Skip to main content Accessibility help

Stakeholder Dialogue as Agonistic Deliberation: Exploring the Role of Conflict and Self-Interest in Business-NGO Interaction

  • Teunis Brand (a1), Vincent Blok (a1) and Marcel Verweij (a1)


Many companies engage in dialogue with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) about societal issues. The question is what a regulative ideal for such dialogues should be. In the literature on corporate social responsibility (CSR), the Habermasian notion of communicative action is often presented as a regulative ideal for stakeholder dialogue, implying that actors should aim at consensus and set strategic considerations aside. In this article, we argue that in many cases, communicative action is not a suitable regulative ideal for dialogue between companies and NGOs. We contend that there is often an adversarial element in the relation between companies and NGOs, and that an orientation towards consensus can be in tension with this adversarial relation. We develop an alternative approach to stakeholder dialogue called ‘agonistic deliberation.’ In this approach, conflict and strategic considerations play a legitimate and, up to a certain point, desirable role.



Hide All
Applbaum, Arthur Isak. 1999. Ethics for Adversaries: The Morality of Roles in Public and Professional Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Arenas, Daniel, Lozano, Josep M., and Albareda, Laura. 2009. “The Role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual Perceptions Among Stakeholders.” Journal of Business Ethics 88 (1): 175–97.
Baur, Dorothea, and Palazzo, Guido. 2011. “The Moral Legitimacy of NGOs as Partners of Corporations.” Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (04): 579604.
Baur, Dorothea, and Schmitz, Hans Peter. 2012. “Corporations and NGOs: When Accountability Leads to Co-Optation.” Journal of Business Ethics 106 (1): 921.
Bendell, Jem. 2003. “Talking for Change? Reflections on Effective Stakeholder Dialogue.” In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance, edited by Andriof, Jörg, Waddock, Sandra, Husted, Brian, and Rahman, Sandra Sutherland, 5369. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
Benjamin, Martin. 1990. Splitting the Difference: Compromise and Integrity in Ethics and Politics. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.
Berman, Shawn L., Wicks, Andrew C., Kotha, Suresh, and Jones, Thomas M.. 1999. “Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship Between Stakeholder Management Models and Firm Financial Performance.” Academy of Management Journal 42 (5): 488506.
Blok, Vincent. 2014a. “The Metaphysics of Collaboration: Identity, Unity and Difference in Cross-sector Partnerships for Sustainable Development:” Philosophy of Management 13 (2): 5374.
Blok, Vincent. 2014b. “Look Who’s Talking: Responsible Innovation, the Paradox of Dialogue and the Voice of the Other in Communication and Negotiation Processes.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (2): 171–90.
Blok, Vincent. 2019. “From Participation to Interruption: Toward an Ethics of Stakeholder Engagement, Participation and Partnership in Corporate Social Responsibility and Responsible Innovation.” In International Handbook of Responsible Innovation: A Global Resource, edited by von Schomberg, René and Hankins, Jonathan, 243258. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Brown, Judy, and Dillard, Jesse. 2013. “Critical Accounting and Communicative Action: On the Limits of Consensual Deliberation.” Critical Perspectives on Accounting 24 (3): 176–90.
Burchell, Jon, and Cook, Joanne. 2006. “Assessing the Impact of Stakeholder Dialogue: Changing Relationships between NGOs and Companies.” Journal of Public Affairs 6 (3–4): 210–27.
Burchell, Jon, and Cook, Joanne. 2013a. “Sleeping with the Enemy? Strategic Transformations in Business–NGO Relationships Through Stakeholder Dialogue.” Journal of Business Ethics 113 (3): 505–18.
Burchell, Jon, and Cook, Joanne. 2013b. “CSR, Co-Optation and Resistance: The Emergence of New Agonistic Relations Between Business and Civil Society.” Journal of Business Ethics 115 (4): 741–54.
Choi, Jaepil, and Wang, Heli. 2009. “Stakeholder Relations and the Persistence of Corporate Financial Performance.” Strategic Management Journal 30 (8): 895907.
Crane, Andrew, and Livesey, Sharon. 2003. “Are You Talking to Me? Stakeholder Communication and the Risks and Rewards of Dialogue.” In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance, edited by Andriof, Jörg, Waddock, Sandra, Husted, Brian, and Rahman, Sandra Sutherland, 3952. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
Crouch, Colin. 2011. The Strange Non-Death of Neoliberalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Dawkins, Cedric. 2015. “Agonistic Pluralism and Stakeholder Engagement.” Business Ethics Quarterly 25 (1): 128.
Dubbink, Wim. 2004. “The Fragile Structure of Free-Market Society: The Radical Implications of Corporate Social Responsibility.” Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (1): 2346.
Elster, Jon. 2000. “Arguing and Bargaining in Two Constituent Assemblies.” Journal of Constitutional Law 2 (2): 345421.
Erman, Eva. 2009. “What Is Wrong with Agonistic Pluralism?: Reflections on Conflict in Democratic Theory.” Philosophy & Social Criticism 35 (9): 1039–62.
Foster, David, and Jonker, Jan. 2005. “Stakeholder Relationships: The Dialogue of Engagement.” Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society 5 (5): 51–7.
Freeman, R. Edward, Harrison, Jeffrey S., Wicks, Andrew C., Parmar, Bidhan, and Colle, Simone de. 2010. Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
García-Marzá, Domingo. 2005. “Trust and Dialogue: Theoretical Approaches to Ethics Auditing.” Journal of Business Ethics 57 (3): 209–19.
Gilbert, Dirk Ulrich, and Rasche, Andreas. 2007. “Discourse Ethics and Social Accountability: The Ethics of SA 8000.” Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (02): 187216.
Golob, Ursa, and Podnar, Klement. 2014. “Critical Points of CSR-Related Stakeholder Dialogue in Practice.” Business Ethics: A European Review 23 (3): 248–57.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1985. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Translated by MacCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1987. The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Translated by MacCarthy, Thomas. Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. From Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. “Three Normative Models of Democracy.” In The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory, reprint, 239–52. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Heath, Joseph. 2007. “An Adversarial Ethic for Business: Or When Sun-Tzu Met the Stakeholder.” Journal of Business Ethics 72 (4): 359–74.
Heath, Joseph. 2014. Morality, Competition, and the Firm: The Market Failures Approach to Business Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Heath, Joseph. 2019. “The Moral Status of Profit.” In The Oxford Handbook of Ethics and Economics, edited by White, Mark D., 337357. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hirschman, Albert O. 1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hirschman, Albert O. 1994. “Social Conflicts as Pillars of Democratic Market Society.” Political Theory 22 (2): 203–18.
Hond, Frank den, and de Bakker, Frank. 2007. “Ideologically Motivated Activism: How Activist Groups Influence Corporate Social Change Activities.” Academy of Management Review 32 (3): 901–24.
Høvring, Christiane Marie, Andersen, Sophie Esmann, and Nielsen, Anne Ellerup. 2018. “Discursive Tensions in CSR Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue: A Foucauldian Perspective.” Journal of Business Ethics 152 (3): 627–45.
Hussain, Waheed, and Moriarty, Jeffrey. 2016. “Accountable to Whom? Rethinking the Role of Corporations in Political CSR.” Journal of Business Ethics 149 (3): 519–34.
Iivonen, Kirsti. 2018. “Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too!Journal of Business Ethics 148 (2): 309–27.
Johnson, J. 1991. “Habermas on Strategic and Communicative Action.” Political Theory 19 (2): 181201.
Johnson-Cramer, Michael E., Berman, Shawn L., and Post, James E.. 2003. “Re-Examining the Concept of ‘Stakeholder Management.’” In Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance, edited by Andriof, Jörg, Waddock, Sandra, Husted, Brian, and Rahman, Sandra Sutherland, 145–61. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
Jones, Thomas M. 1995. “Instrumental Stakeholder Theory: A Synthesis of Ethics and Economics.” Academy of Management Review 20 (2): 404–37.
Kaptein, Muel, and Van Tulder, Rob. 2003. “Toward Effective Stakeholder Dialogue.” Business and Society Review 108 (2): 203–24.
Kerkhof, Marleen van de. 2006. “Making a Difference: On the Constraints of Consensus Building and the Relevance of Deliberation in Stakeholder Dialogues.” Policy Sciences 39 (3): 279–99.
Knops, Andrew. 2007. “Debate: Agonism as Deliberation ? On Mouffe’s Theory of Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 15 (1): 115–26.
Mansbridge, Jane. 2006. “Conflict and Self-Interest in Deliberation.” In Deliberative Democracy and Its Discontents, edited by Besson, Semantha and Martí, José Luis, 107–32. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Group.
Mansbridge, Jane. 2009. “Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Negotiations.” Harvard Kennedy School, Working Paper RWP09–010.
Mansbridge, Jane, Bohman, James, Chambers, Simone, Estlund, David, Føllesdal, Andreas, Fung, Archon, Lafont, Cristina, Manin, Bernard, and Martí, José Luis. 2010. “The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 18 (1): 64100.
Markell, Patchen. 1997. “Contesting Consensus: Rereading Habermas on the Public Sphere.” Constellations 3 (3): 377400.
Martens, Kerstin. 2002. “Mission Impossible? Defining Nongovernmental Organizations.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations 13 (3): 271–85.
Mena, Sébastien, and Palazzo, Guido. 2012. “Input and Output Legitimacy of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives.” Business Ethics Quarterly 22 (03): 527–56.
Mena, Sébastien, and Waeger, Daniel. 2014. “Activism for Corporate Responsibility: Conceptualizing Private Regulation Opportunity Structures: Private Regulation Opportunity Structures.” Journal of Management Studies 51 (7): 1091–117.
Moog, Sandra, Spicer, André, and Böhm, Steffen. 2015. “The Politics of Multi-Stakeholder Initiatives: The Crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council.” Journal of Business Ethics 128 (3): 469–93.
Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism?Social Research 66 (3): 745–58.
Mouffe, Chantal. 2000a. The Democratic Paradox. London ; New York: Verso.
Mouffe, Chantal. 2000b. “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism.” IHS Political Science Series, no. 72.
Mouffe, Chantal. 2005. On the Political (Thinking in Action). New York: Routledge.
Noland, James, and Phillips, Robert A.. 2010. “Stakeholder Engagement, Discourse Ethics and Strategic Management.” International Journal of Management Reviews 12 (1): 3949.
Norman, Wayne. 2011. “Business Ethics as Self-Regulation: Why Principles That Ground Regulations Should Be Used to Ground Beyond-Compliance Norms as Well.” Journal of Business Ethics 102 (S1): 4357.
Palazzo, Guido, and Scherer, Andreas Georg. 2006. “Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework.” Journal of Business Ethics 66 (1): 7188.
Patzer, Moritz, Voegtlin, Christian, and Georg Scherer, Andreas. 2018. “The Normative Justification of Integrative Stakeholder Engagement: A Habermasian View on Responsible Leadership.” Business Ethics Quarterly 28 (3): 325–54.
Payne, Stephen L., and Calton, Jerry M.. 2002. “Towards a Managerial Practice of Stakeholder Engagement.” Journal of Corporate Citizenship 2002 (6): 3752.
Phillips, Robert A. 1997. “Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness.” Business Ethics Quarterly 7 (1): 5166.
Rasche, Andreas, and Esser, Daniel E.. 2006. “From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability: Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research.” Journal of Business Ethics 65 (3): 251–67.
Rawls, John. 1987. “The Idea Of An Overlapping Consensus.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 7 (1): 125.
Rescher, Nicholas. 1993. Pluralism: Against the Demand for Consensus. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reynolds, MaryAnn, and Yuthas, Kristi. 2008. “Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting.” Journal of Business Ethics 78 (1–2): 4764.
Roloff, Julia. 2008. “Learning from Multi-Stakeholder Networks: Issue-Focussed Stakeholder Management.” Journal of Business Ethics 82 (1): 233–50.
Rondinelli, Dennis A., and London., Ted 2003. “How Corporations and Environmental Groups Cooperate: Assessing Cross-Sector Alliances and Collaborations.” Academy of Management Perspectives 17 (1): 6176.
Rummens, Stefan. 2009. “Democracy as a Non-Hegemonic Struggle? Disambiguating Chantal Mouffe’s Agonistic Model of Politics.” Constellations 16 (3): 377–91.
Sabadoz, Cameron, and Singer, Abraham. 2017. “Talk Ain’t Cheap: Political CSR and the Challenges of Corporate Deliberation.” Business Ethics Quarterly 27 (02): 183211.
Sanders, Lynn M. 1997. “Against Deliberation.” Political Theory 25 (3): 347–76.
Scherer, Andreas Georg, and Palazzo, Guido. 2007. “Toward a Political Conception of Corporate Responsibility: Business and Society Seen from a Habermasian Perspective.” Academy of Management Review 32 (4): 1096–120.
Scherer, Andreas Georg, and Palazzo, Guido. 2011. “The New Political Role of Business in a Globalized World: A Review of a New Perspective on CSR and Its Implications for the Firm, Governance, and Democracy.” Journal of Management Studies 48 (4): 899931.
Scherer, Andreas Georg, Rasche, Andreas, Palazzo, Guido, and Spicer, André. 2016. “Managing for Political Corporate Social Responsibility: New Challenges and Directions for PCSR 2.0.” Journal of Management Studies 53 (3): 273–98.
Seitanidi, Maria May, and Crane, Andrew. 2009. “Implementing CSR Through Partnerships: Understanding the Selection, Design and Institutionalisation of Nonprofit-Business Partnerships.” Journal of Business Ethics 85 (S2): 413–29.
Selsky, J. W., and Parker., Barbara 2005. “Cross-Sector Partnerships to Address Social Issues: Challenges to Theory and Practice.” Journal of Management 31 (6): 849–73.
Thompson, Dennis F. 2008. “Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science.” Annual Review of Political Science 11 (1): 497520.
Trumpy, Alexa J. 2008. “Subject to Negotiation: The Mechanisms Behind Co-Optation and Corporate Reform.” Social Problems 55 (4): 480500.
Unerman, Jeffrey, and Bennett, Mark. 2004. “Increased Stakeholder Dialogue and the Internet: Towards Greater Corporate Accountability or Reinforcing Capitalist Hegemony?Accounting, Organizations and Society 29 (7): 685707.
van Huijstee, Mariëtte, and Glasbergen, Pieter. 2008. “The Practice of Stakeholder Dialogue between Multinationals and NGOs.” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15 (5): 298310.
Van Tulder, Rob, May Seitanidi, Maria, Crane, Andrew, and Brammer, Stephen. 2016. “Enhancing the Impact of Cross-Sector Partnerships: Four Impact Loops for Channeling Partnership Studies.” Journal of Business Ethics 135 (1): 117.
Warren, Mark E., and Mansbridge, Jane. 2013. “Deliberative Negotiation.” In Negotiating Agreement in Politics, 86120. Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association.
Yaziji, Michael, and Doh, Jonathan. 2009. NGOs and Corporations: Conflict and Collaboration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Zakhem, Abe. 2008. “Stakeholder Management Capability: A Discourse–Theoretical Approach.” Journal of Business Ethics 79 (4): 395405.


Stakeholder Dialogue as Agonistic Deliberation: Exploring the Role of Conflict and Self-Interest in Business-NGO Interaction

  • Teunis Brand (a1), Vincent Blok (a1) and Marcel Verweij (a1)


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed