Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,185

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Stakeholder Theory: Reviewing a Theory That Moves Us

Laplume, André O., Sonpar, Karan, Litz, Reginald A.·2008·Journal of Management
DOI 10.1177/0149206308324322
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article reviews the academic stakeholder theory literature as it developed between 1984 and 2007. The authors content analyzed 179 articles that directly addressed Freeman's work on stakeholder theory and found five themes: (a) stakeholder definition and salience, (b) stakeholder actions and responses, (c) firm actions and responses, (d) firm performance, and (e) theory debates. Themes were observed in multiple research fields, suggesting broad appeal. The authors noted a substantial rise in stakeholder theory's prominence since 1995 and documented that the theory has detractors insofar as it questions shareholders' wealth maximization as the most fundamental objective of business. The authors' recommendations include urging more empirical research across a broader set of organizations apart from large publicly traded corporations, more qualitative research to document cognitive aspects of how managers respond to stakeholder expectations, and a return to the theory's emphasis on the strategic benefits of stakeholder management, albeit with a broader view of firm performance.

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 · 10.1177/0149206308324322

Cites

8 of 8 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

Show all 8 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Laplume, A. O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. A.
Venue
Journal of Management
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2008-12
Volume
34
Issue
6
Pages
1152-1189
ISSN
  • 0149-2063 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-1211
DOI
10.1177/0149206308324322
OpenAlex
W1992329207
Cited by
1,185
References
8
FWCI
76.37
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.