Open Access
Subscription Access
The Discussion on Stakeholders in Contrast with the Shareholders Theory:Reconciliation to a Conscious Capitalism
This article describes the stakeholder theory and the shareholder theory, as normative theories about business ethics. Their differences are observed, as well as the way in which they support each other. Finally, these theories are complemented by conscious management (Conscious management), and the importance of a holistic view of the purpose of organizations that includes investors, society and the environment.
Keywords
Conscious Management, Shareholders Theory, Stakeholders Theory.
User
Font Size
Information
- Baek, J., Cho, Y., & Koo, W. (2009). The environmental consequences of globalization: A country-specific time-series analysis, Ecological Economics, 68(8), 2255–2264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.02.021
- Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics, Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard Business Press.
- Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, New York, USA: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139192675
- Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago Press.
- Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.5465/ AMLE.2005.16132558
- Herrman, C. S. (2008). John Mackey’s’ Conscious Capitalism. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1307172 https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1307172
- Klein, N. (2001). No logo: el poder de las marcas.Barcelona, Espa-a: Editorial Paidos.
- Mackey, J. (2011). What conscious capitalism really is: A response to James O’Toole and David Vogel’s “two and a half cheers for conscious capitalism”, California Management Review, 53(3), 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.3.83
- O’Toole, J., & Vogel, D. (2011). Two and a half cheers for conscious capitalism, California Management Review, 53(3), 60–76. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.53.3.60
Abstract Views: 351
PDF Views: 122