Skip to main content
Log in

Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle: The Link Between Ethics and Politics

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

Abstract

Stakeholder theory is an important part of modern business ethics. Many scholars argue for a normative instead of an instrumental approach to stakeholder theory. Recent examples of such an approach show that problems appear with respect to the ethical foundation as well as the specification of the norms and the relation between corporate and individual responsibilities. This paper argues for the relevance of Aristotle's ideas on ethics and politics, and especially the link between them, for stakeholder theory. An Aristotelian approach suggests that the corporation should be considered as existing to allow the decision maker, who normally is a manager, to live a complete and good life and to make decisions that involve the interests of different stakeholders. This approach leads to a number of implications regarding the role of organizational politics and the managerial function.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bacharach, S. B. and E. J. Lawler: 1980, Power and Politics in Organizations (Jossey Bass, San Fransisco).

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, J. R.: 1996, ‘Organizations as Overlapping Jurisdictions: Restoring Reason in Organizational Accounts’, Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (March), 172–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1979, ‘A Three-dimensional Model of Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J.: 1997, ‘Strategic Choice in the Analysis of Action, Structure, Organizations and Environment: Retrospect and Prospect’, Organization Studies 18(1), 43–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, M. B. E.: 1995, ‘A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 92–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A.: 1989, Democracy and its Critics (Yale University Press, New Haven & London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. W. Dunfee: 1994, ‘Towards a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory’, Academy of Management Review 19(3), 252–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, ‘The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drory, A. and T. Romm: 1988, ‘Politics in Organization and its Perception within the Organization’, Organization Studies 9(2), 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drory, A. and T. Romm: 1990, ‘The Definition of Organizational Politics: A Review’, Human Relations 43(11), 1133–1154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evan, W. M. and R. E. Freeman: 1988, ‘A Stakeholder Theory for the Modern Corporation: Kantian Capitalism’, in T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice Hall, Englewood's Cliffs), pp. 75–93.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1994, ‘The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions’, Business Ethics 4(4), 409–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, P. A.: 1984, Collective and Corporate Responsibility (Columbia University Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodpaster, K.: 1991, ‘Business Ethics and Stakeholder Analysis’, Business Ethics Quarterly 1(1), 53–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardie, W. F. R.: 1977, ‘Aristotle's Doctrine that Virtue is a Mean’, in J. Barnes, M. Schofield and R Sorabji (eds.), Articles on Aristotle: 2. Ethics and Politics (Duckworth, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C. and S. R. Clegg: 1996, ‘Some Dare Call It Power’, in S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies (Thousands Oaks, London, Sage Publications, New Delhi), pp. 622–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. W. L. and T. M. Jones: 1992, ‘Stakeholder-Agency Theory’, Journal of Management Studies 29(2), 131–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langtry, B.: 1994, ‘Stakeholders and the Moral Responsibilities of Business’, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4), 431–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leflaive, X: 1996, ‘Organizations as Structures of Domination’, Organization Studies 17(1), 23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meikle, S.: 1994, Aristotle's Economic Thought(Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Michels, R.: 1962, Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligargical Tendencies of Modern Parties (Collier Books, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., B. R. Agle and D. J. Wood: 1997, ‘Towards a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts’, Academy of Management Review 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M.: 1990, Love's Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature (Oxford University Press, New York & Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M.: 1993, ‘Non-Relative Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach’, in M. Nussbaum and A. Sen (eds.), The Quality of Life (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagano, U. and R. Rowthorn (eds.): 1996, Democracy and Efficiency in the Economic Enterprise (Routledge, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, M.: 1997, ‘Organizations and Citizenship’, Organization 4(1), 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. M.: 1973, The Politics of Decision Making (Tavistock, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J.: 1981, Power in Organizations (Pitman, Marsfield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J.: 1992, ‘Understanding Power in Organizations’, California Management Review (Winter), 29–50.

  • Pfeffer, J. and G. R. Salancik: 1978, The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (Harper & Row, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichault, F.: 1995, ‘The Management of Politics in Technically Related Organizational Change’, Organization Studies 16(3), 449–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quin, D. P. and T. M. Jones: 1995, ‘An Agent Morality View of Business Policy’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 22–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romilly, J, de: 1992, The Great Sophists in Periclean Athens (Clarendon Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C.: 1993, Ethics and Excellence: Co-operation and Integrity in Business (Oxford University Press, New York & Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, L.: 1968, Liberalism, Ancient and Modern (Basic Books, New York & London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A.: 1978, Negociations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes and Social Order (Wiley, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, M. C.: 1986, Platos Socratic Conversations: Drama and Dialectic in Three Dialogues (The Athlone Press, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L. and P. L. Cochran: 1985, ‘The Evolution of the Corporate Social Performance Model’, Academy of Management Review 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J.: 1991, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wijnberg, N.M. Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle: The Link Between Ethics and Politics. Journal of Business Ethics 25, 329–342 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006086226794

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006086226794

Keywords

Navigation