Abstract
Chapter 7 presents research findings from the multiple data collection methods explained in the previous chapter. They deliver insights into key stakeholder relationship management on six specific practices, including terminology, stakeholders, communication, organisation/governance, projects, and expectations, which were identified in the literature review as salient. The results facilitate comprehension on three key themes including the target group’s responsible stakeholder management practices, an Anglo-German comparison of the identified practices, as well as their influencing factors. These insights serve to inform and critically examine the prespecified initial desk-based research framework prototype which was presented in Chap. 5. This input enables the framework’s revision, which is the subject of the next chapter.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Born Karol Józef Wojtyła and referred to by Catholics as St. John Paul the Great.
- 2.
For clarification, the term ‘responsible management’ is equated with sustainable business practices with respect to stakeholder engagement activities aimed at ultimately creating shared value. Within this context ‘stakeholder engagement’ is defined as an inclusive practice which obliges an organisation to involve stakeholders in identifying, understanding, responding, and reporting on sustainability issues and concerns. Within that context, stakeholder engagement is interpreted as a fundamental accountability mechanism and management activity based on the rationale that it enables organisations to explain and be answerable to stakeholders for its decisions, actions, and performance. For further details please refer to Chap. 2 and the glossary section which defines these terms in greater detail.
- 3.
For further details please refer to Chap. 6.
- 4.
Please refer to previous chapters for further details regarding how these codes were established.
- 5.
These findings derive from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 159–165).
- 6.
These findings derive from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 166–172).
- 7.
For clarification, these data were mainly gathered from company websites and, to a lesser degree when data could not be identified, also from corporate responsibility and sustainability, as well as annual reports.
- 8.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 173–184).
- 9.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 184–191).
- 10.
These findings derive from a wider study. For further details see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 191–198).
- 11.
These findings derive from a wider study. For further details see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 198–203).
- 12.
Please refer to previous chapters for further details regarding the establishment of these codes.
- 13.
Presented in greater detail in the previous section under the terminology code.
- 14.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 220–226).
- 15.
For clarification, the term ‘CSR’ is employed here and throughout this chapter for brevity purposes. It is intended to signify the concept of responsible management (as defined in Chap. 2) within a corporate sustainable stakeholder relationship setting.
- 16.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 227–233).
- 17.
Please note that although this research was undertaken nearly a decade before the Brexit decision, the findings highlight the underlying mind-set which ultimately led to Britain’s exit from the European Union in 2016.
- 18.
For brevity purposes, the term ‘CSR’ has been adopted in this chapter to signify the concept of responsible management (as defined in Chap. 2) within a corporate sustainable stakeholder relationship setting.
- 19.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 234–242).
- 20.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 243–250).
- 21.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 250–257).
- 22.
These findings comprise excerpts from a wider study. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 257–261).
- 23.
These results comprise findings deriving from a wider study, which for feasibility reasons due to their size have been briefly summarised here in a high-level overview. For further details, see O’Riordan (2010, pp. 270–328).
- 24.
- 25.
For further details on the successive development stages of the framework conceptualisation, please refer to Fig. 6.3 which illustrates this process as stages 1 and 2 in an overview of the development phases.
- 26.
A more detailed version of the results presented in this book is available in O’Riordan (2010, pp. 158–330).
- 27.
To clarify again, the term ‘CSR’ is employed in this chapter for brevity purposes to signify the concept of responsible management (as defined in Chap. 2) within a corporate sustainable stakeholder relationship setting. In the interest of consistency, it has been repeatedly employed to illustrate the stakeholder engagement activities of the target sample in the various texts, frameworks, and tables previously presented throughout this book.
- 28.
For further details please refer to O’Riordan and Fairbrass (2014).
- 29.
For clarification, a more detailed version of the results presented in this book is available in O’Riordan (2010, pp. 270–330).
- 30.
For further details on the development phases of the research framework, please refer to Fig. 6.3, which depicts the initial framework prototype version as stage 1 and the second framework presented here in this section as stage 2 of conceptualisation development phases.
- 31.
The primary research, which was completed between 2005 and 2010, employed a range of research methods including the documentary analysis of 36 company websites and reports, a telephone survey of 46 companies, observation of the stakeholder relationship management practices of 142 firms, and 18 in-depth interviews with senior managers from leading pharmaceutical companies (for further details, please refer to the previous sections of this chapter, the research design in Chap. 6, and O’Riordan (2010).
- 32.
For further details of the overall research design approach please refer to Chap. 6.
- 33.
For further details please see below and refer to O’Riordan and Zmuda (2015).
- 34.
Figure 6.3 depicts this third development phase as stage 3 in the overview of the successive framework conceptualisation development overview presented.
- 35.
For further details on this case study as well as its positioning within the overall research design, please refer to Chap. 6.
- 36.
For clarification, the findings presented here were obtained solely for the purpose of scientific research and are entirely free from any form of financial obligation, support, or expectations of any similar effect or means.
- 37.
For further details please follow this link: http://www.jjcct.org/who-we-are/annual-reports-and-accounts/.
- 38.
For further details please refer to: http://www.jnj.com/sites/default/files/pdf/cs/2015-JNJ-Citizenship-Sustainability-Report.pdf
- 39.
Given the emphasis on the Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust as the object of analysis for this study, this investigation primarily focuses on the time period since the trust was established in 2007 to its strategic objective mandate in 2018. Nevertheless, the findings presented in this section have evolved within the context of the more general philanthropic activities which emerged 16 years ago that were pursued by Johnson & Johnson. According to the respondents, driven largely by broad-brush, universal principles of moral duty, these activities focused predominantly on corporate giving and an environmental programme, which established the basis for a global strategic framework for corporate contributions. This led to the adoption of the umbrella term ‘corporate citizenship’ to convey all activities of this nature within the Johnson & Johnson family of companies.
- 40.
This investigation primarily focuses on the time period since the trust was established in 2006 to its strategic objective mandate in 2018.
- 41.
According to the Johnson & Johnson website, Robert Wood Johnson, a former chairman from 1932 to 1963 and a member of the Company’s founding family, crafted the credo in 1943 just before Johnson & Johnson became a publicly traded company. This was long before the terms ‘corporate social responsibility’ or ‘corporate citizenship’ became ‘popular’. The company considers this credo to comprise more than just a moral compass but rather a recipe for business success. The respondents consider the fact that Johnson & Johnson is one of only a handful of companies that has flourished through more than a century of change, to present evidence for this claim. For further details, please refer to http://www.jnj.com/about-jnj/jnj-credo #.
- 42.
For clarification, these figures are based on an ‘old’ approach of country-based budgets, which did not include co-funding. For further details, please follow this link to the annual report, which provides a financial overview: http://issuu.com/trust2013/docs/johnson-johnson-corporate-citizensh/1?e=8440982/2937331.
- 43.
For further details of a specific project example (ColaLife™ Health to Wealth project ) undertaken by the Janssen EMEA Trust and the Coca-Cola Distributing Company SAB Miller, please refer to O’Riordan and Zmuda (2015, pp. 491–493).
- 44.
Via documentary analysis of 36 company websites and reports, a telephone survey which generated 46 completed questionnaires, observation of 142 pharmaceutical companies, and a successive series of in-depth interviews.
References
Aguilar, F. J. (1967). Scanning the business environment. New York: Macmillan.
AstraZeneca. (2016). AstraZeneca Website. Accessed May 2016, from http://www.astrazeneca.co.uk/astrazeneca-in-uk/our-contribution-to-the-uk.
Bayer. (2007). Bayer Website. Accessed April 2007, from http://www.bayer.com.
Burchell, J., & Cook, J. (2006). It’s good to talk? Examining attitudes towards corporate social responsibility dialogue and engagement processes’. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(2), 154–170.
Campbell, D. J. (2000). Legitimacy theory or managerial reality construction? Corporate social disclosure in Marks and Spencer Plc corporate reports, 1969-1997. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 80–100.
Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2009). Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management (7th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage Learning Inc.
Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia: A seven country study of CSR website reporting. Business and Society, 44(4), 415–441.
Corporate Values Index. (2009). Major study of 3700 companies surveyed in 11 countries announced on Ecco International website. Accessed October 2009, from http://www.business-standard.com.
Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business ethics: A European perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone Publishing Ltd.
Ethical Corp. (2009). If Roche sneezes the pharmaceutical industry catches a cold. Accessed September 2009, from www.ethicalcorp.com.
Financial Times. (2016). Financial Times Newspaper Website. Accessed May, 2016, from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/29ec4074-8e93-11da-ae63-0000779e2340.html#axzz4892qLQ4b.
Fraser, C., & Zarkada-Fraser, A. (2003). Investigating the effectiveness of managers through an analysis of stakeholder perceptions. Journal of Management Development, 22(9), 762–783.
Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.
Gray, R. H., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.
Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 315–327.
Habisch, A., Jonker, J., Wegner, M., & Schmidpeter, R. (Eds.). (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Berlin: Springer.
Haniffa, R. M., & Cooke, T. E. (2005). The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(5), 391–430.
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind—intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hofstede, G. (2016). Website of Geert Hofstede. Accessed June 2016, from http://www.geert-hofstede.com/Germany.html.
Interview. (2014). Face-to-face interview based on a structured questionnaire held with the two authors and two senior executives from the Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust at the Dorint Neuss Kongresshotel, Selikumerstrasse 25, Neuss, 41460, Germany on January 22, 2014.
Johnson & Johnson. (2014). The J&J corporate citizenship Trust. Accessed January 2014, from http://www.jjcct.org/who-we-are/.
Lindblom, C. K. (1994). The implications of organisational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. Paper presented at the Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, New York.
Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2008). Thinking of the organization as a system: The role of managerial perceptions in developing a corporate social responsibility strategic agenda. Systems Research and Behavioural Science Special Issue: Systems Thinking and Corporate Social Responsibility, 25(3), 413–426.
Martin, R. (2010). The age of customer capitalism. Harvard Business Review, 88, 1–2.
Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility education in Europe. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 323–337.
May, S., Cheney, G., & Roper, J. (2007). The debate over corporate responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Design for the triple top line: New tools for sustainable commerce. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 9(3), 251–258. doi:10.1016/S1066-7938(02)00069-6.
Millennium Development Goals. (2014). Millennium development goals and beyond 2015. Accessed January 2014, from http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/.
Novo Nordisk. (2016). Novo Nordisk website. Accessed May 2016, from http://–www.novonordisk.uk.
O’Riordan, L. (2006). CSR and stakeholder dialogue: Theory, concepts, and models for the pharmaceutical industry. MRES Dissertation University of Bradford, Bradford, UK.
O’Riordan, L. (2010). Perspectives on corporate social responsibility (CSR): Corporate approaches to stakeholder engagement in the pharmaceutical industry in the UK and Germany. PhD Thesis, Bradford University School of Management, Bradford, UK.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2008). CSR—Theories, models and concepts in stakeholder dialogue—A model for decision-makers in the pharmaceutical industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(4), 754–758.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2014). Managing stakeholder engagement: A new conceptual framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 121–145.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2016). Responsible stakeholder engagement: A comparison of corporate approaches in the UK and German pharmaceutical industry. In L. O’Riordan, & P. Zmuda (Eds.), FOM KCC KompetenzCentrum für Corporate Social Responsibility der FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management (Band 2).
O’Riordan, L., & Zmuda, P. (2015). Conceptual framework for CR management: A critical review of sustainable business practice based on a case study of a leading transnational corporation. In L. O’Riordan, P. Zmuda, & S. Heinemann (Eds.), New perspectives on corporate social responsibility: Locating the missing link (pp. 473–504). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Pedersen, E. R. (2006). Making CSR operable: How companies translate stakeholder dialogue in to practice. Business and Society Review, 111(2), 137–163.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organisations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper and Row.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press Edition.
Procter & Gamble. (2007). Procter & Gamble website. Accessed April 2007, from http://www.pg.com/de_DE/ & http://www.pg.com/uk_UK/.
Ruggie, J. (2011). Guiding principles for business and human rights. UN Human Rights Council.
Sanofi Aventis. (2016). Sanofi Aventis Website. Accessed May 2016, from http://www.sanofi.co.uk/I/gb/en/index.jsp; http://www.sanofi.de/I/de/de/index.jsp & http://www.sanofi.de/I/de/de/layout.jsp?scat=432274F1-929F-A227-06964C3F2092.
Schreyögg, G., & Werder, A. (2004). Handwörterbuch Unternehmensführung und Organisation [Handbook Dictionary of Business Management and Organisation]. Stuttgart: Schaeffer-Poechel Verlag.
Schwalbach, J. (2000). Image, Reputation, und Unternehmenswert (Image, Reputation, and Company Value. Institut für Management Humboldt-Universität Berlin.
Stark, A. (1994). What’s the matter with business ethics? Harvard Business Review, 38–48.
Trebeck, K. (2008). Exploring the responsibility of companies: Corporate social responsibility to stakeholders. Social Responsibility Journal, 4(3), 349–365.
Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2004). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business (3rd ed.). London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Ulrich, P., & Fluri, E. (1995). Management: Eine Konzentrierte Einführung (Management a concise introduction) (7th ed.). Bern/Stuttgart/Wien: Haupt.
UN Global Compact. (1999). United Nations Global Compact. www.unglobalcompact.org.
Williamson, O. E. (1979). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and anti-trust implications. New York: The Free Press.
Williamson, O. E. (1985). The economic institutions of capitalism. New York: The Free Press.
Woodward, D., Edwards, P., & Birkin, F. (2001). Some evidence on executives: Views of corporate social responsibility. British Accounting Review, 33, 357–397.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
O’Riordan, L. (2017). Research Findings on Conceptualising Corporate Approaches to Stakeholder Management. In: Managing Sustainable Stakeholder Relationships. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50240-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50240-3_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50239-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50240-3
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)