs, social capital and the common good. J Bus Ethics 45(1–2):93–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugeno M (1977) Fuzzy measures and fuzzy integrals, a survey. In: Gupta MM, Saridis GN & Gaines BR (eds) Fuzzy automata and decision processes. North-Holland, New York, pp 89–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (1988) Investigaciones filosóficas. Crítica, Barcelona

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1988) On ordered weighted averaging aggregation operators in multicriteria decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18(1):183–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8:338–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1997) Toward a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets Syst 90(2):111–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann HJ (1978) Fuzzy programming and linear programming with several objective functions. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1(1):45–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Luis Retolaza .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Retolaza, J.L., San-Jose, L., Ruíz-Roqueñi, M. (2016). Methodological Proposals. In: Social Accounting for Sustainability. SpringerBriefs in Business. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13377-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics