Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 643 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 129 - Next  Jump:
2012 - BALAS Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 10964 words || 
Info
1. Garriga, Elisabet. "Beyond the stakeholder utility function: stakeholder capability in the value creation process" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the BALAS Annual Conference, Adolfo Ibáñez University (UAI) School of Business, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Mar 27, 2012 Online <PDF>. 2019-06-16 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p554579_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: In spite of the thousands of articles on stakeholder theory, research on value creation has had a shorter history and narrower breadth (Freeman et al, 2010; Walsh, 2005; Jones and Wicks, 1999). Only a few studies have researched from a stakeholder lens what value creation is (Post et al., 2002; Harrison et al., 2010; Bosse et al., 2009,) how stakeholders appropriate value, (Coff, 1999; Byler and Coff, 2003) or the processes or activities by which stakeholders create value (Post et al 2002). To the extent that to date, some questions remain unanswered regarding how a firm should treat stakeholders in order to create value. Specifically from the stakeholder’s side, several questions arise: What does value mean for stakeholders? What does “value” mean for a particular group of stakeholders and how do firms create these different types of value? How do we measure the value created by stakeholders (beyond the accounting and financial measures)? What is stakeholder behavior in the value creation process? The purpose of this paper is to answer these questions from Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach, identifying and measuring stakeholders’ capabilities in the value creation process. Stakeholder capability is the adequate concept to understand stakeholder welfare rather than the utility function concept. The empirical evidence is provided by an in-depth case study, of the company The Grobo Group and its stakeholders. The results indicate three types of stakeholder capabilities which are relevant for value creation: business capabilities (employable, autonomous, innovative, entrepreneurial, responsive), social capabilities (green/social) and basic capabilities (healthy). The results also show that the business capabilities are those which have higher weight which have never been identified before in previous Amartya Sen Studies.

2011 - BALAS Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 6824 words || 
Info
2. Davila, Anabella. and Molina, Christiane. "The Social Dynamics of Stakeholder Relationships: From Silent Stakeholders to a Salient Organization" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the BALAS Annual Conference, Universidad Adolfo Ibanez, Santiago, Chile, Apr 13, 2011 Online <PDF>. 2019-06-16 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p488722_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study examines the social dynamics of stakeholder relationships and presents an archival analysis of small coffee producers in southern Mexico that formed a cooperative and that currently compete in the international fair trade market. This research presents evidence that there are contextual factors by which silent stakeholders turn into salient groups. These factors include the role of social relationships and a strong sense of moral commitment in the development of modern organizations in rural areas. This case study provides evidence for a horizontal organization-stakeholder relationship in contrast to a hierarchical relationship of subordination.

2016 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: unavailable || 
Info
3. Mackie, Thomas., Sheldrick, Radley., deFerranti, Sarah., Saunders, Tully., Leslie, Laurel. and Rojas, Erick. "Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Stakeholder Engaged Research (SER): Strategies Promoting Patient-centered Outcomes Research principles in SER" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Washington State Convention Center, Seattle, WA, Aug 17, 2016 Online <PDF>. 2019-06-16 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1121258_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Background
U.S. federal funding agencies increasingly incentivize stakeholder engaged research (SER), which represents a paradigm shift toward incorporating a range of stakeholders in research design, conduct, and dissemination.

Objectives
We employ qualitative methods to capture experience-based recommendations on how to operationalize four Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR) principles in SER, specifically (1) reciprocal relationships, (2) co-learning, (3) partnership, and (4) trust, transparency and honesty.

Methods
We conducted semi-structured interviews with members of a stakeholder panel who participated in a two-year comparative effectiveness study of cholesterol screening and treatment among young adults.

Participants included eight young adults and parent stakeholders and 11 professional panel members.

The interview guide included questions about the four PCOR principles and queried preferred strategies to attain them. Interview transcripts were analyzed employing an a priori and emergent coding structure.

Results
Participants provided strategies to promote the four PCOR principles. While some stakeholder-identified strategies were complementary, others conflicted due to (1) competing ideologies identified among the principles, and (2) distinct stakeholder preferences. Illustrative of competing ideologies, participants simultaneously preferred receiving relevant articles before calls (to facilitate co-learning) but also minimal outside reading (to achieve partnership). Illustrative of distinct stakeholder preferences, young adult and parent panel members generally preferred calls to occur on weekends/evenings while professional panel members preferred mid-week work hours.

Conclusions
Our exploratory study provides stakeholder-identified strategies to achieve the four PCOR principles, and highlights the need to identify, acknowledge and address potentially conflicting preferences across stakeholders and over the course of the study.

2005 - American Political Science Association Pages: 28 pages || Words: 13505 words || 
Info
4. Weaver, Mark., Moore, Richard. and Parker, Jason. "Understanding Grassroots Stakeholders and Grassroots Stakeholder Groups: The View from the Grassroots in the Upper Sugar Creek" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-06-16 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p41675_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Although collaborative watershed management is increasingly accepted as the dominant paradigm in resource management and environmental policy, research on collaborative watershed organizations has largely ignored the attitudes and behaviors of grassroots stakeholders and the formation and organization of grassroots watershed groups. Instead, the research on collaborative watershed management has remained focused on the study of policy elites or “grasstops” (Graetz and Shapiro 2005) stakeholders, including “interest group leaders, elected officials, bureaucrats, and partnership staff” (Lubell 2004, 341) and on watershed partnerships, defined as a “collection of parties, usually featuring both private and governmental representatives…” (Kenny et al. 2000, quoted in Lubell, et al 2002), i.e. as collaborations among such policy elites (see Leach and Pelky 2001). In this study, we shift this focus to examine the beliefs and behavior of grassroots stakeholders, defined as the “appropriators” (Ostrom 1990) or the “consumers” (Lubell 2004) of natural resources and the formation of grassroots watershed organizations. We utilize the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), which has been fruitfully applied to research on watershed partnerships, and we attempt to adopt the appropriate elements of ACF in conjunction with conceptions of social identity to provide a framework for examining grassroots stakeholders and groups. This study focuses on one grassroots watershed group, which is made up of farmers, in a subwatershed in the Sugar Creek watershed in northeast Ohio, and uses data collected through three different methods to address some of the difficulties in understanding grassroots as opposed to grasstops stakeholders and organizations.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 129 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy