Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Business Ethics
Published in: Journal of Business Ethics 1/2022

03-08-2020 | Original Paper

Stakeholder Engagement, Knowledge Problems and Ethical Challenges

Authors: J. Robert Mitchell, Ronald K. Mitchell, Richard A. Hunt, David M. Townsend, Jae H. Lee

Published in: Journal of Business Ethics | Issue 1/2022

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In the management and business ethics literatures, stakeholder engagement has been demonstrated to lead to more ethical management practices. However, there may be limits on the extent to which stakeholder engagement can, as currently conceptualized, resolve some of the more difficult ethical challenges faced by managers. In this paper we argue that stakeholder engagement, when seen as a way of reducing five types of knowledge problems—risk, ambiguity, complexity, equivocality, and a priori irreducible uncertainty—can aid managers in resolving such ethical challenges. Using a practical illustration of the ethical challenges surrounding the development and application of genetic modification technologies, we demonstrate how stakeholder engagement enables managers to better address these knowledge problems, thereby to manage more ethically. In this way, we suggest that stakeholder engagement has an even more crucial role to play in business ethics research and practice.
previous article Inducing Corporate Social Responsibility: Should Investors Reward the Responsible or Punish the Irresponsible?
next article Trust Erosion During Industry-Wide Crises: The Central Role of Consumer Legitimacy Judgement

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Footnotes
1
We note that another difficulty in resolving ethical challenges may also result from an unwillingness on the part of managers to address knowledge problems relating to certain beliefs, facts, inferences, needs, etc., vis-à-vis their stakeholders. In this sense, a boundary condition of our approach is that a manager must first want to address a knowledge problem through stakeholder engagement.
 
2
We recognize that the example of recombinant DNA that we utilize involves decision makers who are primarily scientists. Nonetheless, we consider these individuals to be managers of a set of technologies that have given rise to an industry valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars and acknowledge that a subset of these scientists went on to be the founders and managers of the firms that make up this industry. In this role, they created both their own firms and also substantial value for their universities through the licensing of their patents.
 
3
As we previously have noted, equivocality often is confused with ambiguity; but these are distinct concepts. With ambiguity, increases in information lead to increases in consensus. Whereas with equivocality no amount of additional information can create consensus. Only increased dialogue relative to some common purpose will produce the intersubjective agreement necessary to coordinated action, without any expectation that the distinct world views that give rise to equivocality will be reconciled (Townsend et al. 2018).
 
4
See various documentaries e.g., National Geographic Channel (2018). Mars: Inside SpaceX, Documentary.
 
Literature
Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2005). How do entrepreneurs organize firms under conditions of uncertainty? Journal of Management, 31(5), 776–793.
Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1), 11–26.
Alvarez, S. A., Young, S. L., & Woolley, J. L. (2018). Creating the world’s deadliest catch: The process of enrolling stakeholders in an uncertain endeavor. Business & Society, 59(2), 287–321.
Aragón-Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2003). A contingent resource-based view of proactive corporate environmental strategy. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 71–88.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000). Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 717–736.
Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2006). Beyond dichotomy: The curvilinear relationship between social responsibility and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 27(11), 1101–1122.
Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2012). Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1304–1320.
Berg, P., Baltimore, D., Boyer, H. W., Cohen, S. N., Davis, R. W., Hogness, D. S., et al. (1974). Potential biohazards of recombinant DNA molecules. Science, 185(4148), 303.
Berg, P. (2008). Asilomar 1975: DNA modification secured. Nature, 455(7211), 290–291.
Berg, P., & Singer, M. F. (1995). The recombinant DNA controversy: Twenty years later. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 92(20), 9011–9013.
Bosse, D. A., & Coughlan, R. (2016). Stakeholder relationship bonds. Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), 1197–1222.
Bosse, D. A., Phillips, R. A., & Harrison, J. S. (2009). Stakeholders, reciprocity, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 447–456.
Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequences of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 297–318.
Brammer, S., & Millington, A. I. (2003a). The effect of stakeholder preferences, organizational structure and industry type on corporate community involvement. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(3), 213–226.
Brammer, S., & Millington, A. I. (2003b). The evolution of corporate charitable contributions in the UK between 1989 and 1999: Industry structure and stakeholder influences. Business Ethics: A European Review, 12(3), 216–228.
Brickson, S. L. (2005). Organizational identity orientation: Making the link between organizational identity and organizations’ relations with stakeholders. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4), 576–609.
Brickson, S. L. (2007). Organizational identity orientation: The genesis of the role of the firm and distinct forms of social value. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 864–888.
Brossard, D., Belluck, P., Gould, F., & Wirz, C. D. (2019). Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(16), 7692–7697.
Carter, S. M. (2006). The interaction of top management group, stakeholder, and situational factors on certain corporate reputation management activities. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 1145–1176.
Cennamo, C., Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2012). Socioemotional wealth and proactive stakeholder engagement: Why family-controlled firms care more about their stakeholders. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6), 1153–1172.
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 1–23.
Christmann, P. (2004). Multinational companies and the natural environment: Determinants of global environmental policy. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 747–760.
Clark, C. E., Bryant, A. P., & Griffin, J. J. (2017). Firm engagement and social issue salience, consensus, and contestation. Business & Society, 56(8), 1136–1168.
Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25.
Crane, A., & Ruebottom, T. (2011). Stakeholder theory and social identity: Rethinking stakeholder identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 77–87.
Daft, R. L., & Macintosh, N. (1981). A tentative exploration into the amount and equivocality of information processing in organizational work units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(2), 207–224.
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284–295.
Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bingham, C. B. (2009). Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(3), 413–452.
Dawkins, C. E. (2014). The principle of good faith: Toward substantive stakeholder engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(2), 283–295.
Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effects of social and environmental disclosures - A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311.
DeTienne, K. B., & Lewis, L. W. (2005). The pragmatic and ethical barriers to corporate social responsibility disclosure: The Nike case. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(4), 359–376.
Dorobantu, S., Henisz, W. J., & Nartey, L. (2017). Not all sparks light a fire: Stakeholder and shareholder reactions to critical events in contested markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 62(3), 561–597.
Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643–669.
Fassin, Y. (2008). Imperfections and shortcomings of the stakeholder model’s graphical representation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(4), 879–888.
Fassin, Y. (2009). The stakeholder model refined. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 113–135.
Fassin, Y. (2012). Stakeholder management, reciprocity and stakeholder responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(1), 83–96.
Fassin, Y., de Colle, S., & Freeman, R. E. (2017). Intra-stakeholder alliances in plant-closing decisions: A stakeholder theory approach. Business Ethics: A European Review, 26(2), 97–111.
Ford, R. C., & Richardson, W. D. (1994). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(3), 205–221.
Fredrickson, D. S. (2001). The recombinant DNA controversy: A memoir. Washington DC: ASM Press.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder perspective. Boston: Pitman.
Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press on Demand.
Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205.
Garud, R., Schildt, H. A., & Lant, T. K. (2014). Entrepreneurial storytelling, future expectations, and the paradox of legitimacy. Organization Science, 25(5), 1479–1492.
Gilbert, D. T., & Osborne, R. E. (1989). Thinking backward: Some curable and incurable consequences of cognitive busyness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 940–949.
Girard, C., & Sobczak, A. (2012). Towards a model of corporate and social stakeholder engagement: Analyzing the relations between a French mutual bank and its members. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(2), 215–225.
Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777–798.
Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.
Greenwood, M., & Mir, R. A. (2019). Critical management studies and stakeholder theory: Possibilities for a critical stakeholder theory. In J. B. Barney, R. E. Freeman, J. S. Harrison, & R. A. Phillips (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of stakeholder theory (pp. 35–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, J., & Vredenburg, H. (2005). Managing stakeholder ambiguity. MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(1), 11–13.
Hardy, C., & Maguire, S. (2016). Organizing risk: Discourse, power, and “riskification”. Academy of Management Review, 41(1), 80–108.
Heffernan, O. (2017). A meaty issue. Nature, 544(7651), S18–S20.
Henisz, W. J., Dorobantu, S., & Nartey, L. J. (2014). Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement. Strategic Management Journal, 35(12), 1727–1748.
Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.
Holzer, B. (2008). Turning stakeseekers into stakeholders: A political coalition perspective on the politics of stakeholder influence. Business & Society, 47(1), 50–67.
Husted, B. W., Jamali, D., & Saffar, W. (2016). Near and dear? The role of location in CSR engagement. Strategic Management Journal, 37(10), 2050–2070.
Jefferson, V. (2006). The ethical dilemma of genetically modified food. Journal of Environmental Health, 69(1), 33–35.
Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.
Kaler, J. (2002). Morality and strategy in stakeholder identification. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(1/2), 91–99.
Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. New York: Hart, Schaffner and Marx.
Kobeissi, N., & Damanpour, F. (2009). Corporate responsiveness to community stakeholders: Effects of contextual and organizational characteristics. Business & Society, 48(3), 326–359.
Krimsky, S. (1982). Genetic alchemy: The social history of the recombinant DNA controversy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kuechle, G., Boulu-Reshef, B., & Carr, S. (2016). Prediction- and control-based strategies in entrepreneurship: The role of information. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 10(1), 43–64.
Laplume, A. O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. A. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1152–1189.
Lenn, J. (1993). Statement on stakeholders and failure. Informal presentation at the Annual meeting of the International Association for Business and Society (IABS), San Diego, CA.
Lotila, P. (2010). Corporate responsiveness to social pressure: An interaction-based model. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 395–409.
Maak, T. (2007). Responsible leadership, stakeholder engagement, and the emergence of social capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 329–343.
March, J. G. (1994). Primer on decision making: How decisions happen. New York: The Free Press.
Marens, R., & Wicks, A. (1999). Getting real: Stakeholder theory, managerial practice, and the general irrelevance of fiduciary duties owed to shareholders. Business Ethics Quarterly, 9(2), 273–293.
McGrath, R. G., & MacMillan, I. C. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset: Strategies for continuously creating opportunity in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Meznar, M. B., & Nigh, D. (1995). Buffer or bridge? Environmental and organizational determinants of public affairs activities in American firms. Academy of Management Journal, 38(4), 975–996.
Miller, J. I. (2012). The mortality problem of learning and mimetic practice in emerging industries: Dying to be legitimate. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(1), 59–88.
Michaelson, C. (2008). Moral luck and business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 773–787.
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.
Mitchell, R. K., Weaver, G. R., Agle, B. R., Bailey, A. D., & Carlson, J. (2016). Stakeholder agency and social welfare: Pluralism and decision making in the multi-objective corporation. Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 252–275.
Musteen, M., & Ahsan, M. (2013). Beyond cost: The role of intellectual capital in offshoring and innovation in young firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(2), 421–434.
Noland, J., & Phillips, R. (2010). Stakeholder engagement, discourse ethics and strategic management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 39–49.
Nutt, P. C. (1998). How decision makers evaluate alternatives and the influence of complexity. Management Science, 44(8), 1148–1166.
Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Inc.
Phillips, L. T., Stephens, N. M., Townsend, S. S. M., & Goudeau, S. (2020). Access is not enough: Cultural mismatch persists to limit first-generation students’ opportunities for achievement throughout college. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1037/​pspi0000234.CrossRef
Pieper, T. M., Smith, A. D., Kudlats, J., & Astrachan, J. H. (2015). The persistence of multifamily firms: Founder imprinting, simple rules, and monitoring processes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(6), 1313–1337.
Rehbein, K., Logsdon, J. M., & Van Buren, I. I. I. (2013). Corporate responses to shareholder activists: Considering the dialogue alternative. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(1), 137–154.
Rivkin, J. W. (2001). Reproducing knowledge: Replication without imitation at moderate complexity. Organization Science, 12(3), 274–293.
Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887–910.
Sachs, S., & Rühli, E. (2011). Stakeholders matter: A new paradigm for strategy in society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Selden, P. D., & Fletcher, D. E. (2015). The entrepreneurial journey as an emergent hierarchical system of artifact-creating processes. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 603–615.
Shapira, Z. (1995). Risk taking: A managerial perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 729–753.
Shiu, Y. M., & Yang, S. L. (2017). Does engagement in corporate social responsibility provide strategic insurance-like effects? Strategic Management Journal, 38(2), 455–470.
Sidgwick, H. (1879). The establishment of ethical first principles. Mind, 4(13), 106–111.
Sillanpaa, M. (1998). The Body Shop values report: Towards integrated stakeholder auditing. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(13), 1443–1456.
Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106(6), 467–482.
Sitkin, S. B., & Pablo, A. L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the determinants of risk behavior. Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 9–38.
Snider, J., Hill, R. P., & Martin, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: A view from the world’s most successful firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175–187.
Sonenshein, S. (2016). How corporations overcome issue illegitimacy and issue equivocality to address social welfare: The role of the social change agent. Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 349–366.
Sull, D. N., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2015). Simple rules: How to thrive in a complex world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490.
Torugsa, N. A., O’Donohue, W., & Hecker, R. (2012). Capabilities, proactive CSR and financial performance in SMEs: Empirical evidence from an Australian manufacturing industry sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(4), 483–500.
Townsend, D. M., Hunt, R. A., McMullen, J. S., & Sarasvathy, S. D. (2018). Uncertainty, knowledge problems and entrepreneurial action. Academy of Management Annals, 12(2), 659–687.
Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601–617.
Ulmer, R. R., & Sellnow, T. L. (2000). Consistent questions of ambiguity in organizational crisis communication: Jack in the Box as a case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(2), 143–155.
Valentine, S., & Fleischman, G. (2008). Ethics programs, perceived corporate social responsibility and job satisfaction. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 159–172.
von Groddeck, V. (2011). Rethinking the role of value communication in business corporations from a sociological perspective: Why organisations need value-based semantics to cope with societal and organisational fuzziness. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 69–84.
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance–financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.
Wang, T., & Bansal, P. (2012). Social responsibility in new ventures: Profiting from a long-term orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 33(10), 1135–1153.
Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Winkler, A. L. P., Brown, J. A., & Finegold, D. L. (2018). Employees as conduits for effective stakeholder engagement: An example from B corporations. Journal of Business Ethics, 107(1), 21–34.
Winter, S. G. (1987). Knowledge and competence and strategic assets. In D. J. Teece (Ed.), The competitive challenge: Strategies for industrial innovation and renewal: 159–184. New York: Harper & Row.
Wiseman, R. M., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153.
Zack, M. (1999). Developing a knowledge strategy. California Management Review, 41(3), 125–145.
Zattoni, A. (2011). Who should control a corporation? Toward a contingency stakeholder model for allocating ownership rights. Journal of Business Ethics, 103(2), 255–274.
Metadata
Title
Stakeholder Engagement, Knowledge Problems and Ethical Challenges
Authors
J. Robert Mitchell
Ronald K. Mitchell
Richard A. Hunt
David M. Townsend
Jae H. Lee
Publication date
03-08-2020
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Journal of Business Ethics / Issue 1/2022
Print ISSN: 0167-4544
Electronic ISSN: 1573-0697
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04550-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Journal of Business Ethics 1/2022 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Inducing Corporate Social Responsibility: Should Investors Reward the Responsible or Punish the Irresponsible?

Editorial Essay

The Metrics of Ethics and the Ethics of Metrics

Original Paper

Highway to (Digital) Surveillance: When Are Clients Coerced to Share Their Data with Insurers?

Original Paper

Drivers of Sustainability and Consumer Well-Being: An Ethically-Based Examination of Religious and Cultural Values

Original Paper

Competing Logics in the Islamic Funds Industry: A Market Logic Versus a Religious Logic

Original Paper

When Does Corporate Social Responsibility Backfire in Acquisitions? Signal Incongruence and Acquirer Returns