Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 296

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

A Names-and-Faces Approach to Stakeholder Management: How Focusing on Stakeholders as Individuals Can Bring Ethics and Entrepreneurial Strategy Together

McVea, John F., Freeman, R. Edward·2005·Journal of Management Inquiry

Abstract

Just as the ideas of stakeholder theory, stakeholder management, or stakeholder capitalism approach acceptance as a mainstream core idea in management theory, the authors want to suggest a somewhat radical rethinking of it. They believe that in almost all of its incarnations, stakeholder theory merely recapitulates some rather standard business assumptions. As a result, they believe that two problems are perpetuated—the separation of ethics and value creation and the overemphasis of stakeholder roles rather than relationships between stakeholders as real people with names and faces. In this article, the authors propose that by adopting a view of stakeholders as real people with names and faces, they can reinvigorate stakeholder research and focus their efforts on the neglected challenge of understanding how collections of idiosyncratic individuals can work together to create value in entrepreneurial firms in ways that benefit all those who are affected.

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 · 10.1177/1056492604270799

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

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
McVea, J. F., & Freeman, R. E.
Venue
Journal of Management Inquiry
Published
2005-03
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
57-69
ISSN
  • 1056-4926 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6542
OpenAlex
W2061360408
Cited by
296
References
2
FWCI
21.98
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.