Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Managing for Stakeholders Using Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Managing for shareholders means maximising the market value of a company by increasing their returns. Managing for stakeholders means simultaneously creating value for multiple parties, such as employees, government, suppliers, customers, the environment and even society as a whole, which requires a multiple-criteria decision-making approach. This paper develops social indicators to measure the value that a company has distributed to stakeholders since the foundation of the company, and then calculates its relative efficiency using data envelopment analysis (DEA). The accumulated value of the investments made by the shareholders, the subsidies received and the loans borrowed are proposed as inputs. The accumulated value of taxes paid by the company, personnel payments, interest payments to creditors, and purchases from suppliers are proposed as outputs. All values are adjusted for the time value of money at the valuation date. We chose a weighted DEA model because not all stakeholders are worth the same, obtaining the weights from the preferences of social investment experts using a multi-attribute decision-making technique. A practical case is presented, obtaining the relative efficiency of a sample of companies in creating value for five years since their foundation. We found a positive relationship between efficiency in generating value for shareholders and efficiency in generating value for some non-shareholders, although the results are sensitive to the outputs chosen. The proposed method is useful for social investors when they invest or for public administrations when they provide subsidy to entrepreneurs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The paper includes in a table the main data necessary to carry out the empirical study.

References

  • Alaimo, L., Ciacci, A., & Ivaldi, E. (2020). Measuring sustainable development by non-aggregative approach. Social Indicators Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-020-02357-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callens, I., & Tyteca, D. (1999). Towards indicators of sustainable development for firms: A productive efficiency perspective. Ecological Economics, 28(1), 41–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsen, L., and Bruggemann, R. (2019). Stakeholders’ Opinions: Food Sustainability as an Exemplary Case. Social Indicators Research, 1–14.

  • Castellet, L., & Molinos-Senante, M. (2016). Efficiency assessment of wastewater treatment plants: A data envelopment analysis approach integrating technical, economic, and environmental issues. Journal of Environmental Management, 167, 160–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro‐Mera, A., and Palacios‐González, M. M. (2019). Socially responsible investment: An analysis of the structure of preferences of savers. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management.

  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Tone, K. (2007). Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software. Springer Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dervaux, B., Leleu, H., Nogues, H., & Valdmanis, V. (2006). Assessing French nursing home efficiency: An indirect approach via budget-constrained DEA models. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 40(1), 70–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, R. F., & Forman, E. H. (1992). Group decision support with the analytic hierarchy process. Decision Support Systems, 8, 99–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California Management Review, 45(4), 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esteban-Sánchez, P., de la Cuesta-González, M., & Paredes-Gázquez, J. D. (2017). Corporate social performance and its relation with corporate financial performance: International evidence in the banking industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 1102–1110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foladi, S., Solimanpur, M., & Rezaee, M. J. (2020). Inverse dynamic data envelopment analysis for evaluating faculties of university with Quasi-Fixed Inputs. Social Indicators Research, 148(1), 323–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. New York Times Magazine, 122–126.

  • Gabriel, K. R. (1971). The biplot graphic display of matrices with application to principal component analysis. Biometrika, 58(3), 453–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global Reporting Initiative (2016). GRI 201: Economic Performance, available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/standards/download-the-standards/. Accessed 27 December 2020.

  • Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). On the methodological framework of composite indices: A review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Social Indicators Research, 141(1), 61–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Nieto, B., Serrano-Cinca, C., & Mar Molinero, C. (2009). Social efficiency in microfinance institutions. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60(1), 104–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez-Nieto, B., Serrano-Cinca, C., & Camón-Cala, J. (2016). A credit score system for socially responsible lending. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(4), 691–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halme, M., Joro, T., Korhonen, P., Salo, S., & Wallenius, J. (1999). A value efficiency approach to incorporating preference information in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 45, 103–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. S., Barney, J. B., Freeman, R. E., and Phillips, R. A. (Eds.). (2019). The Cambridge Handbook of Stakeholder Theory. Cambridge University Press.

  • Iparraguirre, J. L., & Ma, R. (2015). Efficiency in the provision of social care for older people: A three-stage data envelopment analysis using self-reported quality of life. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 49, 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (2001). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 14(3), 8–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keshavarz, E., and Toloo, M. (2018). A hybrid data envelopment analysis and multi‐attribute decision making approach to sustainability assessment. Expert Systems, e12347, pp 1–17.

