Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review

  • Published:
Management Review Quarterly Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mitchell et al.’s (Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886, 1997) theory of stakeholder salience is still the leading theory for stakeholder identification and prioritization. However, the influence of contextual factors on managerial perceptions is less developed than topics such as stakeholder attributes and underlying assumptions. Further, the existing literature is scattered and not summarized systematically. Therefore, this review aims at providing a comprehensive and structured overview to clarify terms and accelerate future research. With the help of a research framework, I structured the identified literature into a manager’s individual “inner context” (i.e., position, knowledge and cognition, and personality) and their “outer context” (i.e., environment, organization, and passive stakeholder characteristics). Research gaps were identified not only in every category, but also in the used focal organization, geography, methodologies, and underlying theories. These results suggest new paths such as a focus on projects and interdisciplinary research with other fields such as personnel psychology or design thinking.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Google Scholar 6/11/2018.

  2. Last query 3/9/2017.

  3. Using most recent data (2015), inclusion of the references’ categories: business, business finance, ethics, management, green and sustainable science and technology.

References

  • Aaltonen K (2011) Project stakeholder analysis as an environmental interpretation process. Int J Project Manag 29(2):165–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aaltonen K, Kujala J (2010) A project lifecycle perspective on stakeholder influence strategies in global projects. Scand J Manag 26(4):381–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams RB, Licht AN, Sagiv L (2011) Shareholders and stakeholders: how do directors decide? Strateg Manag J 32:1331–1355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA (1999) Who matters to CEOs? an investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad Manag J 42(5):507–525

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostol O, Näsi S (2010) Institutional implications for stakeholder modelling: looking at institutions in a centralised economy. J Bus Ethics 96:33–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee SB, Bonnefous A-M (2011) Stakeholder management and sustainability strategies in the French nuclear industry. Bus Strategy Environ 20:124–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boesso G, Kumar K (2016) examining the association between stakeholder culture, stakeholder salience and stakeholder engagement activities. Manag Decis 54(4):815–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyatzis RE (1982) The competent manager: a model for effective performance, 1st edn. Wiley, Hoboken

    Google Scholar 

  • Bundy J, Shropshire C, Buchholtz AK (2013) Strategic cognition and issue salience: toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Acad Manag Rev 38(3):352–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buysse K, Verbeke A (2003) proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strateg Manag J 24(5):453–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Catano VM, Wiesner WH, Hackett RD, Methot LL (2009) Recruitment and selection in Canada, 4th edn. Nelson Education, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo C, Berrone P, Cruz C, Gomez-Mejia LR (2012) Socioemotional wealth and proactive stakeholder engagement: why family-controlled firms care more about their stakeholders. Entrep Theory Pract 36(6):1153–1173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi YR, Shepherd DA (2005) Stakeholder perceptions of age and other dimensions of newness. J Manag 31(4):573–596

    Google Scholar 

  • Crilly D, Sloan P (2012) Enterprise logic: explaining corporate attention to stakeholders from the “inside-out”. Strateg Manag J 33(10):1174–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crilly D, Sloan P (2014) Autonomy or control? organizational architecture and corporate attention to stakeholders. Organ Sci 25(2):339–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David P, Bloom M, Hillman AJ (2007) Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strateg Manag J 28(1):91–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad Manag Rev 20(1):65–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dong S, Burritt R, Qian W (2014) Salient stakeholders in corporate social responsibility reporting by chinese mining and minerals companies. J Clean Prod 84:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll C, Starik M (2004) the primordial stakeholder: advancing the conceptual consideration of stakeholder status for the natural environment. J Bus Ethics 49(1):55–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunne D, Martin R, Rotman JL (2006) Design thinking and how it will change management education: an interview and discussion. Acad Manag Learn Educ 5(4):512–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith M, Thorpe R, Jackson P (2008) Doing a literature review. In: Management research, 3rd edn. Sage, London, pp 29–54

  • Eesley C, Lenox MJ (2006) Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strateg Manag J 27(8):765–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eskerod P, Huemann M, Savage G (2015) Project stakeholder management—past and present. Proj Manag J 46(6):6–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang H, Van de Graaff Randolph R, Chrisman JJ, Barnett T (2013) Firm religiosity, bounded stakeholder salience, and stakeholder relationships in family firms. J Manag Spirit Relig 10(3):253–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassin Y (2009) The stakeholder model refined. J Bus Ethics 84(1):113–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fineman S, Clarke K (1996) Green stakeholders: industry interpretations and response. J Manag Stud 33(6):715–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan JC (1954) The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull 51(4):327–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman EA (1992) The Fleishman job analysis system. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman RE (1984) Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Pitman series in business and public policy, vol 1. Pitman Publishing, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad Manag Rev 24(2):191–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gannon MJ, Pillai R (2010) Understanding global cultures: metaphorical journeys through 29 nations, clusters of nations, continents, and diversity, 4th edn. SAGE, Thousands Oaks

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gifford EJM (2010) Effective shareholder engagement: the factors that contribute to shareholder salience. J Bus Ethics 92:79–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg A (1990) Connecting diversification to performance: a sociocognitive approach. Acad Manag Rev 15(3):514–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graf L (2015) Organizing and conducting scholarly literature reviews. In: Strang KD (ed) The Palgrave handbook of research design in business and management, 1st edn. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY, pp 109–119

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter MS (1985) Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. Am J Sociol 91(3):481–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greer CR, Downey HK (1982) Industrial compliance with social legislation: investigations of decision rationales. Acad Manag Rev 7(3):488–498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haigh N, Griffiths A (2009) The natural environment as a primary stakeholder: the case of climate change. Bus Strategy Environ 18(6):347–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall M, Millo Y, Barman E (2015) Who and what really counts? stakeholder prioritization and accounting for social value. J Manag Stud 52(7):907–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey B, Schaefer A (2001) Managing relationships with environmental stakeholders: a study of U.K. water and electricity utilities. J Bus Ethics 30(3):243–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques I, Sadorsky P (1999) The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Acad Manag J 42(1):87–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill CWL, Jones TM (1992) Stakeholder-agency theory. J Manag Stud 29(2):22–2380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho DCK, Lau C (2016) Linking socio-cultural influences to managerial cognition of stakeholder salience. Acad Manag Proc 1:13785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jawahar IM, McLaughlin GL (2001) toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: an organizational life cycle approach. Acad Manag Rev 26(3):397–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones TM, Felps W, Bigley GA (2007) Ethical theory and stakeholder-related decisions: the role of stakeholder culture. Acad Manag Rev 32(1):137–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin AE (2000) Encyclopedia of psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Khurram S, Pestre F (2015) Taking stock of the stakeholder salience tradition: renewing the research agenda. Acad Manag Proc 1:15028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khurram S, Pestre F (2017) Rethinking salience of not-for-profit and for-profit stakeholders of a firm. Bus Soc Rev 12(2):136–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen TP, Moher D, Jadad A (1998) Guides for reading and interpreting systematic reviews: I. Getting started. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 152(7):700–704

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korschun D (2015) Boundary-spanning employees and relationships with external stakeholders: a social identity approach. Acad Manag Rev 40(4):611–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff K (2006) The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Magness V (2008) Who are the stakeholders now? An empirical examination of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood theory of stakeholder salience. J Bus Ethics 83:177–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahmoud-Jouini SB, Midler C, Silberzahn P (2016) Contributions of design thinking to project management in an innovation context. Proj Manag J 47(2):144–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marcus B (2011) Personalpsychologie, 1st edn. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mattingly JE (2007) How to become your own worst adversary: examining the connection between managerial attributions and organizational relationships with public interest stakeholders. J Public Affairs 7(1):7–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Wood DJ, Agle B (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Chrisman JJ, Spence LJ (2011) Toward a theory of stakeholder salience in family firms. Bus Ethics Q 21(2):235–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell RK, Robinson RE, Marin A, Lee JH, Randolph AF (2013) Spirital identity, stakeholder attributes, and family business workplace spirituality stakeholder salience. J Manag Spirit Relig 10(3):215–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neville BA, Menguc B (2006) Stakeholder multiplicity: toward an understanding of the interactions between stakeholders. J Bus Ethics 66(4):377–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neville BA, Bell SJ, Whitwell GJ (2011) Stakeholder salience revisited: refining, redefining, and refueling an underdeveloped conceptual tool. J Bus Ethics 102(3):357–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen TD (2016) Political stakeholder theory: the state, legitimacy, and the ethics of microfinance in emerging economies. Bus Ethics Q 1(January):1–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Parent MM, Deephouse DL (2007) A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. J Bus Ethics 75(1):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrault Crawford E (2014) Zombies and originals: how cultural theory informs stakeholder management. Bus Soc Rev 119(4):447–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrault Crawford E, Williams CC, Berman S (2011) Stakeholder salience revisited: enlightening, balancing and transcending. Acad Manag Proc 2011(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfarrer MD, Decelles KA, Smith KG, Taylor MS (2008) After the fall: reintegrating the corrupt organization. Acad Manag Rev 33(3):730–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips R (2003) Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics, 1st edn. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauth I, Nabergoj AS (2016) Design thinking workshops: a way to facilitate sensemaking and idea development across organizational levels. In: Škerlavaj M, Cerne M, Dysvik A, Carlsen A (eds) Capitalizing on creativity at work. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Northampton, pp 192–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau R (2009) The 5-year synchronous impact factor for large journal citation reports (JCR) subject areas. Cybermetr Int J Scientometr Informetr Bibliometr 13(1):11–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Santana A (2012) Three elements of stakeholder legitimacy. J Bus Ethics 105(2):257–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siggelkow N (2007) Persuasion with case studies. Acad Manag J 50(1):20–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siltaoja M, Lähdesmäki M (2015) From rationality to emotionally embedded relations: envy as a signal of power in stakeholder relations. J Bus Ethics 128(4):837–850

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siltaoja M, Lähdesmäki M, Spence L (2017) Stakeholder salience for small businesses: a social proximity perspective. J Bus Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3707-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JVDL, Adhikari A, Tondkar RH (2005) Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: a stakeholder perspective. J Account Public Policy 24:123–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman MC (1995) Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Acad Manag Rev 20(3):571–610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashman P, Raelin J (2013) Who and what really matters to the firm: moving stakeholder salience beyond managerial perceptions. Bus Ethics Q 23(4):591–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turkulainen V, Aaltonen K, Lohikoski P (2015) Managing project stakeholder communication: the qstock festival Case. Project Management Journal 46(6):74–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Nierop E (2010) The introduction of the 5-year impact factor: does it benefit statistics journals? Stat Neerl 64(1):71–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voegtlin C (2016) Why managers perceive a responsibility to respond to stakeholder demands: toward a theory of perceptions of managerial responsibility. Acad Manag Proc 1:15875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh G, Roos J (1996) A tale of the unfinished. Strateg Manag J 17(9):729–737

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss J-H (2015) How firms impact cities: a capability perspective on firm-driven collective action. Acad Manag Proc 2015(1):12755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang Y (2007) On the cognitive processes of human perception with emotions, motivations, and attitudes. Int J Cognit Informat Nat Intell 1(4):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang S, Gao Y, Hodgkinson G, Rousseau D, Flood P (2015) Opening the black box of CSR decision making: a policy-capturing study of charitable donation decisions in China. J Bus Ethics 128(3):665–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitzner D, Deutsch Y (2015) Understanding motivation and social influence in stakeholder prioritization. Organ Stud 36(10):1337–1360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn MI (2001) Building stakeholder theory with a decision modeling methodology. Bus Soc 40(2):133–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winn MI, Keller LR (2001) A modeling methodology for multiobjective multistakeholder decisions: implications for research. J Manag Inq 10(2):166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoellick JC (2015) Reply to Dong et al., 2014, JCLEPRO, 84, 59–69. J Clean Prod 107:317–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Technology and Management, Technische Universität Berlin, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623, Berlin, Germany

    Hannah Charlotte Joos

Authors
  1. Hannah Charlotte Joos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hannah Charlotte Joos.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4 Search results from databases including detailed reasons for exclusion
Full size table
Table 5 Stakeholder salience literature related to contextual factors
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joos, H.C. Influences on managerial perceptions of stakeholder salience: two decades of research in review. Manag Rev Q 69, 3–37 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-018-0144-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-018-0144-8

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation