Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

GREEN STAKEHOLDERS: INDUSTRY INTERPRETATIONS AND RESPONSE*

Fineman, Stephen, Clarke, Ken·1996·Journal of Management Studies

Abstract

This paper argues that industrial responses to ‘green’ pressures may fruitfully be explored using a stakeholder framework. However, the common view of an objective configuration of stakeholders is replaced with one that favours an interpretive perspective. Managers are viewed as crucial mediators of stakeholder influence; how they identify, define and construct stakeholders is an important feature of the meaning of greening and an industry's subsequent response. A qualitative study of managers in four UK industries ‐ supermarkets, automotives, power and chemicals ‐ is reported. the effect of a small number of stakeholders ‐ campaigners and regulators ‐ is examined in some detail, distinguished differentially according to their perceived legitimacy and the threat they pose to industry. Also examined is the large group of traditionally powerful stakeholders ‐ customers, creditors and employees ‐ who fail markedly to impact on industry's greening. the implications of the findings for pro‐environmental change and stakeholder theory are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1996.tb00169.x

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 406

Metadata

Authors
Fineman, S., & Clarke, K.
Venue
Journal of Management Studies
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1996-11
Volume
33
Issue
6
Pages
715-730
ISSN
  • 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-6486
OpenAlex
W2011064971
Cited by
406
References
2
FWCI
21.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.