2016
DOI: 10.1017/beq.2016.28
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stakeholder Judgments of Value

Abstract: ABSTRACT:Although central to stakeholder theory, stakeholder value is surprisingly neglected in the literature. We draw upon prospect theory to show how stakeholder judgments of value depend crucially on the reference state, how there are several alternative reference states that may be operative when stakeholders judge value, how the choice of reference state for stakeholders’ value judgments can occur intuitively or deliberately, and how the level of the operant reference state may change with time and may a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
(149 reference statements)
1
28
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, our findings provide fertile ground for future researchers to explore how empowerment and engagement are perceived by low‐power stakeholders as part of the process of value creation and whether their perception of happiness and wellbeing (Harrison & Wicks, ) differs from the company’s point of view. Given that we considered only managers’ and NGOs’ opinions about the issue, further research could strengthen the debate about the linkages between empowerment and engagement in the value creation process (Freeman et al, ; Jones & Felps, ; Lankoski, Smith, & Wassenhove, ) by considering low‐power stakeholders’ perceptions.…”
Section: Conclusion Limitations and Further Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, our findings provide fertile ground for future researchers to explore how empowerment and engagement are perceived by low‐power stakeholders as part of the process of value creation and whether their perception of happiness and wellbeing (Harrison & Wicks, ) differs from the company’s point of view. Given that we considered only managers’ and NGOs’ opinions about the issue, further research could strengthen the debate about the linkages between empowerment and engagement in the value creation process (Freeman et al, ; Jones & Felps, ; Lankoski, Smith, & Wassenhove, ) by considering low‐power stakeholders’ perceptions.…”
Section: Conclusion Limitations and Further Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As many authors have acknowledged, the discourse on value creation for stakeholders requires further development, especially related to the qualitative evaluation of value creation from a variety of stakeholder perspectives [9,27,28,33]. This process becomes even more complex when referring to value co-creation [15,17].…”
Section: Resilience and Value Co-creationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this way, it was possible to confirm the framework's theoretical validity and to identify a scale of dimensional development that could allow a qualitative evaluation of the effectiveness of empowerment in moderating the vulnerabilities of the coffee supply chain. By developing the framework, the authors seek to advance the academic debate on value co-creation involving low-power stakeholders, which seems to be in need of further development of qualitative evaluation methods for value co-creation [9,15,17,19,27,28,33]. Second, the author conceptualized a direct link between empowerment, value co-creation and supply chain resilience [1,3,7,8,10,14].…”
Section: Conclusion Theoretical Contributions and Managerial Implimentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1995; Kochan & Rubinstein, 2000). The contemporary contributions to this theory mostly ignore the role of stakeholders in creating value for the central actor and each other (Freeman, Harrison, Wicks, Parmar, & De Colle, 2010;Harrison & Wicks, 2013;Lankoski, Smith, & Van Wassenhove, 2016). It is precisely the role of the central actor to ensure the sustainability of the sharing economy platform by continuously co-developing value-adding offerings with and for its diverse stakeholders while increasing value capture opportunities for itself (Dass & Kumar, 2014;Gawer & Cusumano, 2014;Gobble, 2014;Möller & Svahn, 2009).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%