Toward a new theory of the firm: A critique of stakeholder “theory”

Management Decision

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 317-328

  Key, Susan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

Agencies; Contracts; Economic theory; Social responsibility; Stakeholders; Theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84986173304     PISSN: 00251747     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00251749910269366     Document Type: Review

References (70)

1. Abrams, F. (1951), “Management responsibilities in a complex world”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 29-34.
2. Ackerman, R. (1975), The Social Challenge to Business, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. Ackerman, R. and Bauer, R. (1976), Corporate Social Responsiveness, Reston Publishing, Reston, VA.
4. Allison, G. (1971), The Essence of Decision Making, Little Brown, Boston, MA.
5. Barnard, C. (1938), The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Bird, F. and Waters, J. (1987), “The nature of managerial moral standards”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 15-22.
7. Bowen, H. (1953), Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper, New York, NY.
8. Brenner, S. and Cochran, P. (1991), “The stakeholder theory of the firm: implications for business and society theory and research”, IABS Proceedings 1991, pp. 449-67.
9. Carroll, A. (1979), “A three-dimensional model of corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 497-505.
10. Carroll, A. (1989), Business > Society: Ethics > Stakeholder Management, SouthWestern Publishing Company, Cincinnati.
11. Chamberlain, F. (1973), The Limits of Corporate Responsibility, Basic Books, New York, NY.
12. Clarkson, M. (1988), “Corporate social performance in Canada, 1976-1986”, in Preston, L. (Ed.), Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT.
13. Coase, R. (1937), “The nature of the firm”, Economica, Vol. 4, pp. 386-405.
14. Coase, R. (1960), “The problem of social cost”, Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. 5, pp. 1-44.
15. Committee for Economic Development (CED), (1971), Social Responsibilities of Business Corporations, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
16. Davis, K. (1973), “The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 312-22.
17. Davis, K. (1975), “Five propositions for social responsibility”, Business Horizons, Vol. 18 No. 6, pp. 19-24.
18. DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (1983), “The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 147-60.
19. Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. (1994), “Toward a unified conception of business ethics: integrative social contacts theory”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 252-84.
20. Donaldson, T. and Preston, L. (1995), “The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 65-91.
21. Dreyfus, H. (1992), What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
22. Eberstadt, N. (1977), “What history tells us about corporate responsibilities”, in Carroll, A. (Ed.), Managing Corporate Social Responsibility, Little Brown, Boston, MA, pp. 17-22.
23. Eells, R. (1960), The Meaning of Modern Business, Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
24. Elbing, A. and Elbing, C. (1967), The Value Issue of Business, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
25. Etzioni, A. (1975), A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations, Free Press, New York, NY.
26. Evan, W. (1966), “The organization set: toward a theory of inter-organizational relations”, in Thompson, J. (Ed.), Approaches to Organizational Design, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 175-90.
27. Frederick, W. (1986), “Theories of corporate social performance: much done, more to do”, Working Paper, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Business.
28. Frederick, W. (1994), “From CSR1 to CSR2: the maturing of business > society thought”, Business > Society, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 150-66.
29. Freeman, R. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Ballinger, Boston, MA.
30. Friedman, M. (1962), Capitalism and Freedom, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
31. Frooman, J. (1997), “Socially irresponsible and illegal behavior and shareholder wealth: a meta-analysis of event studies”, Business > Society, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 221-49.
32. Gillies, D. (1996), Artificial Intelligence and the Scientific Method, Oxford University Press, NY.
33. Gioia, D. (1992), “Pinto fires and personal ethics: a script analysis of missed opportunities”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 379-89.
34. Goodpasture, K. (1991), “Business ethics and stakeholder analysis”, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 53-73.
35. Hannan, M. and Freeman, J. (1977), “The population ecology of organizations”, American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 82 No. 4, pp. 929-64.
36. Heald, M. (1970), The Social Responsibilities of Business: Company and Community, 1900-1960, The Press of Case Western University, Cleveland, OH.
37. Hosseini, J. and Brenner, S. (1992), “The stakeholder theory of the firm: a methodology to generate value matrix weights”, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 99-119.
38. Jones, T. (1995), “Instrumental stakeholder theory: a synthesis of ethics and economics”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 404-37.
39. Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
40. Kurland, N. (1996), “Sales, agents, and clients: ethics, incentives, and a modified theory of planned behavior”, Human Relations, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 51-74.
41. Lawrence, P. and Lorsch, J. (1967), Organization and Environment, Irwin Publishers, Homewood, IL.
42. Leifer, R. and Delbecq, A. (1978), “Organizational/environmental interchange: a model of boundary spanning activity”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 40-50.
43. Lynd, R. (1939), Knowledge of What?, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
44. Mahon, J. (1989), “Corporate political strategy”, Business in the Contemporary World, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 50-62.
45. March, J. and Simon, H. (1958), Organizations, John Wiley > Sons, Inc., New York, NY.
46. Merton, R. (1957), Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, Glencoe, IL.
47. Miles, R. (1987), Managing the Corporate Social Environment: A Grounded Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
48. Mills, C. (1959), The Sociological Imagination, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
49. Mitchell R., Agle, B. and Wood, D. (1997), “Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853-86.
50. Mitnick, B. (1993), “Organizing research in corporate social performance: the CSP system as core paradigm”, Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society.
51. Parsons, T. (1951), The Social System, The Free Press, Glencoe, IL.
52. Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G. (1978), The External Control of Organizations, Harper > Row, NY.
53. Polonsky, M. and Ryan, P. (1996), “The implications of stakeholder statutes for socially responsible managers”, Business and Professional Ethics Journal, Vol. 15 No. 4.
54. Preston, L. and Post, J. (1975), Private Management and Public Policy: The Principle of Public Responsibility, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
55. Preston, L. and Sapienza, H. (1990), “Stakeholder management and corporate performance”, The Journal of Behavioral Economics, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 361-75.
56. Rowley, T. (1997), “Moving beyond dyadic ties: a network theory of stakeholder influences”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 887-910.
57. Rowley, T. (1998), “Does relational context matter? An empirical test of a network theory of stakeholder influences”, Presented at the Academy of Management 1998 Meeting, San Diego, CA.
58. Sethi, S. (1975), “Dimensions of corporate social performance: an analytical framework”, California Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 58-64.
59. Sethi, S. (1979), “A conceptual framework for environmental analysis of social issues and evaluation of business response patterns”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 63-74.
60. Shepard, J., Shepard, J., Wimbush, J. and Stephens, C. (1995), “The place of ethics in business”, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 577-601.
61. Smith, A. (1937) [1776], An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, Modern Library edition, Random House, New York, NY.
62. Stigler, G. (1966), The Theory of Price, 3rd ed., Macmillan, New York, NY.
63. Swanson, D. (1995), “Addressing a theoretical problem by reorienting the corporate social performance model”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 43-64.
64. Thompson, J. (1967), Organizations in Action, McGraw-Hill New York, NY.
65. Votaw, D. (1973), “Genius becomes rare”, in Votaw, D. and Sethi, S. (Eds), The Corporate Dilemma, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, pp. 11-45.
66. Wartick, S. and Cochran, P. (1985), “The evolution of the corporate social performance model”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 758-69.
67. Williamson, O. (1963), The Economics of Discretionary Behavior: Managerial Objectives in a Theory of the Firm, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
68. Wood, D. (1991), “Corporate social performance revisited”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 691-718.
69. Wood, D. (1993), Business and Society, Scott, Foresman > Co., Glenview, IL.
70. Wood, D. and Jones, R. (1995). “Stakeholder mismatching: a theoretical problem in empirical research on corporate social performance”, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 225-332.