The current issue and complete text archive of this record is available for www.emeraldinsight.com/1755-4179.htm
Aktionar and stakeholder theory: following your ﬁnancial turmoil Terence Tse
ESCP European countries, London, UK
Goal – The recent ﬁnancial crisis provides restarted the debate in the value of both shareholder and stakeholder theories. This paper aims to continue this kind of discussion. Design/methodology/approach – The paper opinions existing literature and looks at the beneﬁts and problems associated with these types of frameworks throughout the lens with the recent incidents which have taken place during the ﬁnancial crisis. Studies – The key assertion of this paper is that shareholder theory is in itself a audio theory. But, some professionals following this theory could have brought disrepute to it. In comparison, the stakeholder theoretical construction has but to assert it is inﬂuence as the concept is definitely not yet unambiguously deﬁned, that makes it difﬁcult for the structure to become detailed in functional business configurations. Research limitations/implications – Long term research should seek opinion on the opportunity and deﬁnition of the stakeholder model, and who the stakeholders should include. It should as well focus on expanding the tools and techniques necessary for the incorporation of stakeholder theory in business operations. Social implications – Insurance plan makers can work with market bodies and business market leaders to cause them to become place increased emphasis on the interests of non-shareholders and encourage effort between various groups of stakeholders to achieve company goals. Originality/value – The paper continues the aktionar and stakeholder theory issue in light in the recent financial crisis. Keywords Aktionar value examination, Stakeholder evaluation, Financial services, Economical theory Conventional paper type Study paper
Aktionar and stakeholder theory fifty-one
1 . Launch In June 2009, a lot more than 1, 000 MBA pupils from a number of top organization schools fixed an pledge that declared the being rejected of the shareholder-oriented business strategy and promised to give the same importance to " shareholders, co-workers, customers and the society in which we operate” (Skapinker, 2009). If this is a knee-jerk result of MBA college students to reduce the blame in the latest financial crisis on older executives or maybe the pursuit of a brand new ideal is beyond the scope of this paper. Nevertheless , it is clear that these college students, among many corporate executives, are choosing the main contending alternative to shareholder- stakeholder theory. The issue between both of these theories can be not unmatched. The scandals at Enron, Global Traversing, Tyco Intercontinental and WorldCom sparked ﬁerce debate regarding which of these two hypotheses is superior to the various other (Smith, 2003). The drop of many relatively successful UK banks before the latest ﬁnancial crisis such as Northern Ordinary, Royal Lender of Ireland (RBS) and Halifax Bank of Scotland (HBOS) informed us this debate is definitely far from above. Indeed, taking into consideration the various characteristics of the crisis, there is an urgency to keep this conversation. This newspaper aims to serve this purpose by critiquing some of the existing literature of both shareholder and stakeholder theories and discussing the beneﬁts and problems associated with these frameworks through the lens of the latest ﬁnancial crisis.
Qualitative Exploration in Financial Market segments Vol. 3 No . 1, 2011 pp. 51-63 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1755-4179 DOI 10. 1108/17554171111124612
QRFM a few, 1
It problems particularly the UK banking and ﬁnancial services sector as this industry is considered to be one of the primary catalysts of this crisis. Perhaps, most importantly, the problems that plague this sector apparently epitomise the misguided utilization of shareholder theory. The main affirmation of this paper is that aktionar theory is at itself a sound theory and it is probably that several executives following this theory, deservingly or wrongly, have...
References: Aldrick, G. (2008), " HBOS style was also dependent on from suppliers funding, says Andy Hornby”, The Telegraph, September 18. Armitstead, M. (2009), " HBOS: how it sold out of road”, The Telegraph, February 18. Bank of England (2008), Financial Stableness Report, Lender of Great britain, London, October. Basu, S i9000., Mahendra, 3rd there�s r. and Hovig, T. (2008), " An extensive study of behavioral ﬁnance”, Journal of Financial Service Professionals, Vol. 62 No . four, pp. 51-62. Beinhocker, E. (2006), The foundation of Prosperity: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics, Unique House, London. Choi, M. and Wang, H. (2009), " Stakeholder relations as well as the persistence of corporate ﬁnancial performance”, Proper Management Journal, Vol. 39, pp. 895-907. Clarkson, Meters. (1995), " A stakeholder framework to get analyzing and evaluating company social performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No . one particular, pp. 92-117. Danielson, M. G., Blue jean, L. H. and David, R. S i9000. (2008), " Shareholder theory – just how opponents and proponents both get it wrong”, Journal of Applied Financing, Fall/Winter, pp. 62-6. De Bondt, Watts., Gulnur, M., Hersh, T. and Sotiris, K. T. (2008), " Behavioural ﬁnance: Quo Vadis? ”, Log of Utilized Finance, Fall/Winter, pp. 7-21. DesJardins, J. R. and McCall, T. J. (2004), Contemporary Problems in Business Ethics, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA. Donaldson, T. and Preston, T. E. (1995), " The stakeholder theory of the firm: concepts, data, and implications”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No . you, pp. 65-91. Doukas, M. A. and Petmezas, D. (2007), " Acquisitions, overconﬁdent managers and self-attribution bias”, European Financial Management, Vol. 13 No . 3, pp. 531-77. Monetary Times (2009), " Shareholder value re-evaluated”, Financial Occasions, March 15, available at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/293fc3c4-1196-11de-87b1-0000779fd2ac.html Freeman, L. E. (1994), Strategic Supervision: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Boston, MOTHER. Friedman, Meters. (1962), Capitalism and Flexibility, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ELLE. Frooman, L. (1999), " Stakeholder inﬂuence strategies”, School of Managing Review, Volume. 24 Number 2, pp. 191-205. Godimento, D. A. (1995), " Practicability, paradigms and problems in stakeholder theory”, Schools of Administration Journal, Vol. 24 Number 2, pp. 228-32. Gombola, M. and Marciukaityte, M. (2007), " Managerial overoptimism and the choice between financial debt and fairness ﬁnancing”, The Journal of Behavioral Fund, Vol. 8 No . four, pp. 225-35. Grant, L. (2009), " Shareholder value maximisation can be used appropriately”, Financial Times, 03 18, sold at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0ede1ee8-135f-11de-a170-0000779fd2ac.html Heaton, J. N. (2002), " Managerial confidence and corporate ﬁnance”, Financial Management, Vol. 31, pp. 33-45. Hillman, A. J. and Keim, G. D. (2001), " Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: what's the results? ”, Tactical Management Diary, Vol. 22, pp. 125-39.
Shareholder and stakeholder theory 61
QRFM 3, one particular
Property of Commons Treasury Panel (2009), Banking Crisis: Dealing with the Failure of the UK Banks, Residence of Commons Treasury Panel, London. Huang, R. and Ratnovski, L. (2008), " The irony of lender wholesale funding”, Working Conventional paper No . 09-3, Federal Hold Bank of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, Nov. Jensen, Meters. C. (2002), " Worth maximization, stakeholder theory, as well as the corporate target function”, Organization Ethics Quarterly, Vol. doze No . two, pp. 235-56. Jensen, M. C. and Meckling, T. H. (1976), " Theory of the ﬁrm: managerial behavior, agency costs and possession structure”, Diary of Financial Economics, Vol. three or more, pp. 305-60. Kaler, J. (2006), " Differentiating stakeholder theories”, Log of Business Ethics, Volume. 46, pp. 71-83. Kochan, T. A. and Rubenstein, S. A. (2000), " Toward a stakeholder theory of the ﬁrm: the Saturn partnership”, Organizational Science, Volume. 11 No . 4, pp. 367-86. Laplume, A., Sonpar, K. and Reginald, A. L. (2008), " Stakeholder theory: reviewing a theory that moves us”, Journal of Managing, Vol. thirty four No . six, pp. 1152-89. Larsen, S. T. (2007), " RBS aims to do it again NatWest trick”, Financial Instances, October 17. Larsen, G. T. (2009), " Goodwin's undoing”, Financial Times, Feb . 24. Lo, A. (2005), " Reconciling efﬁcient marketplaces with behavioral ﬁnance: the adaptive market segments hypothesis”, Diary of Purchase Consulting, Vol. 7 No . 2, pp. 21-44. Low, A. (2008), " Bureaucratic risk-taking behavior and equity-based compensation”, Log of Financial Economics, Vol. 80 No . a few, pp. 470-90. Malmendier, U. and Tate, G. A. (2008), " Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconﬁdence plus the market's reaction”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 89 Number 1, pp. 20-43. Malmendier, U., Tate, G. A. and Yan, J. (2006), " Company ﬁnancial guidelines with overconﬁdent managers”, AFA 2006 Boston Meetings Paper, AFA, Boston, MA. Martin, R. (2008), " Shorting staying power”, University of Toronto Mag, Summer, offered at: www.magazine.utoronto.ca/summer-2009/unhelpful-management-theoriesshareholder-value-roger-martin/ Maubossin, M. (2009), " Taking head: managing for shareholder is still key”, Financial Instances, August installment payments on your Phillips, 3rd there�s r. A., Freeman, R. Electronic. and Wicks, A. (2003), " What stakeholder theory is not”, Business Values Quarterly, Vol. 7 No . 1, pp. 51-66. Rajgopal, S. and Shevlin, T. (2002), " Empirical data on the regards between share option reimbursement and risk taking”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, Vol. 33, pp. 145-71. Rappaport, A. (1997), Creating Shareholder Worth, The Cost-free Press, New york city, NY. Ruf, B. Meters., Muralidhar, E., Brown, 3rd there�s r. M., Janney, J. T. and Paul, K. (2001), " A great empirical analysis of the romance between change in corporate sociable performance and ﬁnancial overall performance: a stakeholder theory perspective”, Journal of Business Values, Vol. 32 No . a couple of, pp. 143-56. Russo, T. E. and Schoemaker, S. J. They would. (1992), " Managing overconﬁdence”, Sloan Administration Review, Vol. 33, pp. 7-17. Russo, M. Sixth is v. and Fouts, P. A. (1997), " A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and proﬁtability”, Schools of Administration Journal, Volume. 49 No . 3, pp. 534-59. Sanders, W. Meters. G. and Hambrick, D. C. (2007), " Moving the for the fences: the effects of CEO stock options on firm risk choosing and performance”, Academy of Management Record, Vol. 50 No . 5, pp. 1055-78. Schwartz, Meters. S. (2006), " God as a managerial stakeholder? ”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 66, pp. 291-306.
Sharma, T. and Henriques, I. (2005), " Stakeholder inﬂuences about sustainability methods in the Canadian forest companies industry”, Tactical Management Log, Vol. dua puluh enam, pp. 159-80. Shefrin, L. (2007), Behavioral Corporate Financing: Decisions that Create Value, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. Shin, H. S. (2009), " Reﬂections on Northern Rock: the bank run that heralded a global ﬁnancial crisis”, Journal of Economic Points of views, Vol. twenty-three No . you, pp. 101-19. Skapinker, Meters. (2009), " The students who swear by a business school”, Economic Times, June 22. Jones, H. M. (2003), " The investors vs . stakeholders debate”, MIT Sloan Administration Review, Summer season, pp. 85-90. Starik, M. (2005), " Should forest have managerial standing? Toward stakeholder position for non-human nature”, Record of Organization Ethics, Vol. 14, pp. 207-17. Demanding, S. (2010), " Unilever chief backside criticism of shareholder primacy”, The Economical Times, Apr 5, sold at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/91ec7d20-404a-11df-8d23-00144feabdc0.html Streuer, R. (2006), " Mapping stakeholder theory anew: through the ‘stakeholder theory of the ﬁrm' to three views on business-society relations”, Organization, Strategy plus the Environment, Vol. 15, pp. 55-69. Streuer, R., Langer, M. Elizabeth., Konrad, A. and Martinuzzi, A. (2005), " Businesses, stakeholders and sustainable creation: a assumptive exploration of business-society relations”, Diary of Organization Ethics, Volume. 61, pp. 263-81. Sundaram, A. E. and Inkpen, A. C. (2004), " The corporate objective revisited”, Organization Science, Vol. 15 No . 3, pp. 350-63. Taylor swift, S. E. and Brown, J. D. (1988), " Illusion and well-being: a social psychology perspective in mental health”, Psychological Message, Vol. ciento tres, pp. 193-210. Weinstein, N. D. (1980), " Unrealistic optimism about future your life events”, Journal of Persona and Social Psychology, Volume. 39, pp. 806-20. Real wood, D. M. (1991), " Corporate cultural performance revisited”, Academy of Management Assessment, Vol. of sixteen No . 5, pp. 691-718. Corresponding creator Terence Tse can be called at: [email protected] eu
Aktionar and stakeholder theory 63
To purchase reprints of this article make sure you e-mail: [email protected] com Or perhaps visit each of our web site for even more details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission with the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited devoid of permission.