David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 65 (3):251 - 267 (2006)
Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-à-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-benefit calculations, thus neglecting other important spheres of influence pertaining to more broadly defined stakeholder interests. We argue in this paper that, as a part of the strategic decision for a certain standard, management needs to identify and act according to the needs of all stakeholders. We contend that the creation of a dialogical understanding among affected stakeholders cannot be a mere outcome of applying certain accountability standards, but rather must be a necessary precondition for their use. This requires a stakeholder dialogue prior to making a choice. We outline such a discursive decision framework for accountability standards based on the Habermasian concept of communicative action and, in the final section, apply our conceptual framework to one of the most prominent accountability tools (AA 1000).
|Keywords||accountability standards discourse ethics Habermas organizational accountability stakeholder management stakeholder dialogue|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Olivier Boiral, Mario Cayer & Charles M. Baron (2009). The Action Logics of Environmental Leadership: A Developmental Perspective. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 85 (4):479 - 499.
Andreas Rasche (2010). The Limits of Corporate Responsibility Standards. Business Ethics 19 (3):280-291.
Francesco Perrini, Angeloantonio Russo, Antonio Tencati & Clodia Vurro (2011). Deconstructing the Relationship Between Corporate Social and Financial Performance. Journal of Business Ethics 102 (S1):59-76.
Daniel Arenas, Josep M. Lozano & Laura Albareda (2009). The Role of Ngos in Csr: Mutual Perceptions Among Stakeholders. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 88 (1):175 - 197.
Frances Bowen, Aloysius Newenham-Kahindi & Irene Herremans (2010). When Suits Meet Roots: The Antecedents and Consequences of Community Engagement Strategy. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 95 (2):297 - 318.
Similar books and articles
John J. McCall (2002). Leadership and Ethics: Corporate Accountability to Whom, for What and by What Means? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 38 (1-2):133 - 139.
Mark Starik (1995). Should Trees Have Managerial Standing? Toward Stakeholder Status for Non-Human Nature. Journal of Business Ethics 14 (3):207 - 217.
Kenneth E. Goodpaster (1991). Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly 1 (1):53-73.
Scott J. Reynolds, Frank C. Schultz & David R. Hekman (2006). Stakeholder Theory and Managerial Decision-Making: Constraints and Implications of Balancing Stakeholder Interests. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 64 (3):285 - 301.
John Kaler (2003). Differentiating Stakeholder Theories. Journal of Business Ethics 46 (1):71 - 83.
Michel Ferrary (2009). A Stakeholder's Perspective on Human Resource Management. Journal of Business Ethics 87 (1):31 - 43.
Bryan W. Husted (1998). Organizational Justice and the Management of Stakeholder Relations. Journal of Business Ethics 17 (6):643 - 651.
Adele Santana (2012). Three Elements of Stakeholder Legitimacy. Journal of Business Ethics 105 (2):257-265.
Julia Roloff (2008). Learning From Multi-Stakeholder Networks: Issue-Focussed Stakeholder Management. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 82 (1):233 - 250.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #95,238 of 1,088,810 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,810 )
How can I increase my downloads?