The word 'stakeholder' not only has a prominent place
in public and nonprofit management theory and practice (Bryson, 2004) but also in the natural resources and
environmental management. Analysis of stakeholder is crucial due to the
increasingly interconnected of the global
world (shared power world) which mean taking stakeholder account into the natural
resources problem is a part of solutions (problem-solving).
Consequently, the decision about the definition of stakeholders is also
important because it will affect who
and what counts in the activities (Mitchell et al. 1997). For
this reasons, stakeholder analysis method has gained increasing position and
attention on this field, particularly on the participatory methods (Prell et.al, 2009).
Stakeholders analysis is a procedure for gaining an
understanding of the system by identifying the key actors or stakeholders and assessing their respective
interest in the system (Grimble
& Wellard, 1997). It refers to a range of tools or an approach for generating
knowledge about stakeholder (Fu,
et.al, 2011) and understanding the system based on their attributes,
interrelationships, and respective interests to the issue and resources (Mushove & Vogel, 2005).
Currently, stakeholder analysis is often used
as an analytical tool to identify the differences point of view between the main actors who have conflicting
interest and to create an alternative
strategy in terms of promoting sustainable use of natural resources (Tanaka, 2006).
Application of stakeholder analysis mostly
address a similar set of questions (Weible, 2006); Who are
the stakeholders to include in the analysis?
What are the stakeholders’ interests and beliefs? Who controls critical
resources? With whom do stakeholders form
coalitions? What strategies and venues do stakeholders
use to achieve their objectives? However, various stakeholder analysis method
that have been developed in different fields leading to confusion of the
concept and application (Reed,
et.al. 2009). For a better understanding about the principle of Who and What really counts on the natural resources management, some
scholars suggest that people should evaluate the actual and potential
relationships among stakeholders systematically. The lack of a coherent methods
to identify, classify, analyze, and manage a stakeholder is leads a lack of
clarity and understanding of stakeholder interactions (Heidrich, et.al. 2009).
The rise of “Stakeholder” concept
According to the R&D
Management literature, the origin of “stakeholder” concept is rooted in the Stanford Research Institute
(1963) publication. They were defined stakeholder as “those group without whose support the organization would cease to
exist” Elias et.al
(2001). The other primary and authoritative
source of stakeholder concept and theory are from Freeman’s book; “Strategic Management:
A Stakeholder Approach.” (Freeman, 1984). From the firm’s
perspective, stakeholders can be initially classified into internal and external (Freeman, 1984). In the concern for environmental and societal
issues, there is a further distinction between market stakeholders and non-market
stakeholders. While market stakeholders are those who involved in typical
market transactions with the focal firm (e.g., customers, suppliers, etc.),
non-market stakeholder are interact with the firm outside of these transactions
(e.g., special interest groups, communities, etc. (Martin, et.al. 2016).
Approaches of Stakeholder
analysis then changed and widely used and implementing in the theory of
corporation (Donaldson &
Preston, 1995), corporate sustainability and CSR (Ayuso, et.al, 2014), policy
and development (Brugha
& Varvasovsky, 2000, Fu et.al, 2011), international case project (Aaltonen, 2011), natural
resources management (Krupa,
2016), and so on. Perspectives on
stakeholder theory have developed around three different approaches (Donaldson and Preston,1995; De
Vita, et.al. 2016), namely: (i) descriptive approach, which is merely
used to explain the characteristics of stakeholders (ii) normative approach, which is critically examines the functioning of
these relationships with the aim of providing guidelines for successful
coordination and/or implementation and (iii) instrumental approach, which is more empirical in nature, aiming to
identify the connections that exist among stakeholders, and how these relations
align to overall goals.
Normative
stakeholder approach proposes that managers should recognize and consider the
priorities of a broad range of constituents not just the firm’s owners. There
are Internal stakeholders - which
are owners, customers, employees, and suppliers - and external stakeholders include consumer advocates and other special-interest
groups (Fedorowichz,
et.al, 2010). In
contrast, the instrumental theory proposes
that if managers do successfully balance stakeholder interests, managers should
take into account the relative power, legitimacy, and urgency of stakeholders’
claims in order to assess the salience of different stakeholder groups (Mitchell et al.
1997).
Table 1. Different
concept of stakeholder (Who) in stakeholder analysis
Type of Stakeholder
|
Definitions
|
Source
|
Stakeholder
of organization
|
Individuals or groups that
can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives
|
Freeman (1984, p 46)
|
Stakeholder
of corporation
|
Persons or groups that have,
or claim, ownership, rights, or interests in a corporation and its
activities, past, present, or future
|
Clarkson, 1995, p 106
|
Stakeholder
of natural resources management
|
Any group of people,
organized or unorganized, who share a common interest or stake in a
particular issue or system
|
Grimble & Wellard (1997,
p 175)
|
Stakeholder
of decision making
|
Actors who have an interest
in the issue under considerations, who are affected by the issue, or who –
because of their position – have or could have an active or passive influence
on the decision-making and implementation process
|
Varvasovsky and brugha (2000,
p 341)
|
stakeholders
of a firm
|
individuals
and constituencies that contribute, either voluntarily or involuntarily, to
its wealth-creating capacity and activities, and who are therefore its
potential beneficiaries and/or risk bearers
|
Post, Preston,
& Sachs, 2002, p. 8
Ayuso,
et.al. 2014
|
Stakeholder could be
assigned to one of the stakeholder groups with their specific interest (Caniato, et.al. 2014), such
as: (1) governmental authorities.
i.e. government, policymakers, local and national authorities. Their interest
are in regulation and law enforcement (2) private
sector, i.e. services suppliers, technology provider, healthcare
facilities, business, etc. Their interests are in economic and financial
performances (3) academia
(universities, education and training institutions, research centers, etc.
Their interests are in research and innovation (4) civil society. i.e. Non-Government Organization (NGO’s), local
community, and media. Their interests are in public awareness, project affected
people, etc. (5) other stakeholders.
Considering the importance
of decision-making process, there are the main categories of stakeholders (Palleto, et.al. 2015); (1) key stakeholders or definitive
stakeholders, who are the main actors in the territory in terms of power and
legitimacy. The key stakeholders should represent the main cultural, social,
and economic interests of the community in order to have constructive dialogue
and respective persons who enable the diffusion of new information. (2) primary stakeholders or expectant
stakeholders, who are the beneficiaries of the plan with less power, and (3) legitimacy and secondary stakeholders
or latent stakeholders who are the actors marginally involved in the issue. Krupa (2016) categorize
stakeholder into three different criteria: (1) primary, (2) secondary, and (3)
tertiary stakeholders.
Stakeholder theory is providing
a suitable theoretical framework for analyzing the relationship between
business and society. On the context of companies, Hill and Jones (1992)
developed a “stakeholder-agency theory” and argued that managers should act as
“agents” for stakeholders. To gather accurate information about the
expectations of stakeholders, companies have to develop strategies for engaging
with stakeholders and for understanding their needs and concerns. Study from Cordano, et.al (2004) demonstrates
that variables, such as attitudes, can help us understand the complex
relationships of those individuals
embedded in stakeholder networks and as a result, help increase the success of stakeholder interactions. Attitude
is a “tendencies to evaluate a particular
entity, such as an action or an outcome, with some degree of favor or
disfavor.”
Social roles of actor groups
are all important components of social networks and essential for creating the
conditions of ecosystem dynamics, rapid change, and reorganization (Folke, et.al. 2005). Different
agents/actors or team/actor groups – as well known as stakeholders - seem to
play significant roles in mobilizing the social network. There are two methods
that have been developed to characterize and classify stakeholder: first, top down “analytical categorizations”
approach where stakeholder is classified by researchers based on their
observation and theoretical perspectives.
Second, bottom up “reconstructive methods” where stakeholder defined by
stakeholder themselves (Reed,
2008). Stakeholder analysis requires some activities; (1) identification
of the important stakeholders, (2) characterization of the stakeholders, (3)
asses the stakeholder influence (4) identify controversies (5) Analyze effects
of controversies on stakeholder network (Jepsen & Eskerod, 2009, Missionier& Fedida, 2014). The classes of stakeholders/stakeholder typology) can
be identified by the possession or attributed possession of one or more of three relationship attributes: power,
legitimacy, and urgency (Mitchell et.al, 1997).
Table 2. Stages of Stakeholder Analysis
Step
|
Process/method/input
|
Output/Outcome
|
Identification of the Important
stakeholders
|
Top
Down Approach: brainstorming (Bryson, 2004), generic
stakeholder list, lesson learned report, special reports, etc
Bottom
Up Approach: Stakeholder Survey (Buanes, et.al, 2004) snowball interview (Heidrich, et.al, 2009),
face to face interview, dialogue, workshop, personal survey, FGD, public
meeting, public hearing, etc.
|
· Direct (affected by project) Stakeholder
· Indirect (affected by project) Stakeholder
List
of Stakeholder:
(1)
Institutional
Stakeholders (state agencies, national and regional level)
(2)
Societal
Stakeholders (local communities)
Caniato,
et.al. 2014:
(1)
governmental
authorities.
(2)
private sector,
(3)
academia
(4)
civil society.
(5) other stakeholders
|
Characterization of the stakeholders,
|
Aaltonen
(2011):
· Power-Interest Matrix
· Stakeholder Mapping
· Outline Tools
· Role-Based stakeholder models
· Etc.
|
Palleto,
et.al. 2015:
(1)
Definitive
stakeholders/key stakeholders
(2)
Expectant
Stakeholders/primary stakeholders
(3)
Latent
Stakeholders/legitimacy and secondary stakeholders
Krupa
(2016):
(1) primary, (2) secondary, and (3)
tertiary stakeholders
|
Asses the stakeholder influence
|
Brugha
et.al, 2000:
(1)
Making an
inventory of the actors who might have a role in decision making
(2)
Collecting
information about them to gauge their importance
(3)
Quantification
of the actors’ level of influence (high, medium and low) and their interest
and support for a specific outcome
(4)
Assessment of
their capacity and willingness to mobilize resources toward a particular goal
(5)
Mapping of
actors (regarding the relationship, potential for developing alliances, and
their relationship to desired outcomes.
|
Mitchell et.al, 1997:
Rank or Map of actors/stakeholders regarding
the power, legitimacy, and urgency attributes.
|
Identify controversies
|
IFC-World Bank
· What type of stakeholder engagement is mandated by law or other
requirements?
· Who will be adversely affected by
potential environmental and social impacts in the project’s area of
influence?
· Who are the most vulnerable among
the potentially impacted, and are special engagement efforts necessary?
· At which stage of project
development will stakeholders be most affected (e.g. procurement,
construction, operations, decommissioning)?
· What are the various interests of
project stakeholders and what influence might this have on the project?
|
|
Analyze effects of controversies on
stakeholder network
|
· Which stakeholders might help to
enhance the project design or reduce project costs?
· Which stakeholders can best assist
with the early scoping of issues and impacts?
· Who strongly supports or opposes the
changes that the project will bring and why?
· Whose opposition could be
detrimental to the success of the project?
· Who is it critical to engage with
first, and why?
· What is the optimal sequence of
engagement
|
No comments:
Post a Comment