Strategic Challenges in Stakeholder Networks

• Authors: Zdziarski Michał , Boutilier Robert G.

Title variants

PL

Strategiczne wyzwania w sieciach interesariuszy

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

PL

Akcjonariusze firm w coraz większym stopniu muszą dzielić się władzą z innymi aktorami społecznymi, którzy kontrolują dostęp do cennych zasobów. Ci aktorzy społeczni określani są jako interesariusze, ponieważ działania firm są powiązane z ich interesami dwojakiego rodzaju relacjami: interesariusze wpływają na działania firm i/lub działania firm wpływają na sytuację interesariuszy. Interesariusze są osadzeni w sieciach relacji, w których występują procesy dzielenia się, kombinacji, eksploatacji i ograniczania dostępu do zasobów w oparciu o nieformalny, wyłaniający się ład. Strategiczne manewry w sieciach interesariuszy mają krytyczne znaczenie dla zapewnienia dostępu do wartościowych zasobów i w efekcie do wyników osiąganych przez uczestników sieci. Menedżerowie podejmujący decyzje o kierunkach strategii działania firmy osadzonej w sieci interesariuszy mają do czynienia z wielowymiarowym problemem decyzyjnym. W artykule autorzy przedstawiają propozycję integracji trzech nurtów teoretycznych: teorii zależności zasobowej, analizy sieci społecznych i teorii interesariuszy, dzięki czemu możliwe wydaje się wsparcie procesu decyzyjnego, który pozwala skutecznie manewrować w sieciach interesariuszy. Podkreślają wcześniejsze próby integracji par omawianych teorii i nieliczne prace, w których podjęto integrację trzech strumieni literatury. Na podstawie typologii struktur sieciowych Boutiliera przedstawiają wyłanianie się ładu i wzorców działania w strukturze sieci, dzięki którym możliwe jest sprostanie strategicznym wyzwaniom uzyskania dostępu do zasobów w sieci.

EN

Shareholders of a company must increasingly share power with other social actors that control access to critical resources. These social actors are stakeholders because they have stakes in firms’ operations, either through being affected by them or through being able to affect them. Stakeholders are embedded in networks of relationships in which resources are shared, combined, exploited or restricted, and informal governance modes emerge. Strategic maneuvering in stakeholder networks is critical for assuring a firm’s access to valuable resources and resulting performance. Managers deciding on the strategic course of a firm embedded in a stakeholder network face multi-dimensional problems with multiple causes. It is argued that a three-way integration of the resource dependence theory, social network analysis, and stakeholder theory yields important insights for managers on options of strategic maneuvering in stakeholder networks. We highlight previous attempts to integrate pairs of these theories. Building on Boutilier’s typology of stakeholder network structures, we describe emerging governance patterns, and propose a set of possible moves aiming to address strategic challenges in gaining access to resources controlled by stakeholders.

Keywords

PL

analiza sieci społecznych; teoria interesariuszy; teoria zależności zasobowej; ład sieci; strategiczne wyzwania

EN

social network analysis; stakeholder theory; resource dependence theory; network governance; strategic challenges

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych
• Journal: Problemy Zarządzania
• Year: 2016
• Issue: 4/2016 (64), t.2
• Pages: 62 - 79

Dates

published

2016-12-18

Contributors

author

Zdziarski Michał

• University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management

author

Boutilier Robert G.

• University Drive Burnaby

References

• Adler, P.S. and Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17 40, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2002.5922314.
• Barabási, A.-L. (2002). Linked: The New Science of Networks. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing.
• Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.
• Barney, J.B. (1996). The resource-based theory of the firm. Organization Science, 7(5), 469–469, http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.7.5.469.
• Boorman, S.A. and White, H.C. (1976). Social structures from multiple networks. II. Role structures. American Journal of Sociology, 81(6), 1384–1446.
• Borgatti, S.P. and Everett, M.G. (1999). Models of core/periphery structures. Social Networks, 21(4), 375–395, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-8733(99)00019-2.
• Borgatti, S.P. and Foster, P.C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00087-4.
• Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.-C. (1990). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.
• Boutilier, R.G. (2007). Social capital in firm-stakeholder networks: A corporate role in community development. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 26(1), 121–134, http://dx.doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.4700.2007.su.00014.
• Boutilier, R.G. (2009). Stakeholder Politics: Social Capital, Sustainable Development, and the Corporation. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
• Boutilier, R.G. (2011). A Stakeholder Approach to Issues Management. New York: Business Expert Press.
• Burt, R.S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Burt, R.S. (2000). The Network Structure of Social Capital. In: B.M. Staw and R.I. Sutton (eds), Research in Organizational Behavior. Greenwich: JAI Press.
• Casciaro, T. and Piskorski, M.J. (2005). Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(2), 167–199, http://dx.doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.2.167.
• Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Choi, J. and Wang, H. (2009). Stakeholder relations and the persistence of corporate financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(8), 895–907, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.759.
• Coleman, J.S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94 (Supplement), 95–120.
• Costanza, R. (1992). Ecological Economics: The Science and Management of Sustainability. Columbia University Press.
• Czakon, W. (2012). Sieci w zarządzaniu strategicznym. Warszawa: Oficyna Wolters Kluwer Business.
• Davis, G.F. (2009a). The rise and fall of finance and the end of the society of organizations. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 27–44, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2009.43479262.
• Davis, G.F. (2009b). Managed by the Markets: How Finance Reshaped America. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Davis, G.F. and Cobb, J.A. (2010). Chapter 2 Resource Dependence Theory: Past and Future. In: F. Dobbin and C.B. Schoonhoven (eds), Stanford’s Organizational Theory Renaissance, 1970–2000, Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing.
• Doh, J.P., Howton, S.D., Howton, S.W., and Siegel, D.S. (2010). Does the market respond to an endorsement of social responsibility? The role of institutions, information, and legitimacy. Journal of Management, 36(6), 1461–1485, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206309337896.
• Dyer, J.H. and Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1998.1255632.
• Dyer, J.H., Singh, H., and Kale, P. (2008). Splitting the pie: Rent distribution in alliances and networks. Managerial and Decision Economics, 29(2/3), 137–148, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mde.1391.
• Flora, J.L., Flora, C.B., Campana, F., García Bravo, M., and Fernández-Baca, E. (2006). Social Capital and Advocacy Coalitions: Examples of Environmental Issues from Ecuador. In: R.E. Rhoades (ed.), Development with Identity: Community, Culture and Sustainability in the Andes. Cambridge: CABI Publishing.
• Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.
• Freeman, R.E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3857340.
• Freeman, R.E. and Evan, W.M. (1990). Corporate governance: A stakeholder interpretation. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19(4), 337–359, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0090-5720(90)90022-Y.
• Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1999.1893928.
• Goldsmith, S. and Eggers, W.D. (2004). Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
• Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.
• Gulati, R. (2007). Managing Network Resources: Alliances, Affiliations and Other Relational Assets. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Gulati, R. and Higgins, M.C. (2003). Which ties matter when? The contingent effects of interorganizational partnerships on IPO success. Strategic Management Journal, 24(2), 127–144, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.287.
• Gulati, R. and Sytch, M. (2007). Dependence asymmetry and joint dependence in interorganizational relationships: Effects of embeddedness on a manufacturers performance in procurement relationships. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1), 32–69, http://dx.doi.org/10.2189/asqu.52.1.32.
• Hameri, A.-P. and Hintsa, J. (2009). Assessing the drivers of change for cross-border supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 39(9), 741–761, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600030911008184.
• Henisz, W.J. and Zelner, B.A. (2005). Legitimacy, interest group pressures, and change in emergent institutions: The case of foreign investors and host country governments. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 361–382, http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2005.16387892.
• Hillman, A. and Keim, G. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 2 (2), 125–139.
• Ireland, R., Hitt, M., and Vaidyanat, D. (2002). Alliance management as a source of competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 28(3), 413–436.
• Jawahar, I. and McLaughlin, G. (2001). Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: An organizational life cycle approach. Academy of Management Review, 2 (3), 397–414.
• Kolstad, I. and Wiig, A., (2009). It’s the rents, stupid! The political economy of the resource curse. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5317–5325.
• Klimas, P. (2011). SNA jako narzędzie mapowania interesariuszy. In: J. Harasim (ed.), Warsztaty doktoranckie ’10 Zarządzanie – Finanse – Ekonomia (pp. 170–181). Katowice: Wydawanictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach.
• Leary, J.C. (2007). Talisman’s Sudanese oil investment: The historical context surrounding its entry, departure, and controversial tenure. Durham: Duke University, http://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/10161/217/Leary_Jennifier_2007.pdf?sequence=1.
• Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science; Selected Theoretical Papers. New York: Harper and Row.
• Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Lockamy, A. and McCormack, K. (2010). Analysing risks in supply networks to facilitate outsourcing decisions. International Journal of Production Research, 48(2), 593–611.
• Łudzińska, K. and Zdziarski, M. (2013). Interesariusze w opinii prezesów zarządów polskich przedsiębiorstw. Kwartalnik Nauk o Przedsiębiorstwie, (2), 41-49.
• Mahon, J.F. (2002). Corporate reputation: A research agenda using strategy and stakeholder literature. Business and Society, 41(1), 415–445.
• McGann, J. and Johnstone, M. (2006). The power shift and the NGO credibility crisis. International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law, 8(2), 65–77.
• Mitchell, J.C. (1969). The Concept and Use of Social Networks. In: J.C. Mitchell (ed.), Social Networks in Urban Situations: Analyses of Personal Relationships in Central African Towns. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.
• Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R., and Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.
• Moreno, J.L. (1934). Who Shall Survive? Washington: Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Company.
• Niemczyk, J. (2006). Wyróżniki, budowa i zachowania strategiczne układów outsourcingowych. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Akademii Ekonomicznej we Wrocławiu.
• Penrose, E.T. (1959). The Growth of the Firm. New York: Wiley.
• Peters, R. and Golden, P. (2013). Stakeholder networks and strategy: The influence of network consistency and network diversity on firm performance. Journal of Business Strategies, 30(2), 120–144.
• Pfeffer, J. (1972). Size and composition of corporate boards of director: The organization and its environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 218–229.
• Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations. New York: Harper and Row.
• Phillips, R.A. (2010). Ethics and network organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(3), 533–543.
• Post, J.E., Preston, L.E., and Sachs, S. (2002). Managing the extended enterprise: The new stakeholder view. California Management Review, 45(1), 6–28.
• Postuła, I. (2014). Interesariusze spółek kapitałowych z udziałem państwa. Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, 22(3), 102–121.
• Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., and Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116–145.
• Roloff, J. (2008). Learning from multi-stakeholder networks: Issue-focused stakeholder management. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1), 233–250.
• Ross, M.L. (2001). Does oil hinder democracy? World Politics, 53(3), 325–361.
• Rowley, T.J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887–910.
• Svendsen, A.C. (1998). The Stakeholder Strategy: Profiting from Collaborative Business Relationships. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
• Svendsen, A.C. and Laberge, M. (2005). Convening stakeholder networks: A new way of thinking, being and engaging. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 19, 91–104.
• Waddock, S. (2000). The multiple bottom lines of corporate citizenship: Social investing, reputation, and responsibility audits. Business and Society Review, 105(3), 323–345.
• Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Welcomer, S.A., Cochran, P.L., and Gerde, V.W. (2003). Power and Social Behaviour: A Structuration Approach to Stakeholder Networks. In: J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted, and S.S. Rahman (eds), Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance. Sheffield: Greenleaf.
• Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource dependence theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.
• Westphal, J.D., Boivie, S., and Ming Chng, D.H. (2006). The strategic impetus for social network ties: Reconstituting broken CEO friendship ties. Strategic Management Journal, 27(5), 425–445.
• Wheeler, D., Fabig, H., and Boele, R. (2002). Paradoxes and dilemmas for stakeholder responsive firms in the extractive sector: Lessons from the case of Shell and the Ogoni. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(3), 297–318.
• Zdziarski, M. (2012). Relacje w radach nadzorczych spółek publicznych. Współczesne Zarządzanie, (4), 213–223.

Identifiers

ISSN

1644-9584

DOI

10.7172/1644-9584.64.4