Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Praktische Wirtschaftsphilosophie pp 1–14Cite as

Normativität und Instrumentalität in Stakeholder-Beziehungen

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

  • 410 Accesses

Part of the book series: Handbuch Wirtschaftsphilosophie ((HW))

Zusammenfassung

Begriff und Ansatz des Stakeholders sind über die letzten drei Dekaden hinweg zu einem festen Bestandteil von Managementforschung und -praxis geworden. Obwohl die wegweisenden Arbeiten von R. Edward Freeman längst den Status von Klassikern innehaben, wäre die Rede von einem einheitlichen Stakeholder-Ansatz verfehlt. Der Beitrag nähert sich diesem Ansatz aus der Perspektive seiner maßgeblichen Vertreter, unterstreicht jedoch die höchst unterschiedlichen Lesarten, die das Konzept bis heute auszeichnet.

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

Literatur

  • Antonacopoulou, Elena P., und Jérome Meric. 2005. A critique of stake-holder theory: Management science or a sophisticated ideology of control? Corporate Governance 5(2): 22–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Applbaum, Arthur I. 1996. Rules of the game, permissible harms, and fair play. In Wise choices: Decisions, games, and negotiations, Hrsg. Richard J. Zeckhauser, Ralph L. Keeney und James Sebenius, 301–325. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argandona, Antonio. 1998. The stakeholder theory and the common good. Journal of Business Ethics 17:1093–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asiyai, Romina I. 2015. Improving quality higher education in Nigeria: The roles of stakeholders. International Journal of Higher Education 4(1): 61–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beekun, Rafik I., und Jamal A. Badawi. 2005. Balancing ethical responsibility among multiple organizational stakeholders: The Islamic perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 60:131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettinazzi, Emanuele L. M., und Maurizio Zollo. 2017. Stakeholder orientation and acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal 38:2465–2485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, Norman E. 1999. Business ethics: A Kantian perspective. Malden: Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, Norman E. 2012. Book review: Stakeholder theory: The state of the art by R. Edward Freeman, Jeffrey S. Harrison, Andrew C. Wicks, Bidhan L. Parmar, and Simone de Colle (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010). Business Ethics Quarterly 22(1): 179–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brink, Alexander. 2009. Normatives Stakeholder Management. Eine governancetheoretische Rekonstruktion. In CSR als Netzwerkgovernance – Theoretische Herausforderung und praktische Antworten, Hrsg. Josef Wieland, 215–255. Marburg: Metropolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brummer, James J. 1991. Corporate responsibility and legitimacy: An interdisciplinary analysis. New York: Greenwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchholz, Rogene A., und Sandra B. Rosenthal. 2004. Stakeholder theory and public policy: How governments matter. Journal of Business Ethics 51:143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, Brian K., und Craig P. Dunn. 1996. Feminist ethics as moral grounding for stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 6(2): 133–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, Max B. E. 1995. A stakeholder framework of analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review 20(1): 92–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cludts, Stephan. 1999. The stakeholders as investors: A response to Etzioni. Business Ethics Quarterly 9(4): 673–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, Thomas, und Thomas W. Dunfee. 1994. Toward a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory. Academy of Management Review 18(2): 252–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, Thomas, und Lee E. Preston. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review 20(1): 65–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, Amitai. 1998. A communitarian note on stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 8(4): 679–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evan, William, und R. Edward Freeman. 1993. A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism. In Ethical theory & business, Hrsg. Tom Beauchamp und Norman E. Bowie, 97–106. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, John E. 1987. Authorities in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 6(3): 213–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward. 1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward. 1994. The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 409–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward. 1999. Response: Divergent stakeholder theory. The Academy of Management Review 24(2):233–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward. 2004. The stakeholder approach revisited. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik 5(3): 228–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward. 2008. Ending the so-called ‚Friedman-Freeman‘ debate. Business Ethics Quarterly 18(2): 153–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und Sergiy Dmytriyev. 2017. Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder theory: Learning from each other. Symphonya Emerging Issues in Management 2:7–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und William E. Evan. 1990. Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation. Journal of Behavioral Economics 19:337–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und John McVea. 2001. Stakeholder approach to strategic management. Darden Business School Working Paper, No. 01-02.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und Robert A. Philipps. 2002. Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly 12(3): 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und Robert A. Phillips. 2002. Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly 12(3): 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, und David L. Reed. 1983. Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review 25(3): 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. Edward, Jeffrey S. Harrison, Andrew C. Wicks, Bidhan L. Parmar, und Simone de Colle. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Milton. 1970. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 13.September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, Kevin. 2000. The moral basis of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics 26: 245–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Jared D., und R. Edward Freeman. 2008. The impossibility of the separation thesis: A response to Joakim Sandberg. Business Ethics Quarterly 18(4): 541–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, Jeffrey S., Jay B. Barney, R. Edward Freeman, und Robert A. Philipps. 2019. The Cambridge handbook of stakeholder theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, Edwin. 1996. Organizational ethics & the good life. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, John. 2001. Economic contracts versus social relationships as a foundation for normative stakeholder theory. Business Ethics: A European Review 10(3): 223–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, La Rue T., und Christian Kiewitz. 2005. Organizational justice: A behavioral science concept with critical implications for business ethics and stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 15(1): 67–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Michael C. 2010. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 22(1): 32–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, Michael C., und William H. Meckling. 1976. Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics 3(4): 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Tomas M. 1995. Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review 20:92–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Thomas M., und Andrew C. Wicks. 1999. Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review 24(2): 206–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lampe, Marc. 2001. Mediation as an ethical adjunct of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics 31:165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laplume, André O., Karan Sonpar, und Reginald A. Litz. 2008. Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management 34(6): 1152–1189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lea, David. 2004. The imperfect nature of corporate responsibilities to stakeholders. Business Ethics Quarterly 14(2): 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Jing, Jun Xia, und Edward J. Zajac. 2018. On the duality of political and economic stakeholder influence on firm innovation performance: Theory and evidence from Chinese firms. Strategic Management Journal 39:193–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maak, Thomas, und Peter Ulrich. 2007. Integre Unternehmensführung. Ethisches Orientierungswissen für die Wirtschaftspraxis. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansell, Samuel F. 2013. Capitalism, corporations and the social contract. A critique of stakeholder theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marcoux, Alexei M. 2000. Balancing act. In Contemporary issues in business ethics, Hrsg. Joseph R. DesJardins und John J. McCall, 92–100. Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, Joshua D., und James P. Walsh. 2003. Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiative by business. Administrative Science Quarterly 48:268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendelow, Aubrey L. 1981. Environmental scanning – The impact of the stakeholder concept. ICIS 1981 Proceedings 20:407–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Ronald K., R. Agle Bradley, und Donna J. Wood. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principles of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review 22(4): 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitroff, Ian I., und Richard O. Manson. 1980. A logic of strategic management. Human Systems Management 1(1): 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, Daniel E. 1999. Upping the stakes: A response to John Hasnas on the normative viability of the stockholder and stakeholder theories. Business Ethics Quarterly 9(4): 699–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmer, Bidhan L., R. Edward Freeman, Jeffrey S. Harrison, Andrew C. Wicks, Simone de Colle, und Lauren Purnell. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. The Academy of Management Annals 4(1): 403–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Philipps, Robert A. 2003. Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(1): 51–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Philipps, Robert A., R. Edward Freeman, und Andrew C. Wicks. 2003. What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4): 479–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, Robert A. 1997. Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness. Business Ethics Quarterly 7(1): 51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, Robert A., und Joshua M. Margolis. 1999. Toward an ethics of organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly 9(4): 619–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post, James E., Lee E. Preston, und Sybille Sachs 2002. Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management & organizational wealth. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappaport, Alfred. 1981. Selecting strategies that create shareholder value. Harvard Business Review 59(3): 139–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rappaport, Alfred. 1986. Creating shareholder value: The new standard for business performance. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, Darryl. 1999. Stakeholder management theory: A critical theory perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly 9(3): 453–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Robin W., und Lois Mahoney. 2004. Stakeholder concept of the corporation: Their meaning and influence in accounting research. Business Ethics Quarterly 14(3): 399–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, Andreas G., und Moritz Patzer. 2011. Where is the theory in stakeholder theory? – A meta-analysis of the pluralism in stakeholder theory. In Stakeholder theory. Impact and prospects, Hrsg. Robert A. Phillips, 140–162. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shankman, Neil A. 1999. Reframing the debate between agency and stakeholder theories of the firm. Journal of Business Ethics 19(4): 319–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, Elaine. 1997. The defects of stakeholder theory. Corporate Governance: An International Review 5(1): 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Störig, Hans J. 1992. Kleine Weltgeschichte der Philosophie. Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, Linda K., und Gary R. Weaver. 1999. The stakeholder research tradition: Converging theorists – Not convergent theory. Academy of Management Review 24(2): 222–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Peter. 1998. Wofür sind Unternehmen verantwortlich? Teil II: Stakeholder-Dialog und republikanische Mitverantwortung. Forum Wirtschaftsethik 6(1): 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Peter. 1999. Was ist „gute“ Unternehmensführung? Reflexionen zu den normativen Grundlagen ethikbewussten Managements. In Entwicklungsperspektiven einer integrierten Managementlehre, Hrsg. Peter Gomez, Günter Müller-Stewens und Johannes Rüegg-Stürm, 225–253. Bern/Stuttgart/Wien: Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Peter. 2016. Integrative Wirtschaftsethik: Grundlagen einer lebensdienlichen Ökonomie. Bern: Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Peter, und Edgar Fluri. 1975. Management. Eine konzentrierte Einführung. Bern: Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Buren, Harry J. 2001. If fairness is the problem, is consent the solution? Integrating ISCT and stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 11(3): 481–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, Andrew C. 1996. Reflections on the practical relevance of feminist thought to business. Business Ethics Quarterly 6(4): 523–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, Andrew C., und R. Edward Freeman. 1998. Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics. Organization Science 9(2): 123–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, Andrew C., Daniel R. Gilbert, und R. Edward Freeman. 1994. A feminist reinterpretation of the stakeholder concept. Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4): 475–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijnberg, Nachoem M. 2000. Normative stakeholder theory and Aristotle: The link between ethics and politics. Journal of Business Ethics 25:329–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zakhem, Abe, und Daniel E. Palmer. 2017. Normative stakeholder theory. In Stakeholder management, Hrsg. David M. Wasieleski und James Weber, 49–73. Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Vechta, Vechta, Deutschland

    Christoph Schank

Authors
  1. Christoph Schank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christoph Schank .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl Praktische Philosophie, Christian-Albrechts-Univ Kiel Lehrstuhl Praktische Philosophie, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany

    Ludger Heidbrink

  2. Institut für Wirtschaftsethik, Universität St. Gallen Institut für Wirtschaftsethik, St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Verena Rauen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Schank, C. (2020). Normativität und Instrumentalität in Stakeholder-Beziehungen. In: Heidbrink, L., Lorch, A., Rauen, V. (eds) Praktische Wirtschaftsphilosophie. Handbuch Wirtschaftsphilosophie. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22141-6_29-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22141-6_29-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-22141-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-22141-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Referenz Sozialwissenschaften und Recht

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation