Jeff Frooman

Stakeholder Influence Strategies: The Roles of Structural and Demographic Determinants:

Using Frooman’s typology of stakeholder influence strategies, this research examines the strategies that stakeholders select to exert influence on a firm. Using an experimental approach, the responses of actual environmental leaders to a series of hypothetical vignettes were examined. The results of the experiment suggest how both structural and demographic variables can act as determinants of strategy choice along with how these two types of variables may both complement and inhibit one another. Specifically, the results suggest that repertoires of strategies play a critical role in stakeholder behavior. Demographic variables appear to define the repertoires of strategies the stakeholder will typically choose among, whereas structural variables further refine choice from within that repertoire.

Transformational and passive avoidant leadership as determinants of absenteeism

Purpose – Does leadership style affect absenteeism in a company? The purpose of this paper is to contrast the effects of two leadership styles – transformational and passive avoidant – on absenteeism, both legitimate and illegitimate, as mediated by job satisfaction.Design/methodology/approach – A self‐report questionnaire was completed by a sample of 120 employees of a national mail delivery company. Hierarchical regressions were used to analyze the data.Findings – It was found that transformational leadership decreases illegitimate absenteeism, while passive avoidant leadership increases it. In regard to legitimate absenteeism, transformational leadership is shown to have no effect, while passive avoidant leadership is shown to be negatively related to it. Together, the findings regarding passive avoidant leaders suggest their subordinates tend to come to work when ill (presenteeism), but stay away from work when well (illegitimate absenteeism).Practical implications – For managers trying to reduce the ...

Unknown Knowns and Known Unknowns: Framing the Role of Organizational Learning in Corporate Social Responsibility Development

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is now widely seen as an increasingly significant concern for firms because of moral, relational and instrumental motives. Nevertheless, practical aspects and challenges associated with CSR development in firms remains only partially understood. In this setting, the organizational learning (OL) discipline is recurrently put forward as key in the pursuit and successful development of CSR, but the existing literature remains disjointed. This study critically reviews the existing literature to conceptualize how research to date has approached CSR development in terms of OL, and to provide a two-dimensional structuring framework of the role of OL in CSR development that emphasizes key OL-related aspects supporting CSR development and goes beyond an organization-centric viewpoint to consider not only learning within the organization, but also from others, and with others. In particular, the authors identify key learning processes and sub-processes and critical areas that remain understudied. Overall, the authors propose a macro view of the work done to date at the intersection of OL and CSR, and in doing so help make the ‘OL for CSR development’ scholarship more recognizable as a sub-discipline.

Reframing the Moral Limits of Markets Debate: Social Domains, Values, Allocation Methods

What should and what should not be for sale in a society? This is the central question in the Moral Limits of Markets (MLM) debate, which is conducted by a group of business ethicists and liberal egalitarian political theorists. These MLM theorists, which we will dub ‘market moralists,’ all put forward a specific version of the argument that while the market is well suited to allocate some categories of goods and services, it is undesirable for the allocation of other such categories. We argue that the current MLM debate is too much framed in terms of a market/non-market dichotomy. Moreover, authors tend to distinguish insufficiently between values such as freedom, equality, and efficiency, and allocation methods such as the market, the queue, and rationing. We introduce a new conceptual scheme consisting of societal domains, values, and allocation methods to provide a better structure for this debate. The argument is illustrated from the education and healthcare domains.

Theorizing the Moral Limits of Markets: Social Domains, Values, Mechanisms

The ever-increasing impact of the market in modern societies has triggered a debate among political theorists on ‘the moral limits of markets’ (MLM). This paper develops a new conceptual division into social domains, societal values and distributive mechanisms so as to apply it to the current MLM debate. We argue, first, that this debate can be improved using the concept of domain differentiation, which was originally introduced by Weber, and elaborated by authors such as Walzer. Second, we argue that each separate social domain has a specific value (or set of values) to it. Some of these values will play a role in more than one social domain, but each domain will have its own characteristic configuration of values. Third, we argue that individual values will each be supported by their own mechanism(s). The result of applying this new scheme is that the recent discussion about markets infringing upon ever more new areas of society needs to be conducted more in regard to values such as efficiency, freedom ...