Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T03:47:52.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Communitarian Note on Stakeholder Theory1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

Amitai Etzioni
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This article adds to the discussion of the legitimation of stakeholding, by studying the implications of investing financial assets, years of labor, community resources, or other such scarce goods in a corporation. It attempts to respond to those who argue that it is not possible for all stakeholders to be effectively represented in corporate governance and that if they were, this would undermine the well-being of the corporation.

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , October 1998 , pp. 679 - 691
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

I am indebted to Michael Bocian for research assistance and to Margaret Blair for comments on a previous draft.

References

Notes

2 R. Edward Freeman, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Boston: Pittman, 1984); R. Edward Freeman, “The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions,” Business Ethics Quarterly 4, no. 4.

3 Thomas Donaldson and T. W. Dunfee, “Towards a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory,” Academy of Management Review 19, 1994, pp. 252–284.

4 Max B. E. Clarkson, “A Stakeholder Framework for Analysing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance,” Academy of Management Review 20, 1995, pp. 92–117.

5 Margaret M. Blair, Ownership and Control: Rethinking Corporate Governance for the Twenty-First Century (Washington, D.C.: Brookings, 1995).

6 Robert A. Phillips, “Stakeholder Theory and a Principle of Fairness,” Business Ethics Quarterly 7, no. 1, 1997, pp. 51–66.

7 Steven M. H. Wallman, “The Proper Interpretation of Corporate Constituency Statutes and Formulation of Director Duties,” Stetson Law Review 21, no. 1, Fall 1991, pp. 163–196.

8 Thomas Donaldson and L. E. Preston, “The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications,” Academy of Management Review 20, 1995, pp. 65–91.

9 Irwin M. Stelzer, “The Stakeholder Cometh,” Weekly Standard, February 5, 1996, 16–17.

10 Nell Minow, “Shareholders, Stakeholders, and Boards of Directors,” Stetson Law Review 21, no. 1, Fall 1991, pp. 197–243.

11 Amitai Etzioni, The New Golden Rule: Community and Morality in a Democratic Society (New York: Basic Books, 1996).

12 Edward S. Mason, “Corporation,” in David L. Sills, ed., International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences (New York: Macmillan, 1968), p. 397.

13 Adolfe A. Berle and Gardiner C. Means, The Modern Corporation and Private Property (New York: Macmillan, 1932).

14 William Chambliss and Robert Seidman, Law, Order, and Power (Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1982), pp. 88–92.

15 Ronald E. Voogt, “‘Taking’: Real Estate Owners, Rights and Responsibilities,” The Responsive Community 2, no. 2, pp. 7–10.

16 For example, American property law changed during the 19th century from a “natural use” conception of property which favored agrarian uses to a “reasonable use” conception which favored industrial uses. William Chambliss and Robert Seidman, Law, Order, and Power (Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1982), p. 89–90.

17 E. Merrick Dodd, “The Evolution of Limited Liability in American Industry: Massachusetts,” Harvard Law Review, Vol. LXI, No. 8 (September, 1948), p. 1361.

18 Marleen A. O’Connor, “Restructuring the Corporation’s Nexus of Contracts: Recognizing a Fiduciary Duty,” North Carolina Law Review 60 (June, 1991).

19 Edward S. Mason, “Corporation,” International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York: Macmillan, 1968), p. 396.

20 See Rick Molz, “Employee Job Rights: Foundation Considerations,” Journal of Business Ethics 6 (1987), pp. 449–458.

21 John Locke, The Second Treatise of Government, Thomas P. Peardon, ed. (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1952), p. 17.

22 For example, see Clear v. American Airlines, Inc. (1980), Pugh v. See’s Candies (1981), and Monge v. Beebe Rubber Co. (1974).

23 Cf.: Ronald Dore, Japanese Capitalism, Anglo-Saxon Capitalism; How Will the Darwinian Contest Turn Out? (London: Centre for Economic Performance, 1992), p. 7.

24 I write typically because non-voting shares are an exception.

25 Steven M. H. Wallman, “The Proper Interpretation of Corporate Constituency Statutes and Formulation of Director Duties,” Stetson Law Review XXI, no. 1 (Fall 1991), p. 163.

26 Marleen A. O’Connor, “A Socio-Economic Approach to the Japanese Corporate Governance Structure,” Washington & Lee Law Review 1529, Fall 1993; Francis Fukuyama, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity (New York, Free Press, 1995).

27 For a discussion of stakeholder economies or the European social model, see Tony Wright, Why Vote Labour? (London: Penguin, 1997); and John Kay, Community Values and the Market Economy (London: Social Market Foundation, 1997).