Search results

The recent financial crisis has restarted the debate of the value of both shareholder and stakeholder theories. This paper aims to continue this discussion.

The paper reviews existing literature and examines the benefits and problems associated with these frameworks through the lens of the recent events which have taken place during the financial crisis.

The main assertion of this paper is that shareholder theory is in itself a sound theory. Yet, some executives following this theory could have brought disrepute to it. In contrast, the stakeholder theoretical framework has yet to assert its influence because the concept is not yet unambiguously defined, which makes it difficult for the framework to become operational in practical business settings.

Future research should seek consensus on the scope and definition of the stakeholder model, as well as who the stakeholders should include. It should also focus on developing the tools and techniques necessary for the incorporation of stakeholder theory into business operations.

Policy makers could work with industry bodies and business leaders to encourage them to place greater emphasis on the interests of non‐shareholders and encourage collaboration between various groups of stakeholders to achieve corporate goals.

The paper continues the shareholder and stakeholder theory debate in light of the recent economic crisis.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between corporate governance structures and stakeholder and shareholder value maximization perspectives in 267 African banks from 2006 to 2011.

The authors used the Prais–Winsten ordinary least squares and random effect regression models to explore this relationship to ensure consistency and efficiency in results. The data for this study were collected from Bankscope.

The results of this study show that corporate governance structures such as CEO duality, nonexecutive members and extreme large board size lead to a reduction in both shareholder and stakeholder value maximization. However, audit independence and board size also promote both shareholder and stakeholder value maximization. Although gender diversity promotes profit maximization, it was not significant in any of the models estimated. The results further suggest that the same corporate governance structures promote and detract shareholder and stakeholder value maximization in Africa although the effect of corporate governance structures was weightier on shareholder value maximization confirming the agency theory.

From these findings, bank management must pursue the institution of good corporate governance structures and avoid weak corporate governance structures to promote shareholder and stakeholder value maximization. Also equity holders may have to pay particular attention to corporate governance structures because they benefit the most from the institution of good corporate governance structures.

This study explores and compares how corporate governance structures promote shareholder and stakeholder value maximization separately in African banks. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first of such studies.

Theories of management require normative justification; that is, they rely on some conception of what is morally good, right, and just. This chapter examines some of the normative reasons for adopting a stakeholder theory of management and for rejecting the once, and perhaps still, “dominant” shareholder-centric approach. This chapter then surveys some of the prominent “normative cores” that are used to ground stakeholder theory, that is, Kantian, contractarian, feminist ethics, and ethical pragmatism, and the moral obligations that each normative approach generates. Some pressing questions are raised with respect to each normative approach. To what extent ought we to recognize imperfect obligations to shareholders? Are contractarian hypernorms morally substantive? How exactly should we care about stakeholders, and is care even an appropriate attitudinal response? Without some commitment to objective ethical standards, how can pragmatists resolve stakeholder conflict?

Focuses on what can be referred to as the “fundamental philosophical issues of corporate governance”. Outlines the interdependence of various kinds of governance. Demonstrates that corporate governance is part of a bundle of governances and that, in this respect, it occupies a leading place to the degree that its principles are becoming consolidated. Then discusses in a more detailed manner what is meant by the term “dominant functionalism”. Then deals with the question of the equilibrium between sovereignty and legitimacy from the point of view of corporate governance. In effect, rules of governance (considered as the designation of a sovereign power) are searching for a legitimizing instance originating outside the framework of those rules. Finally, covers the proprietarialist origins of stakeholder theory, origins which correspond to a moderate liberal tradition.

Diverse understanding of corporate social responsibility (CSR) abounds among scholars and practitioners in Nigeria. The purpose of this chapter is to reinvent CSR in Nigeria through a deeper understanding of the meaning and theories of this nebulous concept for better application in the industry. The qualitative research approach is adopted, relying on critical review of scholarly articles on CSR, website information of selected companies and institutional documents. It was found that there are diverse meanings of CSR in the reviewed literature, but the philanthropic initiatives and corporate donations for social issues are the common CSR practices in Nigeria. Besides, the eight dominant theories of CSR that find relevance for applications in the industry are shareholder/agency, stakeholder, legitimacy, instrumental, social contract, conflict, green and communication theories. The implication of the discourse is that better understanding and application of CSR theories would strengthen conceptual, theoretical and empirical research in the field of CSR. Besides, CSR theories are useful sources of information for practitioners for designing social responsibility policies and practices as well as for providing scholars with sound theoretical framework for academic research.

In this paper, we want to focus on the interactions of shareholder theory, stakeholder theory, institutional theory and agency theory in terms of corporate social responsibility. We will specifically study this issue in the context of commercial banks in the financial sector. Financial firms appear to be subject to strong technical and institutional pressures. They are also more opaque and subject to heavier regulation than their non‐financial counterparts. It appears that the application of agency‐based assumptions to the financial sector is inadequate in explaining corporate governance and related social responsibility practices. In this context, the structure of asymmetric information seems to be more complex and multi‐dimensional. It takes place first between the depositors, the bank and the regulatory authorities; second, between the shareholders, the bank and the regulatory authorities; last, between the borrowers, the managers and the regulatory authorities. These parties also constitute the firms’ stakeholders. In this respect, the state appears to be a major stakeholder and it is in a position to affect all other bank/stakeholder relations through its regulations and participation in the financial sector. These are the factors that intensify institutional pressures in this sector. The institutional embeddedness inherent in a special context is likely to affect stakeholder position and attitudes. Therefore, this paper aims to investigate the conflicting nature of being a stakeholder under institutional pressures and it articulates the factors that determine the behavior of the state as a stakeholder in shaping corporate social responsibility practices of firms.

Considering the standards developed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), this study aims to examine whether the link between material sustainability and financial performance depends on the extent to which the company is oriented toward stakeholders.

To test the predictions, 13,942 firm-year observations from 43 different countries are used, covering the period from 2010 to 2019. Using a hand-mapping approach to match the indicators suggested by the SASB with those of the ASSET4, the authors realize that there are 170 material sustainability indicators among 466 indicators of the ASSET4. The authors use three different methods to verify if the materiality matters, including the alphas obtained from the Fama and French factor models, comparing the average abnormal returns of the portfolios and the bootstrapped Cramer technique.

The findings show that companies investing in material sustainability activities perform better than those investing in immaterial activities. Also, consistent with the theoretical foundations, the authors find that the effect of investing in material sustainability activities is more pronounced in stakeholder-oriented countries than that in shareholder-oriented countries. The results are robust to a battery of sensitivity tests.

Owing to COVID-19 in late 2019, data from 2020 to 2022 have not been used to obtain reliable results.

The results obtained in the current research provide valuable guidance for investors to make investments considering the degree of materiality of sustainability activities in different industries. It also helps managers to increase the company’s financial performance, make efficient decisions related to investment in sustainability activities and find investment strategies on the material sustainability issues in their industries.

This study provides a clearer understanding of investment in sustainability activities in different industries by separating material and immaterial sustainability activities in stakeholder and shareholder-oriented countries, and the results obtained can change the perspective of investors and company managers regarding investing in such activities in different countries. Investing in more materiality sustainability activities than the immateriality dimension can be new opportunities for companies to achieve predetermined goals, help retain and attract business partners or be a source of innovation for new product lines or services. Internal morale and employee engagement may increase while increasing productivity and firm performance. This discussion opens the way for future research.

This study provides insight into the effect of investing in material and immaterial sustainability activities in different industries on the company’s performance in shareholder and stakeholder-oriented countries.

The chapter discusses Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with appropriate theoretical framings with the intent of creating a deeper understanding and application of CSR theories in Ibero-America’s hospitality industry. The research method is a qualitative research approach relying on critical review of scholarly articles on CSR theories. The sourced articles were critically discussed and analysed to fit the needs of the hospitality industry in Ibero-America. The shareholder/agency, stakeholder, legitimacy, instrumental, social contract, conflict, green and communication theories were identified as the eight dominant theories of CSR with diverse applications in the hospitality industry. The CSR theories discussed are not exhaustive, as there are emerging theories that explicate CSR in different contexts. The implication is that better understanding and application of CSR theories would strengthen conceptual, theoretical and empirical research in Ibero-America. The CSR theories are useful sources of information for practitioners for designing corporate CSR policies as well as providing scholars with sound theoretical framework for academic research. The chapter is a novel attempt at bridging theory and practice in the field of CSR, as well enriching the understanding of this concept among both practitioners and scholars in Ibero-America.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of corporate governance structures in the UK and Germany addressing the extent to which corporate governance structures may have been a contributory factor to the recent banking crisis. Following a review of shareholder and stakeholder theories of corporate governance and a comparative overview of corporate governance codes in the UK and Germany, the authors aim to provide some country level macroeconomic data and performance related data for a small number of large banks in the UK and Germany.

The paper is structured as follows. It first reviews the existing literature that underpins the stakeholder vs shareholder debate within corporate governance. It then reviews the current codes of conduct and governance structures implemented by UK and German banks. An analysis of the extent to which the banking crises can be attributed to failures in governance is presented and finally some conclusions and recommendations are outlined.

Findings suggest that while corporate governance in banks would appear to have been a significant factor in the recent banking crisis, based on the performance data, it cannot be said that a corporate governance approach based on either shareholder capitalism (UK) or stakeholder capitalism (Germany) is more at fault than the other. However, it is clear that UK and German corporate governance structures were not adequate to prevent the recent banking crisis and only time will tell whether the remedial actions taken have been sufficient. The present findings, in line with those presented in the Walker report in 2009, suggest that the codes of conduct in both countries were not adequate to deal with the complex issues caused by the financial crisis and that changes need to be implemented. The authors fully acknowledge that corporate governance only played a part in the financial crisis and in order to try to stop a repeat of this, the whole regulatory environment in both countries needs to be strengthened.

The main limitation of the study lies with a lack of complex analysis undertaken to support the findings.

The findings from the study suggest that, regardless of the type of governance in operation, current corporate governance rules were not adequate and that a new set of rules is needed in both the UK and Germany. The findings also suggest that the stakeholder/shareholder debate may not be as important as previously claimed and that regulators need to find good governance rules, regardless of theoretical underpinnings.

Governments across the world are currently cutting public spending in an extreme fashion and this is, partly, due to the banking crises. Therefore, poor governance in the banking sector is leading to massive social problems in the real world as governments cut services.

The paper is original as it is the first attempt to discuss the corporate governance failing and the banking crises from a shareholder/stakeholder perspective.

Corporate responsibility perceptions from stakeholders are becoming more difficult to manage. This is in part because of large amount of social media being projected to stakeholders on a daily basis. In light of this, the purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between corporate responsibility framing from the social media perspective firm’s performance as defined by abnormal-return (defined as the difference between a single stock or portfolios return and the expected return) and idiosyncratic-risk (defined as the risk of a particular investment because of firm-specific characteristics).

Hypotheses are developed through agenda-setting theory and stakeholder and shareholder viewpoints. The research model is tested using sentiment analysis from a collection of social media from several industries.

The results provide support that three corporate responsibility social media categories (economic, social and environmental-framing) will have different impacts (delayed, immediate) on abnormal-return and idiosyncratic-risk. This study finds differences between immediate (one-day lag) and delayed (three-day lag) associations on abnormal-return and idiosyncratic-risk.

This study also suggests differences between the amount and sentiment of corporate responsibility social media framing on abnormal-return and idiosyncratic-risk. Finally, results identify interaction effects between different corporate responsibility social media categories.