Reflection paper 2
April 28th, 2014
From telling to talking
The issues under discussion during the second session and in the accompanying readings revolved around stakeholder theory as an approach to executing corporate responsibility. This theory is based on company-centrality where various layers of the environment of the company are independently analyzed. In the context of this theory, a stakeholder is understood to be any actor with an explicit or implicit interest in the activities of the company. Actors that typically fall under this category are e.g. employees, owners, customers, the government and surrounding communities. As evidenced by the examples, the concept of stakeholder entails a wide array of internally divergent actors.
According to the article stakeholder relation management can be viewed from two distinct vantage points. The first approach views stakeholder relation management as a strategic vehicle for furthering underlying aims of the company. The alternative approach views stakeholder relations management as an intrinsic value that should be furthered as a product of its own merits. The issue of effectively managing stakeholder relations has in recent years gained much more prominence and astute companies are in many cases turning to it as a means to increase customer retention/loyalty and thereby positively impact shareholder value. This kind of an approach would allude to the strategic view as the more prevalent vantage point for approaching stakeholder relations management.
While a strategic approach might be perceived as inferior to an intrinsic value approach I would like to argue that it is the end rather than the means that ultimately matters. Irrespective of whether actions are pursued based on their value or as vehicles for an ulterior value, the results and implications can be equally profound. For example the Finnish paper