salience model-supply chain management
DESCRIPTION
Supply Chain ManagementTRANSCRIPT
A Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience
Ronald K. Mitchell,
Bradley R. AgleDonna J. Wood
Outline
• Introduction
• Definitions
• Stakeholder attributes
• Stakeholder classes
• Case analysis
• Conclusion
Stakeholder
Employees
Manager
Owners
Society
Suppliers
Government
Creditors
Shareholders
customers
Company
Focus on….
Who are the stakeholders of a firm?
• Normative ( -
Logic to consider certain classes as
stakeholders
To whom do managers pay attention?
• Descriptive )-
conditions to identify stakeholders
Broad v/s Narrow definition
• Broad view-The empirical reality
Who can affect the organisation-Influencers
Who are affected by the organisation-Claimants
• Narrow view-Pragmatic reality that managers can‟t and don‟t consider all stakeholder claims(risk factor)
Voluntary and involuntary stakeholders
Stakeholder
Any group or individual who
can affect or is affected by the
achievement of the organisation‟s
objectives
(Freeman, 1984)
What is a stake?
• The things that you loose or gain by
taking the risk.
Eg: Monetary share in a business
Internal stakeholders
• Stake may go beyond ownership
Eg:-Environmental hazards for public
External stakeholders
1. Power
“ A relationship among social actors in
which one social actor A, can get
another social actor B, to do something
that B would not otherwise have
done”(Dahl et al, 1957)
“to influence the firm”
STAKEHOLDER ATTRIBUTES
Types of Power
1. Coercive Power : Based on the physical resources of force, violence or restraint
2. Utilitarian Power: Based on material or financial resources
3. Normative Power: Based on symbolic resources
A generalized perception or assumption that
the actions of an entity are desirable, proper or
appropriate within some socially constructed system
of norms, values and beliefs (Suchman, 1995)
1. Individual
2. Organisational
3. Societal
“It is the legitimacy of the relationship in terms of desirability or appropriateness with the firm”
2. Legitimacy
Urgency is defined as the degree to
which stakeholder claims for immediate attention
(Mitchell et. al, 1997)
The degree depends on
A) When a relationship or claim is of time sensitive
B) How critical/ important is the claim to the stakeholder
“ Calling for immediate attention or pressing”
3. Urgency
SALIENCE
The degree to which managers give
priority to competing stakeholder claims.
• The more the attributes the more the salience
• They are group of stakeholders who enter
into a contractual relationship with all other
stakeholders
• Direct control over the decision-making
apparatus of the firm (Hill & Jones, 1992)
• They determine which stakeholders are
salient and to whom they should pay
attention.
Role of manager?
Stakeholder salience will be positively related to
the cumulative number of stakeholder attributes –
power, legitimacy, and urgency – perceived by
managers to be present.
Three classes
1. Low Salient Class (Latent)
2. Moderate Salient Class (Expectant)
3. High Salient Class
Stakeholder Classes
Stakeholder Classes
Dormant
DiscretionaryDemanding
Power
LegitimacyUrgency
Dep
en
den
t
Definitive
Class I-Latent Stakeholders
• Only one of three attributes & Low salience
• No attention from managers
1. Dormant
2. Discretionary
3. Demanding
1. Dormant
• Little or no interaction/involvement
Eg: Those who spend a lot of money
Dormant
DiscretionaryDemanding
Power
Urgency
Legitimacy
2. Discretionary Stakeholders• Likely to be recipients of corporate philanthropy
• No pressure on managers
• Eg. – Beneficiaries of charity,
Schools and hospitals
Dormant
DiscretionaryDemanding
Power
Urgency Legitimacy
3. Demanding Stakeholders• Those with urgent claims but no legitimacy or power
• Irritants for management but not worth considering
Eg:-People with unjustified grudges, serial complainers
Dormant
DiscretionaryDemanding
Power
Urgency
Legitimacy
Class 2 - Expectant Stakeholders
• 2 Attributes & Moderate Salience
• Active rather than Passive
1. Dominant
2. Dependent
3. Dangerous
1. Dominant Stakeholders
Only stakeholders of an organisation/formal
Possess Power + Legitimacy
Eg:-Board of Directors, HR Dept.
2. Dangerous Stakeholders• Those with powerful and urgent claims
• Coercive and Violent
Eg:-strikers and terrorists
3. Dependent Stakeholders• Dependent on other bodies to carry out their will
• Lack the power to enforce their stake
Eg: – Residents & animals impacted by incidents like
Oil Spill, Mining etc.
Class 3 - Definitive Stakeholders
• Possess the three attributes
• Top priority by the managers
Eg:-Democratic legitimacy achieved by a
„Dangerous‟ nationalist party by winning national
elections
DYNAMISM in RELATIONS
• A stakeholder can increase/decrease their salience by acquiring or losing one of the attributes: power, legitimacy or urgency
• Example: When DB receives a complaint, it moves from being a expectant to a definitive stakeholder
Non-stakeholder
Latent Expectant Definitive
• Stakeholders possess combination of three critical attributes- power, legitimacy and urgency
• Salience of a stakeholder is low when one attribute, moderate when two attributes and high when all three attributes
• As there is change in these variable- dynamic model
• Attributes are not objective, but based on human perception.
Case:-
• Multinational oil & gas company
• Upstream segment -oil and natural gas exploration, field development and production.
• Downstream segment - product and service-led arm of focused on fuels, lubricants and petrochemicals.
• Shareholder-driven company (bottom-line)
• Attempted to gain higher stock values through higher profits at the expense of safety concerns
Stakeholders of BP
Deepwater
Horizon oil Spill
•20 April 2010
• Gas release and
explosion
•Macondo exploration
well for BP in the Gulf
of Mexico
Deep Water Horizon
Oil Spill
Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
• Biggest hit for BP and its public relations
that had a direct impact on its share prices
• Killed 11 people and injured many others
• Environmental, health & economic
consequences.
• Most importantly, it was not the first
disaster linked to the BP brand.
Failed in stakeholder identification and prioritisation!
1. Undermined the extent of the damage!
2. No empathy with those affected!
3. It was too late to take moral responsibility
before dealing with legal liabilities
4. Given priority to the company‟s shareholders
and managers after those of the environment
and the communities affected by the spill!
5. Denied various claims made by researchers
Stakeholders of BP Identified
Government(federal and state)
Employees
Shareholders
Environmentalists
Businesses along the coast
Coastal Residents
Customers
Activity (as on 31 December 2013) Funding
Response and clean-up $14 billion+
Claims, advances and settlements $12.5 billion
Funding for the natural resource damage assessment
process
$1 billion+
Early restoration projects
(Reflects projects that BP and the trustees
have reached agreement or agreement in principle)
$698 million
State-led tourism campaigns $178 million
State-led seafood marketing programmes $47 million
State-led seafood testing $24 million
BP's payments related to Gulf Coast recovery
Stakeholders and their Classes for BP
Stakeholders Attributes
Power Legitimacy Urgency
Stake holder class
Government Definitive
Employees Expectant (Dependent)
Shareholders Expectant (Dominant)
Environmentalists Expectant (Dangerous)
Businesses along the
coast
Expectant (Dependent)
Coastal Residents Expectant (Dependent)
Customers Latent (Discretionary)
* * *
- * *
* * -
* - *
- * *
- * *
- * -
• Managers should never forget that
stakeholders change in salience, requiring
different degrees and types of attention (Eg:
ANC)
• This stakeholder approach can improve upon
existing theories, which emphasize on power
and interests
• Enables a more systematic classes of
stakeholder-manager relationships
Conclusion
Thank you
Raghavan Sathyan Archana
PhD student
Agricultural Economics
JLU, Giessen.