Understanding the Nature of Stakeholder Relationships: An Empirical Examination of a Conflict Situation

Stakeholder mapping for the governance of biosecurity: a literature review

“…Bots et al 2000;Stone 2002;Mouratiadou and Moran 2007), and methods to assess and analyse conflicts between stakeholders (e.g. Howard 1989;Hjortso et al 2005;Kilgour and Hipel 2005;Kujala et al 2012). Although these relationships may be used to categorise and prioritise stakeholders for engagement, these sorts of analyses are typically conducted after stakeholders have been categorised, to understand how different stakeholder groups interact with one another, and to identify specific individuals or organisations that may play an important role in diffusing knowledge or practices within and between different groups of stakeholders.…”

“…Phillipson and Liddon 2007;Berkes 2009;Phillipson et al 2012). Relationships between stakeholders are also likely to change at different points in the knowledge management cycle, and it may be necessary to take this into account in the stakeholder analysis (Kujala et al 2012). These changing relationships may have important consequences as alliances are formed that enable certain groups to increase their level of influence.…”

Motivators of Mobilization

“…Implicit in the role of management of a firm is the distribution of created value among a variety of stakeholders (Schlierer et al 2012). Managers must balance the interests of the firm and a diverse array of stakeholders, some of which may have interests that conflict with those of the firm (Kujala et al 2012). In this context, perceptions of fairness and equity on the part of stakeholders become extremely pertinent.…”

Corporate Tax: What Do Stakeholders Expect?

“…As outlined earlier in this paper, corporate tax, while currently very much in the public eye, is different from other managerial issues in a number of ways, most importantly: blurred boundaries between what is voluntary and mandatory, a lack of transparency and communication by many businesses, and a sense of perceived unfairness felt by many in society. As such, a dialogue between business and society on issues related to corporate tax needs to be facilitated and conducted in a sensitive and appreciative manner (Kujala et al 2012;Mitchell et al 2016;Money et al 2012). However, multi-stakeholder engagement in practice is described as a long-term process that requires an open mind-set, significant emotional and cognitive effort, and a sense of goodwill toward groups with different backgrounds and agendas-hence it requires a genuine desire and engagement by business and community representatives to participate in such a process (Helmig et al 2016;Lopez-De-Pedro and Rimbau-Gilabert 2012;Mackey et al 2007;Roloff 2008;Siltaoja and Lähdesmäki 2015).…”