Search

The methods of improving the performance of senior managerial teams in business enterprises are described. The effect of real and perceived differences among senior managers on the organization's performance is discussed.

A study was undertaken to test hypotheses linking corporate violations of federal laws and regulations to firm size, diversity, financial pressures, and organizational structure and processes. Data used for the research were obtained from the EPA and the Occupatinal Safety and Health Administration. Findings failed to provide strong support for the propositions examined. Of the six hypotheses tested, only the one proposing a positive relationship between the incidence of corporate violations and the value given by senior management to rate of return as a criterion for assessing divisional performance was found to hold true. Implications for future research are mentioned.

To contribute to the continuing challenge of explaining how managers identify stakeholders and assess their salience, in this article, we chronicle the history, assess the impact, and evaluate the possibilities opened by Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (MAW-1997). We do so through two types of qualitative analysis, and also through utilizing a quantitative network analysis tool. The first qualitative analysis categorizes the major contributions of the most influential papers succeeding MAW-1997; the second identifies and compares the relevant issues with MAW-1997 at the time of initial publication and today. We apply main path analysis, a quantitative tool, to map how this scholarly domain has evolved. These three analyses robustly depict the impact of MAW-1997 and the ensuing scholarly conversation, and they enable us to illustrate the current state and trajectory of stakeholder identification and salience scholarship. We close by discussing pressing topics related to the broader body of stakeholder theory literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using unique data provided by the CEOs of 80 large U.S. firms, the authors examined relationships among the stakeholder attributes of power, legitimacy, urgency, and salience; CEO values; and corporate performance. They found strong support for the attribute-salience relationship and some significant relationships among CEO values, salience, and corporate social performance but found no support for a salience-financial performance link. Their findings suggest a need for continued emphasis on the development of normative stakeholder theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Researchers often fail to honor luminaries in their fields of inquiry, at least while they are still alive. What follows is one such tribute, to Dr. Thomas M. Jones, the Boeing Company endowed professor in business management at the University of Washington’s Foster School of Business. Business & Society represents an appropriate outlet for this tribute, given that Tom was the first editor of the journal when the International Association for Business and Society (IABS) assumed editorial control of the Sage Publications journal in 1993. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Researchers in all management specialties have discussed and investigated the important role values play in personal and organizational phenomena. However, because research on values has been performed in a wide range of social science disciplines and at different levels of analysis, much of this work has been uninformed by other work and is neither well integrated nor systematized, resulting in a great deal of confusion concerning the topic. This article attempts to add order and clarity to this area of research by proposing a framework of values research based on level of analysis and by cataloguing and reviewing the vast theoretical and empirical research in light of this framework. It concludes with a critique of the extant literature and recommendations for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents information on a study which reconstructed a categorization of studies that have investigated the relationship between corporate social performance and corporate financial performance. Methods; Results and discussion; Conclusion.