Search results

This chapter investigates the outcome of the ongoing interactions between the Danish University College of Northern Denmark and stakeholder networks in the Italian destination Campi Flegrei. The findings of this study show that the benefits of the interactions among students, lecturers, and destination stakeholders are manifold and show that the challenge resides in strengthening the flux of knowledge sent back to destination stakeholders. Thus, the authors suggest an action- and stakeholder-oriented approach for future knowledge transfer from the educational institution to the destination stakeholders.

The importance of organizational-stakeholder relationships has been an interesting subject in the organizational literature.

In this chapter, the evolution of the concept of stakeholder and how crucial is the company’s interaction and cooperation with them to achieve common goals has been studied. Initially stakeholder was considered a synonym of shareholder but throughout the years the category has expanded including managers, employees, suppliers, and other key actors, until the current meaning: stakeholder is “any group or individuals who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” (Freeman, 1994). Hence for running successful businesses, the companies need to acknowledge the existing stakeholders and provide them expected benefits, proportionally to their relevance, which is based on their power, legitimacy, and urgency. The chapter concludes by showing us the main principles that identify the management duties to all stakeholders and the necessity of increasing their involvement in decision-making processes.

The objective of this final chapter is to summarise the entire study through an overview of each chapter, and provide an analysis of the limitations and areas of future research. Section 7.2 provides the summary, whereas Section 7.3 outlines some of the limitations of the study, including the model itself and its assumptions, the statistical measure utilised, and the problems with the survey including the response rate. Section 7.5 highlights the potential future areas of research within stakeholder theory.

The pursuit of sustainable development goals (SDGs) is the primary driver of road infrastructure development (RID), but multiple parties are involved in the process, causing confusion. To effectively manage stakeholder processes, Jeffry (2009) proposed a framework based on a preventative double-path relationship between stakeholders and institutions. Bal et al. (2013) proposed a five-stage framework for stakeholder management, which includes identifying key players and issues, conducting analysis and plans, tightening restraints on making promises, creating a plan and soliciting input from interested parties, and monitoring its effectiveness. Successful stakeholder management for sustainable road infrastructure project (SRIP) implementation has been shown to have several benefits, such as enhanced understanding of the fiscal position, improving status, building relationships, developing trust, and enduring collaborative relationships, distributing skills and practices, and recognizing and mitigating threats and vulnerabilities. Infrastructure projects involving roads include a range of complex activities, and it is essential for infrastructure projects to evaluate potential project partners prior to making a final decision. Dealing with many stakeholders and maintaining a reasonable degree of concordance between their interests is crucial for fruitful endeavours. It is important for project groups and partners to have a shared understanding of the project’s goals and solicit their input and for a precise approach to identify and manage project partners throughout the execution phase. However, RID is still in its infancy when it comes to managing stakeholders and relationships. Stakeholder management has been ad hoc due to a lack of standardized methodologies, approaches, strategies, and processes, and infrastructure development procedures should include a systematic approach to managing stakeholders. The bulk of SRIP implementation needs come from stakeholders, making project partners crucial. The sustainable development (SD) strategy emphasizes the importance of SRIP execution to stakeholders, such as architects, quantity surveyors, conservationists, environmentalists, regional managers, project managers, suppliers, subcontractors, and sustainability consultants. This section of the research addressed the omissions of previously analysed comprehensive factors in SID models and frameworks, including climate change response, public involvement, and stakeholder management. Strategies for filling these gaps were discussed. An analysis of relevant academic literature was conducted.

We argue that the stakeholder and CSR literature can benefit from more systematic thinking about ownership. We discuss general notions of ownership in the economics and legal literature and the entrepreneurial notion of ownership we have developed in prior work. On this basis, we argue that stakeholder theory needs to deal more systematically with ownership as an economic function that can be exercised with greater or lesser ability, may be complementary to other economic functions, and works better when assigned to homogeneous groups. Some stakeholder groups are likely to lack what we call “ownership competence,” even if they have made relationship-specific investments, in part because of a diversity of interests. We also discuss CSR from the perspective of ownership and support Friedman’s original position, but with a twist. The point of Friedman’s paper is not that firms “should” maximize profits, but that managerial pursuit of “socially responsible” activities in a discretionary way imposes costs on owners. We suggest this problem is exacerbated with entrepreneurial managers who can devise new ways to prop up their self-interested actions with new creative CSR initiatives.

Defaults in corporations, financial institutions and semipublic organizations have resulted in (corporate) governance Codes and Law provisions that aim to improve governance, risk management and policy making by executive and non-executive directors of involved boards in The Netherlands and across the globe. The aim of this chapter is to discuss how semipublic organizations deal with public interest and the contribution of multiple stakeholder team production theory (MSTP) to effectively deal with the issue of how to include interests of different stakeholders and the general public interest in the governance of and policy making by boards of semipublic organizations. This includes the identification, raising awareness and analysis of various interests and their implications.

The authors use a literature review and their own experience.

Based on our literature review and experience converging in a case study design, we hold that a semipublic organization’s exposure to public interests and how it deals with that will remain a critical issue.

We develop a research approach for dealing with stakeholders’ and the public interest and conclude that a governance perspective grounded in team production theory allows for a much better focused incorporation of possibly conflicting stakeholder interests, including public stakeholder interests and stakeholder commitment and cooperation than the dominant control perspective that is currently prevailing.

We contribute to the literature by arguing that the combined MSTP approach offers a pre-eminent approach to influence and shape board behaviour, an increased awareness of interests of different stakeholders coalescing in the public interest and an alternative, complementary view on decision-making by boards viewed as a team.

Stakeholder thinking has contributed considerably to the organizational literature by demonstrating the significance of the environment in managing organizations. Stakeholders affect and are affected by organizations’ daily operations and decisions. They have varied and often conflicting interests, making it necessary for managers and organizations to know who they are as well as their attributes. Consequently, Mitchell et al. (1997) developed the stakeholder salience theory to help managers and organizations identify the power of certain stakeholders and their salience to the organization. With a few exceptions, the mainstream stakeholder salience theory is in many ways still largely static, short-term oriented, and firm-centered. The aim of this paper is to revisit certain conformist assumptions concerning the role of marginalized stakeholders, or “dormant” stakeholders, in stakeholder thinking. Overall, this chapter is a call to a new conceptualization of stakeholders that reintroduces stakeholder dynamics at the core of stakeholder thinking to overcome its restrictive shortcomings. We argue that managing stakeholder relationships is not simply meeting stakeholder demands but also involves taking into account the long-term dynamics of stakeholder interactions.