Skip to main content
Log in

Boards of directors and stakeholder orientation

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Based on a survey of 2,361 directors in 291 of the largest companies of the Southeast States, this study empirically examined boards of directors' stakeholder orientations. The results indicate that (1) there exist distinct stakeholder groups perceived by directors, (2) directors have high stakeholder orientations, (3) directors view some stakeholders differently depending on their occupation (CEO directors v. non-CEO directors) and type (inside directors vs. outside directors).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aupperle, K. E.: 1984, ‘An Empirical Measure of Corporate Social Orientation’, in L. Preston, ed.,Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy (JAI Press, Greenwich, Connecticut), pp. 27–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance’,Academy of Management Review 4, pp. 497–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R. and I. F. Kesner: 1985, ‘Organizational Performance as an Antecedent of Inside/Outside Chief Executive Succession: An Empirical Assessment’,Academy of Management Journal 28, pp. 749–762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dearborne, P. C. and H. A. Simon: 1985, ‘Selected Perceptions: A Note on the Identification of Executives’,Sociometry 21, pp. 140–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. E.: 1973,Management: Tasks, Responsibility, Practices (Harper & Row Publishers, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M.: 1989, ‘Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review’,Academy of Management Review 14, pp. 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E. F. and M. C. Jensen: 1983, ‘Separation of Ownership and Control’,Journal of Law and Economics 26, pp. 301–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, R. and F. McLaughlin: 1984, ‘Perceptions of Socially Responsible Activities and Attitudes: A Comparison of Business School Deans and Corporate Chief Executives’,Academy of Management Journal 27, pp. 666–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1984, ‘Strategic Management’,A Stakeholder Approach (Ballinger, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D. R., Jr., E. Hartman, J. J. Mauriel and R. E. Freeman: 1988,A Logic for Strategy (Ballinger Publishing Company, Cambridge, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. and P. A. Mason: 1984, ‘Upper Echelons: The Organization as a Reflection of Its Top Managers’,Academy of Management Review 9, pp. 193–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, C. W.: 1980, ‘Turnaround Strategies’,Journal of Business Strategy 1, pp. 19–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, S. C.: 1977, ‘Corporate Social Performance: Past and Present Areas of Commitment’,Academy of Management Journal 20, pp. 433–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. and W. H. Meckling: 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost and Ownership Structure’,Journal of Financial Economics 3, pp. 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mace, M. L.: 1972, ‘The President and the Board of Directors’,Harvard Business Review 50(12), pp. 37–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H.: 1983,Power in and Around Organizations (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Neff, T.: 1989, ‘Let Directors be Directors’,Wall Street Journal (December 11), p. 14.

  • Pfeffer, J. and G. R. Salancik: 1978,The External Control of Organizations: A Resource-Dependence Perspective (Harper & Row, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, B. and W. H. Schmidt: 1984, ‘Values and American Manager: An Update’,California Management Review 26, pp. 202–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P.: 1949,TVA and the Grass Roots (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonnenfeld, J. A.: 1981, ‘Executive Apologies for Price Fixing: Role Biased Perceptions of Causality’,Academy of Management Journal 24, pp. 192–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, S. C.: 1955,Functional Control and Corporate Performance in Large Scale Industrial Enterprise (The University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, S. C.: 1964,Boards of Directors: Structure and Performance (University of Oregon Press, Eugene, OR).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, S. C.: 1983,Corporate Leadership: Boards, Directors, and Strategy (McGraw Hill, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. and J. A. Pearce: II 1989, ‘Boards of Directors and Corporate Financial Performance: A Review and Integration Model’,Journal of Management 15, pp. 291–334.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Jia Wang is an Associate Professor of Strategic Management at the California State University at Fresno. His current research interests include corporate governance and corporate social performance.

H. Dudley Dewhirst is a Professor of Strategic Management and Director of the Strategic Management Program at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. His current research interests include corporate governance and technology management.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, J., Dewhirst, H.D. Boards of directors and stakeholder orientation. J Bus Ethics 11, 115–123 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872318

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872318

Keywords

Navigation