Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Organizational Justice and the Management of Stakeholder Relations

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite the appeal of the stakeholder concept, little work had been done with respect to the development of specific structures for the management of stakeholder relations. This paper draws upon the organizational justice literature to demonstrate how many of its concerns coincide with those of the stakeholder management literature. It shows that organizational justice can provide specific advice for the design of stakeholder relations, while stakeholder theory can broaden the scope of current inquiries into organizational justice.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. S.: 1965, ‘Inequity in Social Exchange’, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 2 (Academic Press, New York), pp. 267–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., D. L. Shapiro and L. L. Cummings: 1988,’ Voice and Justification: Their Influence on Procedural Fairness Judgments’, Academy of Management Journal 31, 676–685.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K.: 1978, ‘The Legitimacy of the Business Institution’, in E. M. Epstein and D. Votaw (eds.), Rationality, Legitimacy, and Responsibility: Search for New Directions in Business and Society(Goodyear Publishing Co., Santa Monica, CA), pp. 83–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center for Business Ethics: 1986, ‘Are Corporations Institutionalizing Ethics?’, Journal of Business Ethics 5, 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierkes, M.: 1985, ‘Corporate Social Reporting and Auditing: Theory and Practice’, in K. J. Hopt and G. Teubner (eds.), Corporate Governance and Directors' Liabilities: Legal, Economic and Sociological Analyses on Corporate Social Responsibility(Walter de Gruyter, Berlin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, J. and J. Pfeffer: 1975, ‘Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior’, Pacific Sociological Review 18, 122–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, L. B.: 1990, ‘Legal Environments and Organizational Governance: The Expansion of Due Process in the American Workplace’, American Journal of Sociology 95, 1401–1440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, E. M.: 1987. ‘The Corporate Social Policy Process: Beyond Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Social Responsiveness’, California Management Review 29, 99– 114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, E. M. and D. Votaw (eds.): 1978, Rationality, Legitimacy, and Responsibility: Search for New Directions in Business and Society(Goodyear Publishing Co., Santa Monica, CA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, D. A.: 1989, Justice on the Job: Resolving Grievances in the Nonunion Workplace(Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach.(Pitman, Boston, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R.: 1977, ‘Distributive and Procedural Justice: Combined Impact of “Voice” and Improvement on Experienced Inequity’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35, 108–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. and J. Greenberg: 1985, ‘Procedural Justice: An Interpretive Analysis of Personnel Systems’, in K. Rowland and G. Ferris (eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, vol. 3, ( JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 141–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R. and M. A. Konovsky: 1989, ‘Effects of Procedural and Distributive Justice on Reactions to Pay Raise Decisions’, Academy of Management Journal 32, 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., M. A. Konovsky and R. Cropanzano: 1992, ‘A Due Process Metaphor for Performance Appraisal’, in Barry M. Staw and Larry L. Cummings (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 14 ( JAI Press, Greenwich, CT), pp. 129–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folger, R., D. Rosenfield, R. Hays and R. Grove: 1978: ‘Justice vs. Justification Effects on Productivity: Reconciling Equity and Dissonance Findings’, Organzational Behavior and Human Performance 22, 465–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S. and A. Friedman: 1971, ‘An Examination of Adams' Theory of Inequity’, Administrative Science Quarterly 16, 271–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J.: 1990, ‘Organizational Justice: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow’, Journal of Management 16, 399–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. and R. J. Bies: 1992, ‘Establishing the Role of Empirical Studies of Organizational Justice in Philosophical Inquiries into Business Ethics’, Journal of Business Ethics 11, 433–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J.: 1973, Legitimation Crisis(Beacon Press, Boston, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M.: 1979, ‘Corporate Governance: Who Controls the Large Corporation?’, Hastings Law Journal 30, 1261–1286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky: 1984, ‘Choice, Values, and Frames’, American Psychologist 39, 341–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosnick, R. D.: 1987, ‘Greenmail: A Study of Board Performance in Corporate Governance’, Administrative Science Quarterly 32, 163–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S.: 1980, ‘What Should be Done with Equity Theory? New Approaches to the Study of Fairness in Social Relationships’, in K. Gergen, M. Greenberg and R. Willis (eds.), Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research(Plenum Press, New York), pp. 27–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leventhal, G. S., J. Karuza and W. R. Fry: 1980,’ Beyond Fairness: A Theory of Allocation Preferences’, in G. Mikula (ed.), Justice and Social Interaction(Springer-Verlag, New York), pp. 167–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, E. A. and T. R. Tyler: 1988, The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice(Plenum Press, New York), pp. 27–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, L. L.: 1988, ‘The Norton Company's Ethics Program’, in James Keogh (ed.), Corporate Ethics: A Prime Business Asset(The Business Roundtable, New York), pp. 115–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silk, L. and D. Vogel: 1976, Ethics and Profits: The Crisis of Confidence in American Business(Simon and Schuster, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone C. D.: 1975, Where the Law Ends(Harper & Row, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone C. D.: 1985, ‘Public Interest Representation: Economic and Social Policy Inside the Enterprise’, in K. J. Hopt and G. Teubner (eds.), Corporate Governance and Directors' Liabilities: Legal, Economic and Sociological Analyses on Corporate Social Responsibility(Walter de Gruyter, Berlin), pp. 122–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. W. and L. Walker: 1975, Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis(Erlbaum/Halstead, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J. W. and L. Walker: 1978, ‘A Theory of Procedure’, California Law Review 66, 541–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Commerce: 1979, Corporate Social Reporting in the United States and Western Europe: Report of the Task Force on Social Performance(U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, E. E. and M. C. Chapman Findlay, III: 1984, ‘Corporate Governance: A Problem of Hierarchies and Self Interest’, American Journal of Economics and Sociology 43, 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Bryan W. Husted
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Husted, B.W. Organizational Justice and the Management of Stakeholder Relations. Journal of Business Ethics 17, 643–651 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005930803805

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005930803805

Keywords

Search

Navigation