Journal of Business Ethics 140 (1):43-64 (2017)

Fairness and justice are core issues in stakeholder theory. Although such considerations receive more attention in the ‘normative’ branch of the stakeholder literature, they have critical implications for ‘instrumental’ stakeholder theory as well. In research in the instrumental vein, although the position has seldom been articulated in significant detail, a stakeholder’s inclination to take action against the firm or, conversely, to cooperate with it, is often taken to be a function of its perceptions concerning the fairness or unfairness of the treatment it receives in its relationship with the firm. Thus, from various works in this domain can be distilled what might be termed a ‘fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour’. This perspective, as it currently stands, assumes a high degree of homogeneity in stakeholders’ responses to fair, unfair, or munificent treatment by the firm. This supposition is itself typically based on a presumption that stakeholders consistently and uniformly adhere to norms of equity and reciprocity in their relationships with firms. However, research developments in equity theory and social exchange theory suggest that such assumptions are likely untenable. Accordingly, in this work, after outlining the fairness-based perspective on stakeholder behaviour, I undertake to augment it by presenting propositions concerning the possible influences of stakeholders’ equity preferences and exchange ideologies on their propensities to sanction or support the firm. Incorporating these stakeholder traits into the fairness-based perspective should enhance the predictive validity of its propositions concerning stakeholder behaviour in response to fairness or unfairness in the firm–stakeholder relationship.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10551-015-2665-6
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,436
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What Stakeholder Theory is Not.Andrew C. Wicks - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (4):479-502.
Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness.Robert A. Phillips - 1997 - Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (1):51-66.
Stakeholder Legitimacy.Robert Phillips - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (1):25-41.

View all 30 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness.Robert A. Phillips - 1997 - Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (1):51-66.
Family Fairness.Edna Ullmann-Margalit - 2006 - Social Research: An International Quarterly 73 (2):575-596.
How Fair Is Actuarial Fairness?Xavier Landes - 2015 - Journal of Business Ethics 128 (3):519-533.
The Stakeholders as Investors: A Response to Etzioni.Stephan Cludts - 1999 - Business Ethics Quarterly 9 (4):673-676.
Can a Compromise Be Fair?Peter Jones & Ian O’Flynn - 2013 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 12 (2):115-135.
Fairness and Fair Shares.Keith Horton - 2011 - Utilitas 23 (1):88.
Stakeholder Social Capital: A New Approach to Stakeholder Theory.Elisabet Garriga Cots - 2011 - Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility 20 (4):328-341.
To Be Fair.Benjamin L. Curtis - 2014 - Analysis 74 (1):47-57.


Added to PP index

Total views
21 ( #537,492 of 2,520,402 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #405,718 of 2,520,402 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes