Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who are the Stakeholders Now? An Empirical Examination of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood Theory of Stakeholder Salience

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two environmental accidents in the mining industry provide the context for this study of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (1997, The Academy of Management Review 22, 853–886) analysis of stakeholder salience. I examine the reactions of two stakeholder groups: shareholder response is examined in terms of changing share returns and risk; management response through change in disclosure. I find the two decision-makers reacted at different times. Management responded to the first accident, though not the second. Shareholders responded to the second accident alone. My findings support the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood (MAW) assertion that stakeholder status is impermanent, and determined through the eyes of the decision-maker.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agle B., R. Mitchell, J. Sonnenfeld: 1999, Who Matters to CEOs? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corporate Performance and CEO Values. Academy of Management Journal 42, 507–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attfield R.: 1998, Existence Value and Intrinsic Value. Ecological Economics 24, 163–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskerville-Morley R.: 2004, Dangerous, Dominant, Dependent, or Definitive: Stakeholder Identification when the Profession Faces Major Transgressions. Accounting and the Public Interest 4, 24–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blacconiere W., D. Patten: 1994, Environmental Disclosures, Regulatory Costs, and Changes in Firm Value. Journal of Accounting and Economics 18, 357–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks L. J.: 2004, Business and Professional Ethics for Directors, Executives, and Accountants. Mason, Ohio: Thomson – South Western

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown N., C. Deegan: 1998, The Public Disclosure of Environmental Performance Information – A Dual Test of Media Agenda Setting Theory and Legitimacy Theory. Accounting and Business Research 29, 21–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Buhr, N.: 1994, `Environmental Disclosure: An Empirical Study of Corporate Communication in Canada and the Rolr of Accounting', Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation (University of Western Ontario)

  • Canada Newswire: 1995, ‹Omai Gold Mines Limited Suspends Mining Operations at the Omai Mine’, August 21

  • Canada Newswire: 1996, ‹Environmental Accident at Philippines Mine’, March 26

  • Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants: 1995, Guidance for Directors – Governance Processes for Control. Toronto: Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants: 1997, Full Cost Accounting from an Environmental Perspective. Toronto: Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Press: 1996, ‹Guyana Disaster Contributes to Cambior Loss’, February 9

  • Chatterjee, P.: 1995, ‹Cyanide Spill Could be Long-Term Disaster’, Inter Press Service, August 30

  • Chatterjee, P.: 1996, ‹Canadian-Backed Mines Receive “Major Black Eye”’, Inter Press Service, April 3

  • Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics: 1999. Principles of Stakeholder Management. Toronto: The Joseph L. Rotman School of Management

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinch G., N. Sinclair: 1987, Intra-industry Information Releases: A Recursive Systems Approach. Journal of Accounting and Economics 9, 89–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damsell, K.: 1999, ‹Spill Cleanup Costs Push Boliden Loss to Record Level’, National Post, February 9

  • Deegan C.: 2002, Australian Financial Accounting. Sydney, Australia: McGraw Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Deegan C., B. Gordan: 1996. A Study of the Environmental Disclosure Practices of Australian Corporations. Accounting and Business Research 26(3), 187–199

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling J., J. Pfeffer: 1975, Organisational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organisational Behavior. Pacific Sociological Review 18, 122–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama E., L. Fisher, C. Jensen, R. Roll: 1969. The Adjustment of Stock Prices to New Information. International Economic Review 10(1), 1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray R., R. Kouhy, S. Lavers: 1995, Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review of the Literature and a Longitudinal Study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 8(2), 47–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray R., D. Owen, D. Adams: 1996, Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate and Social Reporting. London: Prentice Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie J., L. Parker: 1989, Corporate Social Reporting: A Rebuttal of Legitimacy Theory. Accounting and Business Research 19, 343–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Klassen R., C. McLaughlin: 1996, The Impact of Environmental Management on Firm Performance. Management Science 42, 1199–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laplante B., P. Lanoie: 1994, The Market Response to Environmental Incidents in Canada: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Southern Economic Journal 60, 657–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom, C.: 1994, ‹The Implications of Organizational Legitimacy for Corporate Social Performance and Disclosure’, Paper Presented at the Annual Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference (New York)

  • Luke, D.: 2002, Night of the Gas. New Internationalist 352, 34

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinlay A.: 1997, Event Studies in Economics and Finance. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1), 13–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Magness, V.: 2000, `The Impact of Environmental Accidents on the Behaviour of TSE Traded Companies', Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation (University of Manitoba)

  • Magness, V.: 2006, `Strategic Posture, Financial Performance and Environmental Disclosure: An Empirical Test of Legitimacy Theory', Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 19(4), 540–563

    Google Scholar 

  • The Mining Association of Canada: 1998, A Guide to the Management of Tailings Facilities [Web Posting] http://www.mining.ca September [Accessed October 13, 2002]

  • Mitchell R., B. Agle, D. Wood: 1997, Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. The Academy of Management Review 22, 853–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreschi, R.: 1988, ‹Tort Liability Standards and the Firm’s Response to Regulation’, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

  • Northern Miner: 1996, Volume 81 (Southam Publishing, Canada) (January 22)

  • Orts E., A. Strudler: 2002, The Ethical and Environmental Limits of Stakeholder Theory. Business Ethics Quarterly 12, 215–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips R., J. Reichart: 2000, The Environment as a Stakeholder? A Fairness-based Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 23, 185–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuters: 1995, ‹Guyana Gold Mine Spill Contaminates River’, August 21

  • Reuters: 1996a, ‹Philippine Mine Leak Won’t Hit Earnings’, March 26

  • Reuters: 1996b, ‹Placer Dome Denies Philippines Ban’, April 4

  • Terreberry S.: 1968, The Evolution of Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly 12, 590–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toronto Stock Exchange: 1994, Report of the Toronto Stock Exchange Committee on Corporate Governance in Canada (Toronto), December

  • Ullmann A.: 1985, Data in Search of a Theory: A Critical Examination of the Relationships Among Social Performance, Social Disclosure and Economic Performance of U.S. Firms. Academy of Management Review 10, 540–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilmshurst, T. and G. Frost: 2000, `Corporate Environmental Reporting: a Test of Legitimacy Theory', Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 13(1), 10–26

  • Zéghal D., Ahmed S.: 1990, Comparison of Social Responsibility Information Disclosure Media Used by Canadian Firms. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 3(1), 38–53

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Accounting, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St.Canada, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5B 2K3

    Vanessa Magness

Authors
  1. Vanessa Magness
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa Magness.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Magness, V. Who are the Stakeholders Now? An Empirical Examination of the Mitchell, Agle, and Wood Theory of Stakeholder Salience. J Bus Ethics 83, 177–192 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9610-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9610-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation