Analysis of the conceptual evolution of stakeholders and competitiveness in applied social sciences and tourism
Keywords:Stakeholders, Competitiveness, Bibliometrics, VOSviewer
Objective: The objective of the study is to map and describe the conceptual-theoretical evolution of stakeholders in relation to competitiveness, presenting the main theoretical influences and the theoretical boundary currents of the relationship between stakeholders and competitiveness.
Method: This is descriptive research, carried out through a quantitative method, using bibliometric techniques of bibliographic cocitation and coupling (pairing) to map the intellectual structure that supports the studies of the relationship between stakeholders and competitiveness. We used the exploratory factor analysis statistical technique and the VOSviewer data mapping software to analyze the documents in our sample.
Originality / Relevance: The literature on stakeholders and competitiveness lacks studies that examine the relationship between these terms. In view of the scarcity of works that relate stakeholders and competitiveness, this study seeks to fill this theoretical gap by mapping and describing the stock of knowledge on the topic.
Results: The cocitation analysis identified five clusters, the most important cluster had as main bias to investigate the competitiveness of tourist destinations and the theory of stakeholders. The bibliographic coupling identified nine thematic areas that studies on stakeholders and competitiveness are focusing on, the area that concentrates more studies is the analysis of the competitiveness of tourist destinations.
Theoretical contributions: The main contribution of this study is exploratory, since in addition to mapping the theoretical-conceptual evolution, more specifically the main theoretical influences, existing theoretical currents and the current theoretical fronts that study the thematic stakeholders and competitiveness, the study provides a point of view departure for future descriptive and causal studies, especially in the clusters formed in the bibliographic pairing map.
Andriof, J., Waddock, S., Husted, B., & Rahman, SS (2017). Revelação do pensamento dos stakeholders: teoria, responsabilidade e engajamento. Routledge.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17(1), 99-120.
Bhawsar, P., & Chattopadhyay, U. (2015). Competitiveness: Review, reflections and directions. Global Business Review, 16(4), 665-679.
Bianchi, R., & Noci, G. (1998). " Greening" SMEs' Competitiveness. Small business economics, 11(3), 269-281.
Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual review of information science and technology, 37(1), 179-255.
Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis. A&C Black.
Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of management review, 20(1), 92-117.
Crouch, G. I., & Ritchie, J. B. (2000). The competitive destination: A sustainability perspective. Tourism management, 21(1), 1-7.
Delmas, M., & Toffel, M. W. (2004). Stakeholders and environmental management practices: an institutional framework. Business strategy and the Environment, 13(4), 209-222.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of management Review, 20(1), 65-91.
Dwyer, L., & Kim, C. (2003). Destination competitiveness: determinants and indicators. Current issues in tourism, 6(5), 369-414.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, 21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
Enright, M. J., & Newton, J. (2004). Tourism destination competitiveness: a quantitative approach. Tourism management, 25(6), 777-788.
Fassin, Y. (2009). The stakeholder model refined. Journal of business ethics, 84(1), 113-135.
Fauver, L., & Fuerst, M. E. (2006). Does good corporate governance include employee representation? Evidence from German corporate boards. Journal of financial economics, 82(3), 673-710.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge university press.
Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of management review, 24(2), 191-205.
Gibb, A. A. (1997). Small firms' training and competitiveness. Building upon the small business as a learning organisation. International small business journal, 15(3), 13-29.
Hair, j. F., Anderson, r. E., Tatham, r. B., & Black, r. (2005). WC Análise multivariada de dados. Tradução de AS Sant’anna e A. Cloves Neto, 5.
Hallmann, K., Müller, S., Feiler, S., Breuer, C., & Roth, R. (2012). Suppliers' perception of destination competitiveness in a winter sport resort. Tourism Review, 67(2), 13-21.
Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago press.
Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic management journal, 31(1), 58-74.
Harrison, JS, Felps, W. & Jones, TM (2019). A teoria instrumental das partes interessadas torna agradável a construção de relacionamentos com base ética nos gerentes, com foco na linha de fundo. Academy of Management Review, 44 (3), 698-700.
Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of management Journal, 42(1), 87-99.
Jones, TM & Wicks, AC (1999). Carta à AMR sobre "teoria convergente das partes interessadas". Academy of Management Review, 24 (4), 621-623.
Jones, TM, Harrison, JS, & Felps, W. (2018). Como a aplicação da teoria instrumental das partes interessadas pode fornecer vantagem competitiva sustentável. Academy of Management Review, 43 (3), 371-391.
Kannan, D. (2018). Role of multiple stakeholders and the critical success factor theory for the sustainable supplier selection process. International Journal of Production Economics, 195, 391-418.
Kochan, T. A., & Dyer, L. (1993). Managing transformational change: the role of human resource professionals. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(3), 569-590.
Lall, S. (2001). Competitiveness indices and developing countries: an economic evaluation of the global competitiveness report. World development, 29(9), 1501-1525.
Marshakova, I. V. (1981). Citation networks in information science. Scientometrics, 3(1), 13-25.
Miles, S. (2017). Classificação da teoria das partes interessadas: uma avaliação teórica e empírica das definições. Journal of Business Ethics , 142 (3), 437-459.
Mitchell, R.K.; Agle, B.R.; Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
Noland, J., & Phillips, R. (2010). Stakeholder engagement, discourse ethics and strategic management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 39-49.
Norcia, V. D., Cotton, B., & Dodge, J. (1993). Environmental performance and competitive advantage in Canada's paper industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 2(4), 1-9.
Normann, H. E., & Hanson, J. (2018). The role of domestic markets in international technological innovation systems. Industry and Innovation, 25(5), 482-504.
Pavlovic, D., Obradovic, T., & Bjelica, D. (2018). Does competitiveness have anything to do with people?. Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies, 23(3), 33-46.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1997). The core competence of the corporation. In Strategische Unternehmungsplanung/Strategische Unternehmungsführung (pp. 969-987). Physica, Heidelberg.
Porter, M. (1990) The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review, 68(2), 73-93.
Penrose, E. (1995). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pesqueux, Y., & Damak‐Ayadi, S. (2005). Stakeholder theory in perspective. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society.
Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business ethics quarterly, 13(1), 25-41.
O’Riordan, L., & Fairbrass, J. (2014). Managing CSR stakeholder engagement: A new conceptual framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 125(1), 121-145.
Rasche, A., & Esser, D. E. (2006). From stakeholder management to stakeholder accountability. Journal of business ethics, 65(3), 251-267.
Reyes, G. E., & Useche, A. J. (2019). Competitiveness, economic growth and human development in Latin American and Caribbean countries 2006- 2015. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal.
Ribeiro, T. D. L. S. A., Kevin, K. S., Costa, B. K., & Urdan, A. T. (2020). Percepções de stakeholders sobre o turismo: um estudo no município de São Sebastião, SP. Turismo: Visão e Ação, 22, 334-354.
Ritchie, B. (1993). Crafting a destination vision. Putting the concept of resident responsive tourism into practice. Tourism Management, 14 (10), 379-389.
Ritchie, J. B., & Crouch, G. I. (1993). Competitiveness in international tourism: A framework for understanding and analysis. World Tourism Education and Research Centre, University of Calgary.
Ryan, C. (2002). Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability—issues of the ‘new tourism’. Tourism management, 23(1), 17-26.
Sautter, E. T., & Leisen, B. (1999). Managing stakeholders a tourism planning model. Annals of tourism research, 26(2), 312-328.Shahroudi, S., & Dery, M. (2011). Assessment of the efficiency of Guilan province’s hotels using two-stage DEA method. Australian Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences, 5(9), 1495-1502.
Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic management journal, 19(8), 729-753.
Sheehan, L. R., & Ritchie, J. B. (2005). Destination stakeholders exploring identity and salience. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 711-734.
Stoney, C., & Winstanley, D. (2001). Stakeholding: confusion or utopia? Mapping the conceptual terrain. Journal of Management studies, 38(5), 603-626.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
Van Eck, NJ, & Waltman, L. (2018). Manual do VOSviewer versão 1.6. 9. Métricas significativas do CWTS. Universiteit Leiden .
Vetter, D. M. (1981). Uma breve introdução à análise estatística com SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences). Revista Brasileira de Estatística, (161).
Vlados, C. e Chatzinikolaou, D. (2020). BRICS e reestruturação global: notas para o futuro próximo. Manag Econ Res J , 6 (S5), 12934.
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource‐based view of the firm. Strategic management journal, 5(2), 171-180.
Yakovleva, N., Sarkis, J., & Sloan, T. (2012). Sustainable benchmarking of supply chains: the case of the food industry. International journal of production research, 50(5), 1297-1317.
Yeo, G. T., Roe, M., & Dinwoodie, J. (2011). Measuring the competitiveness of container ports: logisticians' perspectives. European Journal of Marketing.
Żmuda, M. (2020). National Competitiveness and Sustainability: Friends or Foes. In The Future of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (pp. 291-307). Springer, Cham.
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Future Studies Research Journal: Trends and Strategies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms: the author(s) authorize(s) the publication of the text in the journal;
2. The author(s) ensure(s) that the contribution is original and unpublished and that it is not in the process of evaluation by another journal;
3. The journal is not responsible for the views, ideas and concepts presented in articles, and these are the sole responsibility of the author(s);
4. The publishers reserve the right to make textual adjustments and adapt texts to meet with publication standards.
5. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right to first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Atribuição NãoComercial 4.0 internacional, which allows the work to be shared with recognized authorship and initial publication in this journal.
6. Authors are allowed to assume additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
7. Authors are allowed and are encouraged to publish and distribute their work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on a personal web page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate positive effects, as well as increase the impact and citations of the published work (see the effect of Free Access) at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html• 8. Authors are able to use ORCID is a system of identification for authors. An ORCID identifier is unique to an individual and acts as a persistent digital identifier to ensure that authors (particularly those with relatively common names) can be distinguished and their work properly attributed.