Stakeholder research has blossomed in recent years. Yet, in spite of the advances that have been made, the development of a generally accepted model that reflects facets of the relationship between a corporation and its stakeholders has not yet materialized. In this paper, we propose a model of corporation/stakeholder fit using stewardship, trust, resource dependency, social network, and institutional theories. We propose a nexus of contacts approach to stakeholder management, where relationships can remain nonexploitive without the monitoring or interest alignment remedies demanded by agency theory.

Following a product life cycle and issue life cycle model, we develop a "rational" stakeholder relationship life cycle. However, a stakeholder relationship life cycle involves a human element and includes variables such as trust, commitment, loyalty, social bonding, obligation, and guilt. Using social exchange theory, we then develop seven different types of life cycles which firms and stakeholders could experience, and the factors and conditions that affect which life cycle the stakeholder relationship could follow.

This study examined the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP), employee attitudes toward corporate social performance, and employee and organizational outcomes. Within a small manufacturing company in a Midwestern state, employee surveys were used to establish a measure of employee-organization congruence on level of corporate involvement in five social issues. Congruence was then utilized lo predict job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intention to remain at the company, and organizational attractiveness.

Contemporary organizations face systematic and structural obstacles, both within and outside organizations, which make it difficult or even impractical to pay attention to the needs and interests of stakeholders. Arguably, corporate and non-profit organizations have an internal mechanism which can potentially combat the systematic and structural obstacles which inhibit attention to stakeholders - their boards of directors. In order to use our instruments to approach the problem of how to lead board members to play a greater role In leading organizations to address the needs and interests of their stakeholders, we are conducting a study of board members of the various corporate and non-profit organizations which are Involved in the current large scale effort to revitalize economic development in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

The two arguments contained in this paper are interdependent. First, I assert the need for a conceptual shift in focus for corporate social performance (CSP), away from intemal processes and instead toward the actual satisfaction of internal and extemal stakeholders. Second, I propose an optimal measurement solution of CSP, drawing on statistical generalizability theory.

In studying firms' strategic change, we recognized that the logic of evolutionary theory provided a useful framework for explaining such change. The logic of evolutionary theory differs from the logic of other theories used to analyze strategic change, such as economic theory. The specific logic of evolutionary theory also implies a specific normative core. Based on these insights and on a comprehensive research project (Sachs 2000; Post, Preston, Sachs draft version 2001), we demonstrate in this paper that evolutionary theory can make a substantive contribution to a possible new normative core for stakeholder theory. This normative core calls for the explanation of corporations' strategic behavior and performance from an economic, an ecological as well as a societal point of view (Rühli/Sachs 1999).

The stakeholder management concepts that have been extensively used in the field of family business are discussed in this article. A comparative examination of stakeholder management and family business literatures that have existed in oblivious parallelism, reveals that each has made strides along different dimensions of stakeholder concept. A start towards a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship between the two fields is proposed and the concept of stakeholder mapping is developed.

Organizational sustainability requires the balancing of economic performance with impacts on ecosystem health and social equity. Knowledge required for integrating these seemingly conflicting objectives transcends organizational boundaries and is embedded in networks of stakeholders. As this knowledge is constantly evolving, only firms with a capability of stakeholder integration can harness sustainability knowledge from a variety of internal and extemal stakeholders. Stakeholder integration is a dynamic capability consisting of three sub-capabilities of boundary-spanning, higher-order learning and sustainability commitment. It leads to the development of organizational social capital that enables further stakeholder linkages and sustainability leaming. Via sustainability knowledge generation, this capability leads to improved sustainability performance, short-term benefits and long-term competitive imagination for creative destruction.

Fiji Pine, Limited (FPL) is a case study that can be used to focus on identifying numerous socio-political-business issues - corporate social performance, business-government relations, stakeholder issues, public affairs management, corporate governance, and ecological issues. FPL, a former government managed asset, was incorporated in 1990 in order to ultimately privatize the forests back into the hands of the citizens of Fiji, the owners of the forests. FPL management is currently juggling the various demands of a variety of stakeholders, including the govemment (the majority shareholder), the forest landowners, the extension (leased) forest owners, managers, employees, contract labor, the labor union, village communities, and extemal funding agencies, all with conflicting needs and expectations. Recent events include intemational firms that wish to harvest hardwoods are creating additional conflict for the stakeholders of FPL.

Social policy shareholder resolutions have grown enormously in popularity over the past 20 years as a means for activists to target companies exhibiting behaviors or producing products that the activists wish to change. This study provides preliminary evidence that it is a combination of size and actual company or industry practices that are targeted by shareholder activists. Results indicate that shareholder activists are targeting companies when they produce products that social investors or the activists find problematic and when they are creating concerns about the way they treat the environment. Companies with better customer/product and environmental performance, in particular, can benefit from paying attention to the nature and quality of their products lest they draw negative attention from social activists. Further, specific industries are targeted with respect to employee and community-related practices, creating a need for corporate strategists to stay aware of the possibility that it is possible that both their "good" and "bad" behaviors that to draw activists' attention.

This paper combines, in a first cut at the matter, a developmental history of stakeholder literature with an agenda identifying some key future research issues derived from that review. The paper does NOT reconstmct stakeholder theory (undertaken by Donaldson & Preston, 1995). The purpose is rather to stimulate examination of some unresolved, deeply embedded issues in the field. Timing seems appropriate following the 1999 Academy of Management Journal issue on empirical stakeholder research (Agle et al., Berman et al., Harrison & Freeman, eds., Johnson & Greening, Luoma & Goodstein, Ogden & Watson, Weaver et al.) and the 2000 Business & Society issue (Carroll, Mitnick, Griffin) on corporate social performance (CSP) measurement (in which Rowley & Berman, Szwajkowski, and Wood emphasize stakeholder approaches). A developmental history should consider what degree of synthesis, integration, and convergence, if any, underlies an increasingly rich and diverse literature. There are indications of increasing divergence (cf. Jones & Wicks, 1999, and associated commentaries) as attempted systemadzation and empirical verificadon of stakeholder theorizing proceeds. An agenda for key future directions should provide a coherent sense of where the field can and ought to go. Recommended key directions are: (1) how legitimacv of claims on the firm is to be assessed and related to the definition of stakeholdership; (2) how distribudve fairness of outcomes is to be addressed and implemented in relationship to power: and (3) how multiple interests are to be balanced and/or represented in corporate decision making in relationship to managerial perceptions of urgency. (The legitimacy, power, and urgency schema comes firom Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997.) This effort must necessarily rest on a critique of existing Uterature, but a critique is NOT criticism of specific authors or schools of thought. Rather the current knowledge base (changing over time) is simply a point of departure. Constmctive critique is a desirable norm in scholarship that should not be confounded with judging right versus wrong approaches. A critique searches for arguable weaknesses, as well as strengths, in the current state of the literature and its developmental history, as guidance to future progress. A stakeholder view of the firm has become an axiomatic assumption at a time when theoretical soundness of the current state of business and society scholarship generally is subjected to openly expressed reservations and the empirical verificadon of best practices is repeatedly found difficult, as in the two special issues cited above. As well as divergences among stakeholder scholars, there is the ill-addressed matter in business and society scholarship of its relationship to economics. While negative views of neoclassical economics (and perhaps by inference markets) are commonly enough expressed (cf. Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Jones, 1995), Szwajkowski (2000) argues that a firm's CSP reputation among its stakeholders affects its market valuation.

We organized "A Conversation about Values in Stakeholder Theory" as a discussion session in order to explore whether personal values should be granted more scholarly attention in stakeholder management theoretical approaches than they have received to date.

Three cases and their teaching notes were presented and discussed by the panel, and then opened for general discussion. Suggestions for improving cases and teaching notes were made, to show the editing and improvement process at work. The discussions were directed toward effective use in classrooms, toward possible publication in journals, and toward adoption by book authors.

This case describes the transformation of Shell Oil during the period 1994-1999. In response to intemational environmentalist, human rights, and shareholder campaigns directed against the company. Shell undertook a number of initiatives. These included an organizalional redesign, a study of society's expectations, a revision of the company's business principles, a new approach to reporting and verifying its social and environmental performance, and a series of public dialogues with stakeholders. A multimedia version of the text case is available for classroom use.

This paper frames sustainable student leaming in terms of puzzles, movement, accomplishments, and portfolios. Two conventional practices are reinterpreted as ways for American liberal arts colleges to communicate their commitment to teaching sustainable leaming.

This paper evaluates the current state of business and society using a Kuhnian paradigmatic lens through which to examine the advancement of the field since its inception. Applying the normal science framework, we address the six-step evolutionary process of a paradigm from perceived truth to paradigmatic shift. We conclude that business and society as a field is enriched by the various dominant competing perspectives that continually drive research in the field; thereby precluding the need for an overarching paradigm for business and society.

Can oral history be useful to business and society? This workshop provided a background on oral history, and explored its use within the field.

The title of this symposium is packed with imstated assumptions about the authority that we business ethics teachers claim. Usually, the authority of the business ethics teacher—the one who "effects change for the better"—is taken for granted. This silence is broken when we talk about the premise that students require motivation and change