Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reclaiming Marginalized Stakeholders

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Within stakeholder literature, much attention has been given to which stakeholders “really count.” This article strives to explain why organizational theorists should abandon the pursuit of “Who and What Really Counts” to challenge the assumption of a managerial perspective that defines stakeholder legitimacy. Reflecting on the paucity of employee rights and protections in marginalized work environments, I argue that as organizational researchers, we must recognize and take responsibility for the impact of our research models and visions. By confronting and rethinking the foundational assumptions of stakeholder theory, business and society scholars can identify and pursue research questions that more effectively address contemporary social challenges.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agle, B. R., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R. E., Jensen, M. C., Mitchell, R. K., & Wood, D. J. (2008). Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(2), 153–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. C. (2011). Business lessons from a radical industrialist. New York: St Martin’s Griffin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2000). Whose land is it anyway? National interest, indigenous stakeholders, and colonial discourses: The case of the Jabiluka uranium mine. Organization & Environment, 13(1), 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basel Convention. (2011). Basel convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal. http://www.basel.int. Accessed February 15, 2011.

  • BELA. (2011). Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association. http://www.belabangla.org/. Accessed February 28, 2011.

  • Boatright, J. (1994). What’s so special about shareholders? Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 393–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1989). Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • CBC. (2005). The story. http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/bigbreak/story.html. Accessed January 4, 2011.

  • Clifton, D., & Amran, A. (2011). The stakeholder approach: A sustainability perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 121–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell, B., & Shapirio, A. C. (1987). Corporate stakeholders and corporate finance. Financial Management, 16, 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, S., Laplante, B., & Meisner, C. (2001). Environmental news in Argentina, Chile, Mexico and the Philippines. Local Environment, 5, 351–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1995). The Business Sucks Story. Presidential address to the Society for Business Ethics, Society for Business Ethics Annual Meeting, Vancouver, BC.

  • Freeman, R. E. (2000). Business ethics at the millennium. Business Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J., Wicks, A., Parmar, B., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodpaster, K. (1991). Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1(1), 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, S., & Humphries, M. (1997). Critical management studies in postmodernity: Oxymorons in outer space? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 10(5), 412–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gritten, D., & Saastamoinen, O. (2010). The roles of legitimacy in environmental conflict: An Indonesian case study. Society and Natural Resources, 24, 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, J., & Freeman, R. E. (2008). The impossibility of the Separation Thesis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(4), 541–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. W., & Jones, T. M. (1992). Stakeholder–agency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 29(2), 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marens, R. (2008). Getting past the “government sucks” story: How government really matters. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(2), 84–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marens, R. (2010). Speaking platitudes to power: Observing American business ethics in an age of declining hegemony. Journal of Business Ethics, 94, 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellahi, K., & Wood, G. (2003). The role and potential of stakeholders in “hollow participation”: Conventional stakeholder theory and institutionalist alternatives. Business and Society Review, 108(2), 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, M., Rees, W., Roth, P., & Burtynsky, E. (2009). Oil. Gottingen: Steidl PHOTOGRAPHY INTERNATIONAL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orts, E. W., & Strudler, A. (2002). The ethical and environmental limits of stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parent, M. M., & Deephouse, D. L. (2007). A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 479–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2004). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Philadelphia: Wharton School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rendtorff, J. D. (2009). Responsibility, ethics, and legitimacy of corporations. Koge: Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivers, D. (2010). The hidden shame of ship-breaking industry. CNN, July 12, 2010. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/07/12/bangladesh.hasan.shipyards/?fbid=10Jfmeedo5G. Accessed February 25, 2011.

  • Vazquez-Brust, D., Plaza-Ubeda, J. A., Natenzon, C., & Burgos-Jimenez, J. (2009). The challenges of businesses’ intervention in areas with high poverty and environmental deterioration: promoting an integrated stakeholders’ approach in management education. In C. Wankel & J. Stoner (Eds.), Management education for global sustainability. New York, NY: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & McIntosh, M. (2011). SEE change: Making the transition to a sustainable enterprise economy. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, K. (2009). Food, Inc. How industrial food is making us sicker, fatter, poorer—and what you can do about it. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werhane, P. H., Kelley, S. P., Hartman, L. P., & Moberg, D. J. (2010). Alleviating poverty through profitable partnerships. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia (2011). Stakeholder theory. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_theory. Accessed July 18, 2011.

  • Wood, D. (1994). Essay in ‘Toronto conference: Reflections on stakeholder society’. Business and Society, 33, 82–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M. (2003). Banker to the poor: Micro-lending and the battle against world poverty. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M. (2007). Creating a world without poverty. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Lethbridge, 10707-100 Avenue, Edmonton, AB, T5J3M1, Canada

    Robbin Derry

Authors
  1. Robbin Derry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robbin Derry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Derry, R. Reclaiming Marginalized Stakeholders. J Bus Ethics 111, 253–264 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1205-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1205-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation