Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 338
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Ayadi, Mohamed A. Ben-Ameur, Hatem and Kryzanowski, Lawrence 2016. Typical and Tail Performance of Canadian Equity SRI Mutual Funds. Journal of Financial Services Research, Vol. 50, Issue. 1, p. 57.


    Beckmann, Markus 2016. Order Ethics: An Ethical Framework for the Social Market Economy.


    Bento, Regina F. Mertins, Lasse and White, Lourdes F. 2016. Ideology and the Balanced Scorecard: An Empirical Exploration of the Tension Between Shareholder Value Maximization and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,


    Bereskin, Frederick L. Campbell, Terry L. and Hsu, Po-Hsuan 2016. Corporate Philanthropy, Research Networks, and Collaborative Innovation. Financial Management, Vol. 45, Issue. 1, p. 175.


    Bissola, Rita and Imperatori, Barbara 2016. Governance and Performance in Public and Non-Profit Organizations.


    Bona-Sánchez, Carolina Pérez-Alemán, Jerónimo and Santana-Martin, Domingo J. 2016. SUSTAINABILITY DISCLOSURE, DOMINANT OWNERS AND EARNINGS INFORMATIVENESS. Research in International Business and Finance,


    Castellaneta, Francesco and Gottschalg, Oliver 2016. Does ownership matter in private equity? The sources of variance in buyouts' performance. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37, Issue. 2, p. 330.


    Chatjuthamard, Pattanaporn Jiraporn, Pornsit Tong, Shenghui and Singh, Manohar 2016. Managerial Talent and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): How Do Talented Managers View Corporate Social Responsibility?. International Review of Finance, Vol. 16, Issue. 2, p. 265.


    Clark, Cynthia E. Steckler, Erica L. and Newell, Sue 2016. Managing Contradiction: Stockholder and Stakeholder Views of the Firm as Paradoxical Opportunity. Business and Society Review, Vol. 121, Issue. 1, p. 123.


    Cui, Jinhua Jo, Hoje and Na, Haejung 2016. Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Information Asymmetry?. Journal of Business Ethics,


    Dare, Julia 2016. Will the Truth Set Us Free? An Exploration of CSR Motive and Commitment. Business and Society Review, Vol. 121, Issue. 1, p. 85.


    Dierksmeier, Clause 2016. What is ‘Humanistic’ About Humanistic Management?. Humanistic Management Journal,


    Dierksmeier, Claus 2016. Reframing Economic Ethics.


    Dierksmeier, Claus 2016. Reframing Economic Ethics.


    Feils, Dorothee Rahman, Manzur and Şabac, Florin 2016. Corporate Governance Systems Diversity: A Coasian Perspective on Stakeholder Rights. Journal of Business Ethics,


    Gali, Nazha Hajjar, Dima and Jamali, Ibrahim 2016. The corporate governance and social responsibility nexus in the Lebanese banking industry. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, Vol. 16, Issue. 3, p. 609.


    Garcia-Castro, Roberto and Francoeur, Claude 2016. When more is not better: Complementarities, costs and contingencies in stakeholder management. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 37, Issue. 2, p. 406.


    Gonzalez, Adrian 2016. Poverty, oil and corruption: the need for a Quad-Sector Development Partnership (QSDP) in Nigeria's Niger Delta. Development Policy Review, Vol. 34, Issue. 4, p. 509.


    Hansen, Erik G. and Schaltegger, Stefan 2016. The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: A Systematic Review of Architectures. Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 133, Issue. 2, p. 193.


    Heikkurinen, Pasi and Mäkinen, Jukka 2016. Synthesising Corporate Responsibility on Organisational and Societal Levels of Analysis: An Integrative Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics,


    ×

Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function

Abstract
Abstract:

In this article, I offer a proposal to clarify what I believe is the proper relation between value maximization and stakeholder theory, which I call enlightened value maximization. Enlightened value maximization utilizes much of the structure of stakeholder theory but accepts maximization of the long-run value of the firm as the criterion for making the requisite tradeoffs among its stakeholders, and specifies long-term value maximization or value seeking as the firm’s objective. This proposal therefore solves the problems that arise from the multiple objectives that accompany traditional stakeholder theory. I also discuss the Balanced Scorecard, which is the managerial equivalent of stakeholder theory, explaining how this theory is flawed because it presents managers with a scorecard that gives no score—that is, no single-valued measure of how they have performed. Thus managers evaluated with such a system (which can easily have two dozen measures and provides no information on the tradeoffs between them) have no way to make principled or purposeful decisions. The solution is to define a true (single dimensional) score for measuring performance for the organization or division (and it must be consistent with the organization’s strategy), and as long as their score is defined properly, (and for lower levels in the organization it will generally not be value) this will enhance their contribution to the firm.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Kenneth J. Arrow 1964. “The Role of Securities in the Optimal Allocation of Risk Bearing.” Review of Economic Studies 31(86): 9196.

Ronald H. Coase 1960. “The Problem of Social Cost.” Journal of Law and Economics 3 (October): 144.

Thomas Donaldson and Lee E. Preston 1995. “The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications.” Academy of Management Review 20(1): 6591.

F. A. Hayek 1988. The Fatal Conceit. Edited by W. W. Bartley The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Business Ethics Quarterly
  • ISSN: 1052-150X
  • EISSN: 2153-3326
  • URL: /core/journals/business-ethics-quarterly
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×