Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Stakeholder Influence on Decision Making: From e-Movements (#metoo) to Corporate Social Responsibility Policy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Innovation, Technology, and Market Ecosystems

Abstract

Firms that report engagement in corporate social responsibility strive for both business and social growth and development by being proactive in tending to stakeholders’ needs and wants. In the midst of the #metoo movement, organizations around the world are confronted with the challenge of addressing current and potential stakeholders’ online and offline demands to do the right thing, as well as maintain their right to operate. The question, then, is how does stakeholder voice via social networking sites influence organizational decision making? This study contributes to the understanding of stakeholders’ role in the development of organizations’ standards and policies, by exploring the legitimacy of organizations’ engagement in corporate social responsibility in the midst of the #metoo movement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amato, L. H., & Amato, C. H. (2007, May). The effects of firm size and industry on corporate giving. Journal of Business Ethics, 72(3), 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atzori, L., Iera, A., & Morabit, G. (2010, October). The internet of things: A survey. Computer Networks, 54(15), 2787–2805.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird, C. H., & Parasnis, G. (2011). From social media to social customer relationship management. Strategy & Leadership, 39(5), 30–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakeberg, B. (2015). Online brand communities: Value creating capabilities of brand communities on Facebook. Hamburg: Anchor Academic Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, P. A. (2018). A leader’s personal journey of insight: Going through darkness into light as a condition of leading an organization through its own darkness. The Palgrave Handbook of Workplace Spirituality and Fulfillment, 659–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, R., Hall, A. D., Momentè, F., & Reggiani, F. (2007, December). What corporate social responsibility activities are valued by the market? Journal of Business Ethics, 76(2), 189–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, H. (1995). Social movements. In S. M. Lyman (Ed.), Social movements. Critiques, concepts, case-studies (pp. 60–83). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, M. E., & Boguslaw, J. (2007). Business, poverty and corporate citizenship. Naming the issues and framing solutions. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Spring, 26, 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. E. (2011, August). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. In 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) general conference 2011 (pp. 1–9). Reykjavik: University of Iceland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carty, V. (2014). Arab Spring in Tunisia and Egypt: The impact of new media on contemporary social movements and challenges for social movement theory. International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, 51(1), 51–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleland, D. I. (1997). Project stakeholder management. In D. I. Cleland & W. R. King (Eds.), Project management handbook (2nd ed., pp. 275–301). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007, October–November). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability: The missing link. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7–8), 649–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Camargo, J. A., Mendonça, P. S., de Oliveira, J. H., Jabbour, C. J., & de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. (2017). Giving voice to the silent: A framework for understanding stakeholders’ participation in socially-oriented initiatives, community-based actions and humanitarian operations projects. Annals of Operations Research, 1–16. Retrieved November 2, 2018, from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2426-2

  • de Chernatony, L., & Harris, F. (2000, July). Developing corporate brands through considering internal and external stakeholders. Corporate Reputation Review, 3(3), 268–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Quevedo-Puente, E., De la Fuente-Sabaté, J. M., & Delgado-García, J. B. (2007). Corporate social performance and corporate reputation: Two interwoven perspectives. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(1), 60–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Vogt, P. (2000). Firms’ disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 101–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz, V. (2018, March 12). Extienden alianza entre la red nacional de refugios. Inauguran el primer centro de empoderamiento. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from El Economista: https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/empresas/Inauguran-el-primer-centro-de-empoderamiento-20180312-0084.html

  • Earl, J., & Schussman, A. (2002). The new site of activism: On-line organizations, movement entrepreneurs, and the changing location of social movement decision making. In P. G. Coy (Ed.), Consensus decision making, Northern Ireland and indigenous movements (Vol. 24, pp. 155–187). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • El Financiero. (2017, June 22). Este es el anuncio de Tecate premiado en Cannes. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from Empresas: http://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/empresas/este-es-el-anuncio-de-tecate-premiado-en-cannes

  • Expansión. (2017, June 21). Tecate gana premio por publicidad contra violencia de género. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from Mercadotecnia: https://expansion.mx/mercadotecnia/2017/06/21/tecate-gana-premio-por-publicidad-contra-violencia-de-genero

  • Facebook. (2018, September). Stats. Retrieved November 3, 2018, from Newsroom: https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

  • Fernández-Guadaño, J., & Sarria-Pedroza, J. H. (2018, June). Impact of corporate social responsibility on value creation from a stakeholder perspective. Sustainability, 10(6), 2062–2072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (2009, October 1). What is stakeholder theory? (B. R. Ethics, interviewer) business roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics. Retrieved August 23, 2013, from http://www.corporate-ethics.org/videos/

  • Freeman, R. E., & Dmytriyev, S. (2017). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. SYMPHONYA Emerging Issues in Management, 1, 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2007). The basic framework. In R. E. Freeman, J. S. Harrison, & A. C. Wicks (Eds.), Managing for stakeholders: Survival, reputation, and success (pp. 50–51). New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbreath, J. (2010). How does corporate social responsibility benefit firms? Evidence from Australia. European Business Review, 22(4), 411–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, S., France, L. R., & Melas, C. (2018, October 4). The year since the Weinstein scandal first rocked Hollywood. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from CNN entertainment: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/04/05/entertainment/weinstein-timeline/index.html

  • Goodpaster, K. E. (1991, January). Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1(1), 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2007, September). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerini, M., Strapparava, C., & Özbal, G. (2011). Exploring text virality in social networks. In Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 506–509). Barcelona: ICWSM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L. K., Arvidsson, A., Nielsen, F. A., Colleoni, E., & Etter, M. (2011). Good friends, bad news – Affect and virality in Twitter. In J. J. Park, L. T. Yang, & C. Lee (Eds.), Future information technology. Communications in computer and information science (Vol. 185, pp. 34–43). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001, February). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., Stierl, M., & Bornemann, T. (2013, November). Corporate social responsibility in business-to-business markets: How organizational customers account for supplier corporate social responsibility engagement. Journal of Marketing, 77(6), 54–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HuffPost. (2017, June 22). Tecate no se anuncia en el Super Bowl; apoya lucha contra la violencia. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from Entretenimiento: https://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/2017/02/06/tecate-no-se-anuncia-en-el-super-bowl-apoya-lucha-contra-la-vio_a_21708036/

  • Ilinskaya, S., & Robinson, D. (2018). #MeToo and the estrangement of beauty-and-the-beast narratives. Social research: An international quarterly. Johns Hopkins University Press, 85(2), 375–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isa, D., & Himelboim, I. (2018, March). A social networks approach to online social movement: Social mediators and mediated content in #FreeAJStaff Twitter network. Social Media + Society, 4(1). Retrieved November 3, 2018, from https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118760807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isa, S. M. (2012). An analysis of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on stakeholders loyalty: Perceptions of Malaysian organizations. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 2(7), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ismail, T. (2011). Corporate social responsibility: The influence of the silver book. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3(2), 371–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M., & Van Tulder, R. (2003). Toward effective stakeholder dialogue. Business and Society Review, 108(2), 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelleher, K. (2018, September 14). Nike shares close at another record high after controversial Colin Kaepernick endorsement. Retrieved November 3, 2018, from Fortune: http://fortune.com/2018/09/14/nike-closes-another-record-high-wake-endorsement-colin-kaepernick/

  • Khan, M. T., Khan, N. A., Ahmed, S., & Ali, M. (2012, July). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) – Definition, concepts and scope (a review). Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 2(7), 41–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011, May–June). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54(3), 241–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C. H., & Scullion, H. (2013). The effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on employee motivation: A cross-national study. Poznan University of Economics Review, 13(2), 5–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koufaris, M. (2002, June). Applying the technology acceptance model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 205–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, V., Rahman, Z., & Kazmi, A. A. (2016). Stakeholder identification and classification: A sustainability marketing perspective. Management Research Review, 39(1), 35–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurucz, E. C., Colbert, B. A., & Wheeler, D. (2008). Chapter 4. The business case for corporate social responsibility. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, A. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook on corporate social responsibility (pp. 83–112). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. S., & Ma, L. (2012, March). News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Johnston, W. J. (2009, April). Corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation of U.S. organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(Suppl 2), 303–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (1968, December). Protest as a political resource. The American Political Science Review, 62(4), 1144–1158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liston-Heyes, C., & Ceton, G. (2009, October). An investigation of real versus perceived CSP in S&P-500 firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loader, B. D. (2003). Social movements online. In K. Christensen & D. Levinson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of community: From the village to the virtual world (pp. 1319–1320). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maiba, H. (2005, February). Grassroots transnational social movement activism: The case of peoples’ global action. Sociological Focus, 38(1), 41–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009, April). Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marvin, C. (1990). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J., Smith, J., & Zald, M. N. (1996). Media discourse, movement publicity, and the generation of collective action frames: Theoretical and empirical exercises in meaning construction. In D. McAdam, J. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizaing structures, and cultural framings (pp. 312–337). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mejias, U. A. (2010). The limits of networks as models for organizing the sociality. New Media & Society, 12(4), 603–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, D. S., & Whittier, N. (1994, May). Social movement spillover. Social Problems, 41(2), 277–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997, October). Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moir, L. (2001). What do we mean by social corporate responsibility. Corporate Governance, 1(2), 16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994, July). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mory, L., Wirtz, B. W., & Göttel, V. (2016). Factors of internal corporate social responsibility and the effect on organizational commitment. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 27(13), 1393–1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mozes, M., Josman, Z., & Yaniv, E. (2011). Corporate social responsibility organizational identification and motivation. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(2), 311–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ndlela, M. N. (2010). Crisis communication. A stakeholder approach. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, A., & Meister, M. (2008, March). Corporate social responsibility attribute rankings. Public Relations Review, 34(1), 49–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Shannassy, T. (2003). Modern strategic management: Balancing strategic thinking and strategic planning for internal and external stakeholders. Singapore Management Review, 25(1), 53–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panapanaan, V. M., Linnanen, L., Karvonen, M.-M., & Phan, V. T. (2003, May). Roadmapping corporate social responsibility in Finnish companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, E. R. (2006). Making corporate social responsibility (CSR) operable: How companies translate stakeholder dialogue into practice. Business and Society Review, 111(2), 137–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., Zorbach, T., & Carley, K. M. (2014). Understanding online firestorms: Negative word-of-mouth dynamics in social media networks. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(1–2), 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porta, D. D., & Tarrow, S. G. (2004). Transnational protest and global activism. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006, December). Strategy and society. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Morrill, C., & Zald, M. N. (2000). Power plays: How social movements and collective action create new organizational forms. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 237–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rexhepi, G., Kurtishi, S., & Bexheti, G. (2013, April). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and innovation – The drivers of business growth? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 75(3), 532–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schatzberg, L., Gupta, V. K., & McCandless, D. (1997). Using the value chain model as a method of prioritizing green reengineering efforts. Conference Publications, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2007). Consumer behavior. Upper Saddle River: NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, A., & Street, J. (2000). From media politics to e-protest. Information, Communication & Society, 3(2), 215–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, J., Hu, P., Lai, K. K., & Chen, G. (2018). Determinants of users’ information dissemination behavior on social networking sites: An elaboration likelihood model perspective. Internet Research, 28(2), 393–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign Affairs, 90(1), 28–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, G. W., & Kohers, T. (2002). The link between corporate social and financial performance: Evidence from the banking industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(2), 97–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, P. J., Sethuraman, K., & Lam, J. Y. (2017). Impact of corporate social responsibility dimensions on firm value: Some evidence from Hong Kong and China. Sustainability, 9(9), 1532–1556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stigson, B. (2002). Pillars of change: Business is finally learning that taking care of the environment and meeting social responsibilities makes good business sense. Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, 16(4), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strong, K. C., Ringer, R. C., & Taylor, S. A. (2001, August). The∗ rules of stakeholder satisfaction (∗Timeliness, Honesty, Empathy). Journal of Business Ethics, 32(3), 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, L., & Yu, T. R. (2015). The impact of corporate social responsibility on employee performance and cost. Review of Accounting and Finance, 14(3), 262–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010, May). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarrow, S. G. (2011). Power in movement. Social movements and contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • UNHRC. (2018, July). 38th session of the Human Rights Council. Retrieved November 3, 2018, from HRC sessions: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session38/Pages/ResDecStat.aspx

  • Utting, P. (2005). Corporate responsibility and the movement of business. Development in Practice, 15(3 & 4), 380–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Botero, I. C. (2003, September). Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1359–1392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanhamme, J., & Grobben, B. (2009, April). Too good to be true! The effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(273), 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagemans, F. A., van Koppen, C. S., & Mol, A. P. (2013). The effectiveness of socially responsible investment: A review. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 10(3–4), 235–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wakabayashi, D., Griffith, E., Tsang, A., & Conger, K. (2018, November 1). Google walkout: Employees stage protest over handling of sexual harassment. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/technology/google-walkout-sexual-harassment.html

  • Wang, X., Wei, F., Liu, X., Zhou, M., & Zhang, M. (2011). Topic sentiment analysis in Twitter: A graph-based hashtag sentiment classification approach. In 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management (pp. 1031–1040). Glasgow: CIKM ‘11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, M., Hern, A., Bekiempis, V., Hepler, L., & Fermoso, J. (2018, November 1). Google walkout: Global protests after sexual misconduct allegations. Retrieved November 4, 2018, from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/01/google-walkout-global-protests-employees-sexual-harassment-scandals

  • Werther Jr., W. B., & Chandler, D. (2011). Part I. Strategic corporate social responsibility. In W. B. Werther Jr. & D. Chandler (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility. Stakeholders in a global environment (2nd ed., pp. 1–19). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westerman, D., Spence, P. R., & Van Der Heide, B. (2014, January). Social media as information source: Recency of updates and credibility of information. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 171–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, C.-S. (2015). A study on consumers’ attitude towards brand image, athletes’ endorsement, and purchase intention. The International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 8(2), 233–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xueming, L., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006, October). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Youmans, W. L., & York, J. C. (2012, April). Social media and the activist toolkit: User agreements, corporate interests, and the information infrastructure of modern social movements. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 315–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zald, M. N., & McCarthy, J. D. (1980). Social movement industries: Competition and cooperation among movement organizations. In L. Kriesberg (Ed.), Research in social movements, conflicts and change (Vol. 3). Greenwich: JAI Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zald, M. N., Morrill, C., & Rao, H. (2005). The impact of social movements on organizations: Environment and responses. In G. F. Davis, D. McAdam, W. Richard, & S. N. Mayer (Eds.), Social movements and organization theory (pp. 253–279). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad Panamericana, Mexico City, Mexico

    Andrée Marie López-Fernández

Authors
  1. Andrée Marie López-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. EGADE Business School, Mexico City, Mexico

    Rajagopal

  2. International Management Institute, Bhubaneswar, India

    Ramesh Behl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

López-Fernández, A.M. (2020). Stakeholder Influence on Decision Making: From e-Movements (#metoo) to Corporate Social Responsibility Policy. In: Rajagopal, Behl, R. (eds) Innovation, Technology, and Market Ecosystems. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23010-4_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation