The New Stakeholder Theory on Organizational Purpose

References

• Alchian AA, Demsetz H (1972) Production, information costs, and economic organization. Amer. Econom. Rev. 62:777–795.Google Scholar
• Almandoz J (2023) Inside-out and outside-in perspectives on corporate purpose. Strategy Sci. 8(2):139–148.Link, Google Scholar
• Alvarez SA, Barney JB (2007) Discovery and creation: Alternative theories of entrepreneurial action. Strategic Entrep. J. 1:11–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amis J, Barney JB, Mahoney JT, Wang H (2020a) Why we need a theory of stakeholder governance—and why this is a hard problem. Acad. Management Rev. 45(3):499–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amis J, Mair J, Munir KA (2020b) The organizational reproduction of inequality. Acad. Management Ann. 14:195–230.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Amis JM, Munir KA, Lawrence TB, Hirsch P, McGahan A (2018) Inequality, institutions and organizations. Organ. Stud. 39(9):1131–1152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arikan A, McGahan AM (2010) The development of capabilities in new firms. Strategic Management J. 31(1):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arvate P, Cabral S, McGahan AM, Reis P (2022) Structural advocacy organizations and intersectional outcomes: Effects of women’s police stations on female homicides. Public Admin. Rev. 82(3):503–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Asher CC, Mahoney JM, Mahoney JT (2005) Toward a property rights foundation for a stakeholder theory of the firm. J. Management Gov. 9:1, 5–32.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bacq S, Aguilera R (2022) Stakeholder governance for responsible innovation: A theory of value creation, appropriation, and distribution. J. Management Stud. 59(1):29–60.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bansal P (2003) From issues to actions: The importance of individual concerns and organizational values in responding to natural environmental issues. Organ. Sci. 14(5):510–527.Link, Google Scholar
• Bapuji H, Husted BW, Lu J, Mir R (2018) Value creation, appropriation, and distribution: How firms contribute to societal economic inequality. Bus. Soc. 57:983–1009.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barnard CI (1938) The Functions of the Executive (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Barney JB (2018) Why resource-based theory’s model of profit appropriation must incorporate a stakeholder perspective. Strategic Management J. 39:3305–3325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barney JB (2020) Measuring performance in a way that is consistent with strategic management theory. Acad. Management Discov. 6:1, 5–7.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barney JB, Harrison JS (2020) Stakeholder theory at the crossroads. Bus. Soc. 59(2):203–212.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barringer BR, Harrison JS (2000) Walking a tightrope: Creating value through interorganizational relationships. J. Management 26(3):367–403.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum JAC, McGahan AM (2009) Outsourcing war: The evolution of the private military industry after the Cold War. Preprint, submitted October 29, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1496498.Google Scholar
• Bettinazzi ELM, Zollo M (2017) Stakeholder orientation and acquisition performance. Strategic Management J. 38(12):2465–2485.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blair M, Stout L (1999) A team production theory of corporate law. Va. Law Rev. 85:248–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux F, Stoelhorst JW (2014) Microfoundations for stakeholder theory: Managing stakeholders with heterogeneous motives. Strategic Management J. 35(1):107–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux F, Stoelhorst JW (2016) Stakeholder relationships and social welfare: A behavioral theory of contributions to joint value creation. Acad. Management Rev. 41(2):229–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux F, Stoelhorst JW (2022a) Stakeholder governance: Solving the collective action problems in joint value creation. Acad. Management Rev. 47(2):214–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux F, Stoelhorst J (2022b) Stakeholder theory, strategy, and organization: Past, present, and future. Strategic Organ. 20(4):797–809.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux FM, Vishwanathan P (2020) When do powerful stakeholders give managers the latitude to balance all stakeholders’ interests? Bus. Soc. 59:232–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Business Roundtable (2019) Statement on the purpose of a corporation. Accessed May 1, 2022, https://s3.amazonaws.com/brt.org/BRT-StatementonthePurposeofaCorporationwithSignaturesApril2022.pdf.Google Scholar
• Buttner EH, Lowe KB (2017) Addressing internal stakeholders’ concerns: The interactive effect of perceived pay equity and diversity climate on turnover intentions. J. Bus. Ethics 143:621–633.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabral S, Lazzarini S, de Azavedo PF (2013) Private entrepreneurs in public services: A longitudinal examination of outsourcing and statization of prisons. Strategic Entrep. J. 7:1, 6–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cabral S, Mahoney JT, McGahan AM, Potoski M (2019) Value creation and value appropriation in public and non-profit organizations. Strategic Management J. 40(4):465–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff RW (1999) When competitive advantage doesn’t lead to performance: The resource-based view and stakeholder bargaining power. Organ. Sci. 10(2):119–133.Link, Google Scholar
• Coff RW (2010) The coevolution of rent appropriation and capability development. Strategic Management J. 31(7):711–733.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff RW, Kryscynski D (2011) Drilling for micro-foundations of human capital-based competitive advantages. J. Management 37(5):1429–1443.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coff RW, Raffiee J (2015) Toward a theory of perceived firm-specific human capital. Acad. Management Perspect. 29(3):326–341.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delmas M, Toffel M (2004) Stakeholders and environmental management practices: An institutional framework. Bus. Strategy Environ. 13(4):209–222.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Distelhorst G, McGahan A (2021) Socially irresponsible employment in emerging-market manufacturers. Organ. Sci. 33(6):2135–2158.Link, Google Scholar
• Donaldson T, Preston LE (1995) The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Acad. Management Rev. 20:65–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dorobantu S, Odziemkowska K (2017) Valuing stakeholder governance: Property rights, community mobilization, and firm value. Strategic Management J. 38(13):2682–2703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Durand R, Hawn O, Ioannou I (2019) Willing and able: A general model of organizational responses to normative pressures. Acad. Management Rev. 44(2):299–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fink L (2018) A sense of purpose. Blackrock annual letter to shareholders. Accessed May 1, 2022, https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/01/17/a-sense-of-purpose/.Google Scholar
• Flammer C, Luo J (2017) Corporate social responsibility as an employee governance tool: Evidence from a quasi-experiment. Strategic Management J. 38(2):163–183.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foss N, Klein PG (2018) Entrepreneurial opportunities: Who needs them? Acad. Management Perspect. 34(3):366–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman RE (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman Publishing, London).Google Scholar
• Freeman RE, Wicks AC, Parmar B (2004) Stakeholder theory and the corporate objective revisited. Organ. Sci. 15(3):364–369.Link, Google Scholar
• Garcia-Castro R, Aguilera RV (2014) Incremental value creation and appropriation in a world with multiple stakeholders. Strategic Management J. 36(1):137–147.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garcia-Castro R, Francoeur C (2016) When more is not better: Complementarities, costs and contingencies in stakeholder management. Strategic Management J. 37(2):406–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gartenberg C (2023) The contingent relationship between purpose and profits. Strategy Sci. 8(2):256–269.Link, Google Scholar
• Gartenberg C, McGahan AM (2023) Organizations, authority and the humanities in Adler PS, Adly A, Armanios DE, et al. Authoritarianism, populism, and the global retreat of democracy: A curated discussion. J. Management Inquiry 32(1)3–20.Google Scholar
• Gatignon A, Capron L (2023) The firm as an architect of polycentric governance: Building open institutional infrastructure in emerging markets. Strategic Management J. 44(1):48–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gelles D, Yaffe-Bellany D (2019) Shareholder value is no longer everything, CEOs say. New York Times (August 19), https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/business/business-roundtable-ceos-corporations.html.Google Scholar
• George G, Fewer T, Lazzarini S, McGahan AM, Puranam P (2023a) Partnering for grand challenges: A review of organizational design considerations in public-private collaborations. J. Management. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• George G, Haas MR, Joshi H, McGahan AM, Tracey P (2022) Introduction to the business of sustainability: An organizing framework for theory, practice, and impact. George G, Haas MR, Joshi H, McGahan AM, Tracey P, eds. Handbook on the Business of Sustainability: The Organization, Implementation, and Practice of Sustainable Growth (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK), 2–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• George G, Haas MR, McGahan AM, Schillebeeckx SJD, Tracey P (2023b) Purpose in the for-profit firm: A review and framework for management research. J. Management. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• George G, Howard-Grenville J, Joshi A, Tihanyi L (2016) Understanding and tackling grand challenges through management research. Acad. Management J. 59(6):1880–1895.Crossref, Google Scholar
• George G, McGahan AM, Prabhu J (2012) Innovation for inclusive growth: Toward a theoretical framework and a research agenda. J. Management Stud. 49(4):661–683.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harrison JS, Bosse DA, Phillips RA (2010) Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management J. 31(1):58–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henisz W (2023) The value of organizational purpose. Strategy Sci. 8(2):159–169.Link, Google Scholar
• Inoue C (2020) Election cycles and organizations: How politics shapes the performance of state-owned enterprises over time. Admin. Sci. Quart. 65(3):677–709.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jensen MC (2001) Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. J. Appl. Corporate Finance 14:8–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones TM (1995) Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Acad. Management Rev. 20(2):404–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jourdan J, Kivleniece I, McGahan AM (2019) Toward a stakeholder-centric value co-creation and appropriation perspective. Working paper (rev. October 21, 2020), HEC Paris, Jouy-en-Josas, France.Google Scholar
• Kaplan SL (2018) The problematics of the business case. Working paper, Institute for Gender & the Economy, Rotman School, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
• Kaplan SL (2019) The 360 Corporation: From Stakeholder Trade-offs to Transformation (Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan SL (2020) Beyond the business case for social responsibility. Acad. Management Discov. 6(1):1–4.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan SL (2023) The promises and the perils of corporate stakeholderism. Strategy Sci. 8(2):288–301.Link, Google Scholar
• Kaul A (2013) Entrepreneurial action, unique assets, and appropriation risk: Firms as a means of appropriating profit from capability creation. Organ. Sci. 24(6):1765–1781.Link, Google Scholar
• Kaul A, Luo J (2018) An economic case for CSR: The comparative efficiency of for‐profit firms in meeting consumer demand for social goods. Strategic Management J. 39(6):1650–1677.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaul A, Luo J (2019) Private action in public interest: The comparative governance of social issues. Strategic Management J. 40(4):476–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kivleniece I, Quelin B (2011) Creating and capturing value in public-private ties: A private actor’s perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 37(2):272–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein PG, Mahoney JT, McGahan AM, Pitelis CN (2012) Who is in charge? A property rights perspective on stakeholder governance. Strategic Organ. 10(3):304–315.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein PG, Mahoney JT, McGahan AM, Pitelis CN (2013) Capabilities and strategic entrepreneurship in public organizations. Strategic Entrep. J. 7(1):70–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein PG, Mahoney JT, McGahan AM, Pitelis CN (2019) Organizational governance adaptation: Who is in, who is out, and who gets what. Acad. Management Rev. 44:1, 6–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lange D, Bundy J (2018) The association between ethics and stakeholder theory. Dorobantu S, Aguilera RV, Luo J, Milliken FJ, eds. Sustainability, Stakeholder Governance, and Corporate Social Responsibility, Advances in Strategic Management, vol. 38 (Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK), 365–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Learned EP, Christensen CR, Andrews K, Guth W (1965) Business Policy: Text and Cases (R. D. Irwin, Homewood, IL).Google Scholar
• Lumpkin GT, Bacq S (2019) Civic wealth creation: A new view of stakeholder engagement and societal impact. Acad. Management Perspect. 33(4):383–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mackey A, Mackey TB, Barney JB (2007) Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):817–835.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahoney JT (2001) A resource-based theory of sustainable rents. J. Management 6:651–660.Google Scholar
• Mahoney JT (2012) Toward a stakeholder theory of strategic management. Joan ERC, Josep MRM, eds. Toward a New Theory of the Firm: Humanizing the Firm and the Management Profession (BBVA, Bilbao, Spain), 153–182.Google Scholar
• Mahoney JT (2023) Corporate personhood and fiduciary duties as critical constructs in developing stakeholder management theory and corporate purpose. Strategy Sci. 8(2):212–220.Link, Google Scholar
• Mahoney JT, McGahan AM, Pitelis C (2009) The interdependence of private and public interests. Organ. Sci. 20(6):1034–1052.Link, Google Scholar
• Mazzucato M (2011) The Entrepreneurial State (Demos, London).Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2014) The power of coordinated action: Short-term organizations with long-term impact. Rotman Magazine (Fall).Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2018) Freedom in scholarship: Lessons from Atlanta. Acad. Management Rev. 43(2):173–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2020a) Immigration and impassioned management scholarship. J. Management Inquiry 29(1):111–114.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2020b) Where does an organization’s responsibility end? Identifying the boundaries on stakeholder claims. Acad. Management Discov. 6:8–11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2021) Integrating insights from the resource-based view of the firm into the new stakeholder theory. J. Management 47(7):1734–1756.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2022a) The state of the union in the field of strategic management: Great theories. Imperative problems. Strategic Management Rev. 3(1):25–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM (2022b) Pankaj Ghemawat’s Commitment and the new stakeholder theory. Strategy Sci. 7(2):148–151.Link, Google Scholar
• McGahan AM, Pongeluppe L (2021) There is no planet B: Aligning stakeholder interests to preserve the Amazon rainforest. Working paper, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
• McGahan AM, Barney JB, Zelner B (2013) Private entrepreneurship in the public interest. Strategic Entrep. J. 7(1):1–5.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McWilliams A, Siegel D (2001) Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 26(1):117–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Management Rev. 22:853–886.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W, Joseph J (2018) The attention-based view of great strategies. Strategy Sci. 3(1):289–294.Link, Google Scholar
• Odziemkowska K, Dorobantu S (2020) Contracting beyond the market. Organ. Sci. 32(3):776–803.Link, Google Scholar
• Pongeluppe LS (2022) The Favela Effect: Spatial inequalities and firm strategies in disadvantaged urban communities. Strategic Management J. 43(13):2777–2808.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porter ME, Kramer MR (2006) Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Bus. Rev. 84(12):78–92.Google Scholar
• Porter ME, Kramer MR (2011) Creating shared value. Harvard Bus. Rev. 89(1–2):62–77.Google Scholar
• Pratt MG, Hedden LN (2023) Accounts and accountability: Understanding organizational purpose by exploring its links to identity and meaningful work. Strategy Sci. 8(2):182–192.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P (2018) The Microstructure of Organizations (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rowley TJ (1997) Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Acad. Management Rev. 22(4):887–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schreck P, Van Aaken D, Donaldson T (2013) Positivistic economics and the normativistic fallacy: Bridging the two sides of CSR. Bus. Ethics Quart. 23(2):297–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H (1957) Models of Man: Social and Rational (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Stoelhorst JW (2021) Value, rent, and profit: A stakeholder resource-based theory. Strategic Management J. 1–26.Google Scholar
• Stoelhorst JW, Vishwanathan P (2022) Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Acad. Management Rev., ePub ahead of print October 11, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0268.Google Scholar
• Stout LA (2012) The Shareholder Value Myth: How Putting Shareholders First Harms Investors (Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Oakland, CA).Google Scholar
• Tantalo C, Priem RL (2016) Value creation through stakeholder synergy. Strategic Management J. 37(2):314–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tihanyi L, Graffin S, George G (2014) Rethinking governance in management research. Acad. Management J. 57:1535–1543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang HC, He J, Mahoney JT (2009) Firm-specific knowledge resources and competitive advantage: The roles of economic- and relationship-based employee governance mechanisms. Strategic Management J. 30:1265–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar