Stakeholder theory

Business and ethics have long been a difficult subject because of the various viewpoints people have. The many different industries also make it difficult to define in black and white what is ethical and unethical across the board. Some may assume that to be an ethical business all they must do is abide by the laws and regulations put in place by the government or regulating authorities. Others assume that an ethical business does the aforementioned but also has fair and honest operations, as well

almost guarantee her time at the company would be short lived. As CEO she must juggle the interests of her stakeholders and make decisions that benefit the company. It can prove to be a difficult task as certain stakeholders hold more power and have more influence when it comes to making these decisions. In this paper I will be using stakeholder theory to discuss how Anglo American’s stakeholders influence Carroll’s decision. Carroll is well aware of the dangers her employees face, however she must

cooperate governance, stakeholders are the people who have got some interests in the business and these include shareholders, creditors, suppliers, employees, customers, communities and environment. Stakeholder debate has been there since business has been around and the question in this debate is to determine ‘for whose benefit does the company exists?’ Different theories such as the shareholder value theory, the stakeholder theory and the enlightened shareholder value theory have all been developed

Shareholder theory Milton Friedman in his 1970 article titled” The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits”, argues that the main purpose of the corporation is to maximize profit for shareholders (or stockholders) as long as it is in the confines of the law. He is of the view that a business is not an individual and has no moral responsibility, therefore only the employees have a moral responsibility for the actions of the firm. The managers are viewed as agents of stockholders

Corporate social responsibility is a controversial matter that regarding businesses’ ethics especially those that only obeys the law and does not care for the social harm they have caused. There are numerous occasions where the companies harms the society and communities more than the benefits they provide. The case of Samarco 2015 Mine Disaster is one of the occasion that occurred due to negligence as they chose not to follow a single safety regulation of the dam which caused a calamity that damaged

INTRODUCTIONThe introduction of the concept of stakeholder theory can be traced back in the 1960s (Stoney and Winstanley, 2001),however the concept gained grounds with the publication of Freeman’s (1984) book, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Till now most writers with stakeholders as a central theme have shown numerous theoretical and empirical studies about this concept (Donaldson and Preston, 1995). The concept about stakeholders in an organisation is very paramount, however, far

other stakeholders of the firm, which reflected in his “take-no-prisoners” (case p.1) management style during his tenure as Sunbeam’s CEO. Dunlap’s goals were limited to just maximizing stockholders’ wealth by adopting fast turnaround tactics and all other salient characteristics of the very existence of corporation such as product innovation, product/service quality, employee and customer satisfaction and corporate ethics were completely neglected. Mr. Dunlap’s adaptation of shareholder-theory was

Furthermore NGI is in ownership of 2,200 rooms in 17 hotels across Canada and the United States. The Company is expert in all facets of the hotel business, from marketing to building to management. Focused on creating the best return and value for all stakeholders, Northampton’s market-sensitive strategy is to acquire or build hotels that provide great value and superior accommodation. Gratefully, NGI excels in this sector by offering services that exceed expectations while still posting industry-leading

exploited employees, harmed all stakeholders as well as stockholders, and

holders interpret financial information, specifically to manipulate stakeholders reaction to disappointing financial reports, by changing the focus and constructing a "disconfirmatory effect on the financial figures" (Neu et al., 1998, p.270). Qualitative positive disclosures with quantitative negative disclosures (Gibbins et al., 1990) can be used as a method to down play managerial incompetence and persuade financial stakeholders to excuse past mistakes by using their ethical or socially responsible