Talk:Stakeholder theory

RFC: Stakeholder Theory and Stakeholder Capitalism
What is the relationship between stakeholder capitalism and stakeholder theory? Robert McClenon (talk) 04:34, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

A. They are terms that are used synonymously, and the article should so indicate, and stakeholder capitalism can continue to be a redirect to stakeholder theory.

B. Stakeholder theory is a subset of stakeholder capitalism, as explained in the subsection below. They are distinct concepts and require separate articles.

C. Stakeholder theory is a subset of stakeholder capitalism, as explained in the subsection below. They can both be discussed in separate sections of one article, which will be expanded to discuss the subset-superset relationship. The current redirect can be preserved.

D. Other - Please specify

Indicate your view on the question in the Survey with a brief statement. Do not reply to other editors in the Brief Explanatory Statements or in the Survey. Back-and-forth discussion is permitted in the Threaded Discussion.

Explanation of Subset-Superset Relationship
I would like to clarify that Stakeholder Capitalism is in fact an economic reform movement to enhance the effectiveness of Capitalism by addressing the needs of all stakeholders and the environment.

Stakeholder Theory, as the Wikipedia article clearly states, is simply one of many theories for organizational management.

While the term "stakeholder" is used in both instances, the two topics are actually quite different, as Stakeholder Capitalism is focused on a reform of the entire system of capitalism while the other is a theory for how to manage people more effectively in an organization.

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 13:19, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

These are terms that are used synonymously
These are two names for the same concept. The only sourced definition we have is from Investopedia, which defines Stakeholder capitalism as "a system in which corporations are oriented to serve the interests of all their stakeholders. Among the key stakeholders are customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders and local communities." Stakeholder theory is defined by our article as "a theory of organizational management and business ethics that accounts for multiple constituencies impacted by business entities like employees, suppliers, local communities, creditors, and others." - the same thing. So, which name to use? Per this ngram link from google books, 'Stakeholder theory' is the common name. MrOllie (talk) 19:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Survey

 * Option A. This RFC has largely come about because Bolgerb1953 would like to retain an article he created, which I have redirected to this article. Here's a historical version of his article. Note that it is largely based on a definition proposed in a recent forbes contributor article (so, essentially self published) which was coauthored by Bolberb1953. The 'differences' between Stakeholder capitalism and Stakeholder theory are WP:OR. I'll also quote an edit made by Bolgerb1953 before he became aware that Wikipedia will not host two articles on the same concept: 'commonly used term today for the same concept.' 'Starting in about 2019, the term Stakeholder Capitalism began to describe the same fundamental approach to business.' - MrOllie (talk) 11:22, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A, but While these are pretty clearly synonymous terms (and there is some potential CoI from saying they aren't), it doesn't seem that Stakeholder Capitalism ever went through AfD which I believe is the more appropriate venue for this dispute. I suppose an argument could be made that Stakeholder Capitalism is the practical application of Stakeholder Theory, but without multiple RS using it like that, there's not much point in not redirecting. BSMRD (talk) 14:07, 16 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Option A. These terms are used synonymously but as mentioned by others, it does not seems to be an issue given the number of outside source that do the same. Jurisdicta (talk) 03:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Option A. Per arguments above. These terms are used synonymous. LK (talk) 10:01, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Option C/D. Seems like differences between the two can be explained by differences in scale or practical application. Stakeholder Theory is a micro-level approach to a specific business that would deal with the environment by proxy through environmentalists, while Stakeholder Capitalism is a macro-level approach; both the same fundamental concept. A differences of scale wouldn't necessarily mean a subset/superset relationship (at least not in any meaningful way). I think both applications can be detailed on the existing page for now, but only because the differences are relatively minor. If the subject ever begins gaining more traction in the mainstream and the differences become too detailed, I could see a need for a WP:SPINOUT at that point. : I would caution against assuming that sources conflating the two terms means the concepts themselves are synonymous. That would be a reasonable assumption only if the concepts are relatively well known and understood. In this case, the concept appears to be relatively new; there is always a learning curve with the general public when it comes to correct application of terminology. --Twozerooz (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Option C - As an outside observer reading over the conversation, it seems fairly clear to me from the arguments made that these are in fact two very closely related but distinct concepts (micro/macro level), but Stakeholder Capitalism is not an entrenched enough idea yet to merit its own article. The redirect can stay, and this article can have a subsection about it, which will probably be small until more academic works are done on the subject, or until more reliable sources start talking about it. Fieari (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Threaded Discussion

 * So you're basically proposing the reverse of Option C: That Stakeholder Capitalism is a subset of Stakeholder Theory, and the article should discuss both in separate sections? If so, that's what I'm thinking as well. I disagree with Bolberb1953's assertion that "Stakeholder Theory is simply one of many theories for organizational management," as a brief dive into R.E. Freeman's body of work shows that it's a far broader concept with a wide variety of applications. I think the problem here is, as you said, is that "Stakeholder Capitalism" a relatively new term and academics, economists, and business writers haven't quite reached a consensus: some use the term as a synonym for Stakeholder Theory, some use it to mean "the practical business application of Stakeholder Theory," others use it as "a new economic concept based on the principles of Stakeholder Theory." I think it will take time before a distinction (if any) develops. Niftysquirrel (talk) 15:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes I agree, the article should discuss both in separate sections--Twozerooz (talk) 16:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Giving my support as well to this motion. A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  10:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

If you folks are serious about finding the truth, why doesn't someone contact the father of Stakeholder Theory, R.Edward Freeman. He is alive and well. He writes in an article to be published this Monday: "“I look at Stakeholder Theory as the underlying idea that gave rise to the thinking behind the Stakeholder Capitalism movement."

He would be happy to correspond with any of you: freemane@darden.virginia.edu

Putting these two subjects together is like putting Socialism and Communism in the same Wikipedia article.

They should be separate articles....If you refuse to do that than at the very least the Stakeholder Theory article has to be updated.

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 14:07, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Here is a comment from the London Business School professor whose work the editors for some reason are ignoring:

"Thanks for sharing the discussion. It seems that the other folks don’t actually understand stakeholder capitalism. It’s nice in a way that people are willing to give up their time to ensure the integrity of Wikipedia, but you should not be allowed to cancel other people if you have no expertise."

Alex Edmans | Professor of Finance London Business School, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4SA Assistant: Janet Chater | jchater@london.edu

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 14:30, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps would be interested in creating a draft of a stakeholder capitalism article without the flagrant WP:COI of citing one's own work on Wikipedia. If there is enough academic consensus on the term, this should be easily doable. And a note on the quotation above: please refrain from citing co-authors as a way to argument from authority, it does not help others WP:AGF on your side.  A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  10:36, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I would be happy to remove any references to our content. In fact, the latest version has removed all such references. There is even a way to address the definition discussion without any reference to me. This debate between two professors on Stakeholder Capitalism is occurring on Oct. 5 in which the various definitions will be discussed. You will note that I have nothing to do with this event and that there is not even a mention of Stakeholder Theory: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_P8LVVPnySCe2L2p66qxzfg

Likewise, this organization, with which I have no affiliation, offers 10 podcasts on Stakeholder Capitalism by business leaders and academics...Again, you will find no mention of Stakeholder Theory: https://www.instituteforcorporatetransformation.com/podcast

Finally, Grand Canyon University has a program on Stakeholder Capitalism that it also calls Conscious Capitalism with no reference to Stakeholder Theory. https://www.gcu.edu/colangelo-college-of-business/conscious-capitalism

I can easily find sources that do not involve any of our content.

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Lest there be any doubt that Stakeholder Capitalism is a movement quite distinct from the Stakeholder Theory approach to organizational management, please note the reference to the term "Stakeholder Capitalism" in a letter sent last week to Pres. Biden in the US by a half-dozen or so Democrats in Congress that makes a specific reference to Stakeholder Capitalism as a reform movement. There is no mention of Stakeholder Theory as an organizational management process.

https://www.warner.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=3A602004-6F1E-45C3-85E3-D1C6F7099CBC

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 13:33, 29 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Just a small note, I don't believe the podcasts or the educational programme brochure would be considered WP:RS, . I do think the senate press release is an improvement, but do note the non-academic background of the release. I'll do a deeper dive on the articles you've written on Wikipedia plus the current article to see what the issue is later tonight, but so far I'm inclined to say that both stakeholder theory and capitalism are defined quite vaguely. However, one's idea that capitalism is de facto stakeholder capitalism seems like just the result of living in the current paradigm rather than a statement of fact - thus, more consideration to separating the articles should be given. A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  12:15, 30 September 2021 (UTC)


 * To clarify, I mean that a book alternative to a podcast is always preferred, both for verifyability and also accessibility. I'm not saying the sources arent to be believed, just that they are not of the standard one would expect of an article like this. A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  12:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Intuitively, I would think s. Capitalism is a macroeconomic approach while s. Theory is a business approach, and so significantly different. A. C. Santacruz  &#8258;  Talk  12:19, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the time you and for that of the other volunteers who are taking to understand this. Yes, I agree with your assessment: Stakeholder Capitalism is a macroeconomic model and reform movement and Stakeholder Theory is a management approach that would exist with or without Stakeholder Capitalism, and which was in fact conceived long before it. I am not sure why the individual writings of professors on this subject is not a reliable source but I leave that to you. Also, in our world of business journalism, we contact sources to verify information directly, and the experts on this subject are happy to talk with Wikipedia volunteers. I have provided the email address for the professor who conceived of Stakeholder Theory.

Even though our organization is an important source of information on this subject, I have no need to have any of our information published in Wikipedia. The goal is to give people a place to go to find out more about Stakeholder Capitalism when they read or hear about it...Sending them to an article on Stakeholder Theory is nothing short of inaccurate and confusing and does not due justice to either subject.

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 14:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Has anyone noticed in this thread that there is also an entry in Wikipedia on Stakeholder Management? See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_management

While Stakeholder Capitalism is clearly a movement and Stakeholder Theory an an organizational management process, what's the rationale for having a separate entry for Stakeholder Management?

Bolgerb1953 (talk) 21:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Stakeholder Management is the practice of managing and communicating with the stakeholders of a given project. Basically, it's Project Management speak for PR. It has nothing to do with Stakeholder Theory or Stakeholder Capitalism. Niftysquirrel (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2021 (UTC)