A Case Study of Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization by Managers

Journal of Business Ethics 75 (1):1-23 (2007)

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers using the power, legitimacy, and urgency framework of Mitchell et al. (Academy of Management Review 22, 853–886; 1997). We use a multi-method, comparative case study of two large-scale sporting event organizing committees, with a particular focus on interviews with managers at three hierarchical levels. We support the positive relationship between number of stakeholder attributes and perceived stakeholder salience. Managers’ hierarchical level and role have direct and moderating effects on stakeholder identification and perceived salience. We also found that most stakeholders were definitive, dominant, or dormant types – the other five types were rare. Power has the most important effect on salience, followed by urgency and legitimacy. Based on our case study, we offer several ways to advance the theory of stakeholder identification and salience.

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,805

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
71 (#165,677)

6 months
1 (#386,031)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Similar books and articles

“Stakeholder Work” and Stakeholder Research.Jae Hwan Lee & Ronald K. Mitchell - 2013 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 24:208-213.
Stakeholder Salience and Ethical Views of Small Business Managers.Brian K. Burton & Michael Goldsby - 2005 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 16:306-309.
Changes in Finnish Managers’ Strategic Priorities: Moral Attitudes, Stakeholder Orientation and Economic Interests.Johanna Kujala & Juha Näsi - 2006 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 17:255-260.