  • Kramer, M. R., & Porter, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Arceiz, F. J., Bellostas, A. J., & Rivera, P. (2018). Twenty years of research on the relationship between economic and social performance: A meta-analysis approach. Social Indicators Research, 140(2), 453–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lozano, S., & Villa, G. (2009). Multiobjective target setting in data envelopment analysis using AHP. Computers and Operations Research, 36(2), 549–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Campillo, A., & Fernández-Santos, Y. (2017). What about the social efficiency in credit cooperatives? Evidence from Spain (2008–2014). Social Indicators Research, 131(2), 607–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meireles, M., Sanches, C., Ferreira, S., De Sordi, J. O., & Santos, G. (2016). Social efficiency of for-profit organizations in Brazil: An empirical analysis. Social Indicators Research, 128(2), 909–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulliner, E., Malys, N., & Maliene, V. (2016). Comparative analysis of MCDM methods for the assessment of sustainable housing affordability. Omega, 59, 146–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M., Jr. (1969). Social indicators and social accounts. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 2(2–4), 335–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and User Guide, Paris.

  • Phillips, R., Freeman, R. E., & Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 479–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M. J., & Grau, S. L. (2008). Evaluating the social value of charitable organizations: A conceptual foundation. Journal of Macromarketing, 28(2), 130–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafiaani, P., Dikopoulou, Z., Van Dael, M., Kuppens, T., Azadi, H., Lebailly, P., & Van Passel, S. (2020). Identifying social indicators for sustainability assessment of CCU technologies: A modified multi-criteria decision making. Social Indicators Research, 147(1), 15–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L. (1977). A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15(3), 234–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santisteban, J., & Mauricio, D. (2017). Systematic literature review of critical success factors of information technology startups. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 23(2), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, D., Catalano, G., Genco, M., Pancotti, C., Sirtori, E., Vignetti, S., and Bo, C. (2014). Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects. Economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014–2020.

  • Serrano Cinca, C., & Mar Molinero, C. (2004). Selecting DEA specifications and ranking units via PCA. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55, 521–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimshak, D. G., Lenard, M. L., & Klimberg, R. K. (2009). Incorporating quality into data envelopment analysis of nursing home performance: A case study. Omega, 37(3), 672–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (2002). Non-parametric tests of returns to scale. European Journal of Operational Research, 139(1), 115–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staessens, M., Kerstens, P. J., Bruneel, J., & Cherchye, L. (2019). Data envelopment analysis and social enterprises: Analysing performance, strategic orientation and mission drift. Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2), 325–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (2001). A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 130(3), 498–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tone, K. (2011). Slacks-based measure of efficiency. In: Handbook on Data Envelopment Analysis (pp. 195–209). Springer, Boston, MA.

  • Tone, K., & Tsutsui, M. (2009). Network DEA: A slacks-based measure approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(1), 243–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsutsui, M., & Goto, M. (2009). A multi-division efficiency evaluation of US electric power companies using a weighted slacks-based measure. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 43(3), 201–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitolla, F., Raimo, N., & Rubino, M. (2019). Appreciations, criticisms, determinants, and effects of integrated reporting: A systematic literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 518–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, L. (2018). A Cook’s tour: Towards a framework for measuring the social impact of social purpose organisations. European Journal of Operational Research, 268(3), 784–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widiarto, I., Emrouznejad, A., & Anastasakis, L. (2017). Observing choice of loan methods in not-for-profit microfinance using data envelopment analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 82, 278–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. B. (1938). The theory of investment value. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, T. H., Chih, H. L., Lin, M. C., and Wu, Y. H. (2019). A data envelopment analysis-based methodology adopting assurance region approach for measuring corporate social performance. Social Indicators Research, 1–30.

  • Zhou, H., Yang, Y., Chen, Y., & Zhu, J. (2018). Data envelopment analysis application in sustainability: The origins, development and future directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 264(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (code RTI2018-093483-B-I00), the Government of Aragon (code S38_17R) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Economy and Business Administration, University of Zaragoza, Gran Via, 2, 50005, Zaragoza, Spain

    Carlos Serrano-Cinca, Yolanda Fuertes-Callén & Beatriz Cuellar-Fernández

Authors
  1. Carlos Serrano-Cinca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yolanda Fuertes-Callén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Beatriz Cuellar-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have contributed equally

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Serrano-Cinca.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Serrano-Cinca, C., Fuertes-Callén, Y. & Cuellar-Fernández, B. Managing for Stakeholders Using Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques. Soc Indic Res 157, 581–601 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02671-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02671-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation