Stakeholder theory and dynamics in supply chain collaboration

Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide a framework for analyzing stakeholder‐management strategies in supply chain collaboration. The authors aim to show how prior dyadic relations with a stakeholder and perception of situational demands on the relationship determine the choice of aggressive vs cooperative strategies in managing stakeholder relationships. Design/methodology/approach – To develop a blueprint for predicting collaboration strategies, literature on stakeholder theory, stakeholder management strategies, field theory, and organizational mental models was surveyed. From the literature, 31 predictors of eight stakeholder management strategies were identified. To operationalize the study's constructs, results of a national survey were analyzed to determine the significant predictors of stakeholder management strategies. Findings – Factor analysis identified two groups of stakeholder strategies: aggressive strategies and cooperative strategies. Aggressive strategies feature some form of forceful attitude or behavior toward stakeholders in an attempt to alter other stakeholders' behavior. Cooperative strategies feature supportive attitudes or behaviors towards its stakeholders. Models were developed for these two types of stakeholder management strategies. When the level of trust among stakeholders is low, a firm that presses to complete the collaboration activity may choose aggressive strategies in dealing with its trading partners. On the other hand, a sense of interdependence, a perception that its trading partners share the urgency to collaborate, plus awareness that the collaboration activity benefits all will lead the organization to adopt cooperative strategies. Practical implications – By examining the factors contributing to an organization's decision to pursue aggressive (e.g. the radio frequency identification – RFID Mandate), rather than cooperative stakeholder management strategies, this study has important implications to advocates of change (e.g. firms mandating RFID compliance), and firms at the receiving end of aggressive stakeholder strategies. Originality/value – The findings have important implications for advocates of change (e.g. firms mandating RFID compliance). For trading partners to cooperate, the trading partners must be convinced of the urgency of change, that it is appropriate and right to comply with the call for change, and that they have the ability to do it correctly. To firms at the receiving end of aggressive stakeholder strategies, the approach taken by their trading partners may seem like "bullying tactics" exercised by firms in a position of power. Instead, this research suggests that firms use aggressive stakeholder management strategies because of a heightened sense of urgency, difficulty in conveying legitimacy in carrying out the collaborative undertaking to the trading partners, and lack of faith that all stakeholders will do their share to make the collaborative undertaking work.