The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance
Abstract
This paper argues that the notion of value has been overly simplified and narrowed to focus on economic returns. Stakeholder theory provides an appropriate lens for considering a more complex perspective of the value that stakeholders seek as well as new ways to measure it. We develop a four-factor perspective for defining value that includes, but extends beyond, the economic value stakeholders seek. To highlight its distinctiveness, we compare this perspective to three other popular performance perspectives. Recommendations are made regarding performance measurement for both academic researchers and practitioners. The stakeholder perspective on value offered in this paper draws attention to those factors that are most closely associated with building more value for stakeholders, and in so doing, allows academics to better measure it and enhances managerial ability to create it.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology
Portes, A. (1998) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 · Cited by 12,037 · cited 1×
“Utility through affiliation occurs, in part, through the ability of actors to obtain benefits from their membership in social networks (Lee, Lee & Pennings, 2001; Nahapiet & Ghoshal, 1998; Portes, 1998).”
BackgroundThe Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
Friedman, M. (2007) · Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14 · Cited by 11,529 · cited 3×
“Although Milton Friedman (1970) is often criticized as providing an amoral vision of business, a careful reading of his work also highlights the importance of moral ideals, particularly individual freedom—to decide how to live, where to work, what to buy (i.e., what is of “value”) and under what terms (i.e., what “val…”
BackgroundInfluentialAdams, J. S. (1965) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2 · Cited by 10,818
Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206305279602 · Cited by 10,068
Ecological momentary assessment
Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008) · Annual Review of Clinical Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.3.022806.091415 · Cited by 6,454
Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research.
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng, K. Y. (2001) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425 · Cited by 5,942
Developments in the Measurement of Subjective Well-Being
Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. B. (2006) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/089533006776526030 · Cited by 3,177
Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2010.495581 · Cited by 2,755
Self-citationMoving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences
Rowley, T. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107 · Cited by 2,522
Metadata
- Authors
- Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C.
- Venue
- Business Ethics Quarterly
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 97-124
- ISSN
- 1052-150X (ISSN-L)
- 2153-3326
- OpenAlex
- W2159452650
- Cited by
- 1,049
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 112.42
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5840/beq20132314
- The paper
- Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. Business Ethics Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq20132314
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.
