Stakeholder Theory: Utilitarianism applied to Businesses/Organizations 1:02, 8:55 Identify (1) Options/Decisions and (2) Whom it Effects 2:10 Consider consequences for everyone (all stakeholders) 6:30 Corporations and Non-Profits. Who is effected? 9:30 Externalities (unintended/unpredicted consequences.) Positive and Negative 15:25 23:17 We need to know Costs and Benefits 25:00 Understand Behaviors, Values, Contexts: _The Mission Statement_ 28:24 Procedures/Rules. _Methods of The Mission_
You got it wrong in the first 60 sec. A stakeholder is not simply someone affected by an action. In the sense that we are all beholden to the other and Kumbaya, sure, but this is not firm economic theory other than within a Socialist narrative. A stakeholder is someone who has possessed something and exchanged it for a claim on something else. Stakeholding is not passive and there are risks involved. Not some generic amorphous risk but specifically the risk that you may have been better off staking your claim elsewhere. Whether you are an investor, employee, CEO, manager, customer, sovereign entity or resident - you may find yourself affected by many different actions or you may not like some result but you are never simply a passive stakeholder... you are simply affected.
I watch after another of your lectures professor. Thank you so much for recording them.
Stakeholder Theory: Utilitarianism applied to Businesses/Organizations
1:02, 8:55 Identify (1) Options/Decisions and (2) Whom it Effects
2:10 Consider consequences for everyone (all stakeholders)
6:30 Corporations and Non-Profits. Who is effected?
9:30 Externalities (unintended/unpredicted consequences.)
Positive and
Negative 15:25
23:17 We need to know Costs and Benefits
25:00 Understand Behaviors, Values, Contexts: _The Mission Statement_
28:24 Procedures/Rules. _Methods of The Mission_
From UK London, Anglia Ruskin university, this was so helpful thanks 🎉 great teacher here.
It‘s not utilitarianism applied but pragmatism vitalized in business conduct!
Great videos. Can you make one on underdetermination?
You got it wrong in the first 60 sec. A stakeholder is not simply someone affected by an action. In the sense that we are all beholden to the other and Kumbaya, sure, but this is not firm economic theory other than within a Socialist narrative. A stakeholder is someone who has possessed something and exchanged it for a claim on something else. Stakeholding is not passive and there are risks involved. Not some generic amorphous risk but specifically the risk that you may have been better off staking your claim elsewhere. Whether you are an investor, employee, CEO, manager, customer, sovereign entity or resident - you may find yourself affected by many different actions or you may not like some result but you are never simply a passive stakeholder... you are simply affected.
That’s not how Freeman uses the term.
Sounds more like a sort of shareholder.
Please read the second sentence and then the last sentence that you have written.