From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research
Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-a-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-ben...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of business ethics 2006-05, Vol.65 (3), p.251-267 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 267 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 251 |
container_title | Journal of business ethics |
container_volume | 65 |
creator | Rasche, Andreas Esser, Daniel E. |
description | Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-a-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-benefit calculations, thus neglecting other important spheres of influence pertaining to more broadly defined stakeholder interests. We argue in this paper that, as a part of the strategic decision for a certain standard, management needs to identify and act according to the needs of all stakeholders. We contend that the creation of a dialogical understanding among affected stakeholders cannot be a mere outcome of applying certain accountability standards, but rather must be a necessary precondition for their use. This requires a stakeholder dialogue prior to making a choice. We outline such a discursive decision framework for accountability standards based on the Habermasian concept of communicative action and, in the final section, apply our conceptual framework to one of the most prominent accountability tools (AA 1000). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10551-005-5355-y |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_198071770</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1073196921</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c154t-f0a37727584b4fea0523d4f40b9052d47875ce9131f3fac2c73f95201dbe8a2a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkDFPwzAQhS0EEqXwA9gidsNd7KuTsaooRSpiAGbLcWxIaeNiu0P-PanKwlvuSe_pTvcxdotwjwDqISEQIQcgToKID2dsgqQEh1mtztkEcKa4JCkv2VVKGxhFKCesXsawK96y-XZfYdu6WLyY3ny6netzkcO_ZG5tOPTZNN22y8M1u_Bmm9zN35yyj-Xj-2LF169Pz4v5mlskmbkHI5QqFVWykd4ZoFK00kto6tG2UlWKrKtRoBfe2NIq4WsqAdvGVaY0YsruTnv3MfwcXMp6Ew6xH09qrCtQqBSMJTyVbAwpRef1PnY7EweNoI-A9AmQHt_WR0B6EL8v71ha</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>198071770</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Rasche, Andreas ; Esser, Daniel E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Rasche, Andreas ; Esser, Daniel E.</creatorcontrib><description>Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-a-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-benefit calculations, thus neglecting other important spheres of influence pertaining to more broadly defined stakeholder interests. We argue in this paper that, as a part of the strategic decision for a certain standard, management needs to identify and act according to the needs of all stakeholders. We contend that the creation of a dialogical understanding among affected stakeholders cannot be a mere outcome of applying certain accountability standards, but rather must be a necessary precondition for their use. This requires a stakeholder dialogue prior to making a choice. We outline such a discursive decision framework for accountability standards based on the Habermasian concept of communicative action and, in the final section, apply our conceptual framework to one of the most prominent accountability tools (AA 1000). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-4544</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0697</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10551-005-5355-y</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBUEDJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Nature B.V</publisher><subject>Accountability ; Business ethics ; Initiatives ; Stakeholder management ; Stakeholders ; Standardization ; Strategic management ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of business ethics, 2006-05, Vol.65 (3), p.251-267</ispartof><rights>Springer 2006</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c154t-f0a37727584b4fea0523d4f40b9052d47875ce9131f3fac2c73f95201dbe8a2a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27864,27922,27923</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rasche, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esser, Daniel E.</creatorcontrib><title>From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research</title><title>Journal of business ethics</title><description>Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-a-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-benefit calculations, thus neglecting other important spheres of influence pertaining to more broadly defined stakeholder interests. We argue in this paper that, as a part of the strategic decision for a certain standard, management needs to identify and act according to the needs of all stakeholders. We contend that the creation of a dialogical understanding among affected stakeholders cannot be a mere outcome of applying certain accountability standards, but rather must be a necessary precondition for their use. This requires a stakeholder dialogue prior to making a choice. We outline such a discursive decision framework for accountability standards based on the Habermasian concept of communicative action and, in the final section, apply our conceptual framework to one of the most prominent accountability tools (AA 1000). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Business ethics</subject><subject>Initiatives</subject><subject>Stakeholder management</subject><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>Standardization</subject><subject>Strategic management</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0167-4544</issn><issn>1573-0697</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkDFPwzAQhS0EEqXwA9gidsNd7KuTsaooRSpiAGbLcWxIaeNiu0P-PanKwlvuSe_pTvcxdotwjwDqISEQIQcgToKID2dsgqQEh1mtztkEcKa4JCkv2VVKGxhFKCesXsawK96y-XZfYdu6WLyY3ny6netzkcO_ZG5tOPTZNN22y8M1u_Bmm9zN35yyj-Xj-2LF169Pz4v5mlskmbkHI5QqFVWykd4ZoFK00kto6tG2UlWKrKtRoBfe2NIq4WsqAdvGVaY0YsruTnv3MfwcXMp6Ew6xH09qrCtQqBSMJTyVbAwpRef1PnY7EweNoI-A9AmQHt_WR0B6EL8v71ha</recordid><startdate>200605</startdate><enddate>200605</enddate><creator>Rasche, Andreas</creator><creator>Esser, Daniel E.</creator><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K8~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200605</creationdate><title>From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability</title><author>Rasche, Andreas ; Esser, Daniel E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c154t-f0a37727584b4fea0523d4f40b9052d47875ce9131f3fac2c73f95201dbe8a2a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Business ethics</topic><topic>Initiatives</topic><topic>Stakeholder management</topic><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>Standardization</topic><topic>Strategic management</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rasche, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Esser, Daniel E.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>DELNET Management Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of business ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rasche, Andreas</au><au>Esser, Daniel E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research</atitle><jtitle>Journal of business ethics</jtitle><date>2006-05</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>65</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>251</spage><epage>267</epage><pages>251-267</pages><issn>0167-4544</issn><eissn>1573-0697</eissn><coden>JBUEDJ</coden><abstract>Confronted with mounting pressure to ensure accountability vis-a-vis customers, citizens and beneficiaries, organizational leaders need to decide how to choose and implement so-called accountability standards. Yet while looking for an appropriate standard, they often base their decisions on cost-benefit calculations, thus neglecting other important spheres of influence pertaining to more broadly defined stakeholder interests. We argue in this paper that, as a part of the strategic decision for a certain standard, management needs to identify and act according to the needs of all stakeholders. We contend that the creation of a dialogical understanding among affected stakeholders cannot be a mere outcome of applying certain accountability standards, but rather must be a necessary precondition for their use. This requires a stakeholder dialogue prior to making a choice. We outline such a discursive decision framework for accountability standards based on the Habermasian concept of communicative action and, in the final section, apply our conceptual framework to one of the most prominent accountability tools (AA 1000). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Nature B.V</pub><doi>10.1007/s10551-005-5355-y</doi><tpages>17</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0167-4544 |
ispartof | Journal of business ethics, 2006-05, Vol.65 (3), p.251-267 |
issn | 0167-4544 1573-0697 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_198071770 |
source | PAIS Index; Business Source Complete; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; EBSCOhost Education Source; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Accountability Business ethics Initiatives Stakeholder management Stakeholders Standardization Strategic management Studies |
title | From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T13%3A08%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=From%20Stakeholder%20Management%20to%20Stakeholder%20Accountability:%20Applying%20Habermasian%20Discourse%20Ethics%20to%20Accountability%20Research&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20business%20ethics&rft.au=Rasche,%20Andreas&rft.date=2006-05&rft.volume=65&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=251&rft.epage=267&rft.pages=251-267&rft.issn=0167-4544&rft.eissn=1573-0697&rft.coden=JBUEDJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10551-005-5355-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1073196921%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=198071770&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |