The relationship between corporate governance and employment relations has been viewed in two theoretical perspectives. On one hand, supporters of shareholder-oriented corporate governance have argued that a firm must maximize the interests of shareho...
The relationship between corporate governance and employment relations has been viewed in two theoretical perspectives. On one hand, supporters of shareholder-oriented corporate governance have argued that a firm must maximize the interests of shareholders and that the benefit of employees is subordinate to the benefit of shareholders. That is, the firm’s primary responsibility is to protect the interests of stockholders, and employees’ interests are only a secondary concern to the firm. On the other hand, stakeholder perspective contends that a firm must improve the interests of various stakeholders of the firm (such as employees, consumers, and the community) as well as shareholders. Thus, the stakeholder view argues that the firm must pursue a balance of the conflicting interests of various stakeholders of the firm.
Based on above two approaches at firm level, this study investigates the impact of the types of stakeholder management on industrial relations and firm performance through empirical analysis. To examine our research subjects, we manipulate the definition of stakeholder management. The stakeholder management consists of the institutions for shareholder protection and stakeholder protection. The levels of stakeholder protection were measured by employee participation and social stakeholder programs, and the institutions for shareholder rights were used as the measurement of the levels of shareholder protection.
Next, we categorize the types of stakeholder management by cluster analysis and examine their relationships with industrial relations and firm performance. The findings of the study are as follows.
First, the cluster analysis has found two clusters; the type of high shareholder orientation and high stakeholder orientation (Group A), and the type of low shareholder orientation and low stakeholder orientation (Group B).
Second, the companies in Group A show better industrial climates than those in Group B in the relationships between the types of stakeholder management on industrial relations.
Third, when the marginal effects of stakeholder management on firm performance were analyzed after controlling the average of firm performance over the past two years, the companies in Group A showed stronger performance than those in Group B.
The theoretical implications of the research are as follows.
While previous studies on stakeholder management aimed to find out the links between the elements of stakeholder management and firm performance, little research on stakeholder management has involved shareholders with diverse stakeholders.
As the concepts of shareholder-oriented management, sustainable management and corporate social responsibility have been widely recognized, it is considered important for businesses to give due regard to the interests of stakeholders.
In this study, a research model involving the perspectives of stakeholder and shareholder offers a comprehensive understanding framework of stakeholder management, which can contribute to relevant future studies.
The empirical implications of the study are as follows.
Shareholder protection and stakeholder protection institutionalized in South Korean businesses do not seem to be mutually exclusive, which could reflect the idea that shareholders and all relevant stakeholders are not seen as a group of conflicts of interests.
Though a conceptual approach to stakeholders classifies stakeholders into employees, shareholders, and other parties of interest, parallel protections for shareholders and stakeholders are implemented in business practices.