Loading…
Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword?
Porter and Kramer (Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92, 2006; Harv Bus Rev 89(1/2), 66–77, 2011) introduced 'shared value' as a 'new conception of capitalism,' claiming it is a powerful driver of economic growth and reconciliation between business and society. The idea has generated strong...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Journal of business ethics 2016-08, Vol.137 (2), p.231-267 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493 |
| container_end_page | 267 |
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 231 |
| container_title | Journal of business ethics |
| container_volume | 137 |
| creator | Dembek, Krzysztof Singh, Prakash Bhakoo, Vikram |
| description | Porter and Kramer (Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92, 2006; Harv Bus Rev 89(1/2), 66–77, 2011) introduced 'shared value' as a 'new conception of capitalism,' claiming it is a powerful driver of economic growth and reconciliation between business and society. The idea has generated strong interest in business and academia; however, its theoretical precepts have not been rigorously assessed. In this paper, we provide a systematic and thorough analysis of shared value, focusing on its ontological and epistemological properties. Our review highlights that 'shared value' has spread into the language of multiple disciplines, but that its current conceptualization is vague, and it presents important discrepancies in the way it is defined and operationalized, such that it is more of a buzzword than a substantive concept. It also overlaps with many other (related) concepts and lacks empirical grounding. We offer recommendations for defining and measuring the concept, take a step toward disentangling it from related concepts, and identify relevant theories and research methods that would facilitate extending the knowledge frontier on shared value. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10551-015-2554-z |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1878788265</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24755774</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24755774</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFZ_gAdhwYuX6E6ym028iBa_oCLU6nXZJJM2Jc3W3cRif71bIiIenDnM5XlnhoeQY2DnwJi8cMCEgICBCEIheLDZIQMQMgpYnMpdMmAQy4ALzvfJgXML5ksAH5DJuGrR6razSCf4UeGampK-zLXFgr7pusNLek2nczQW2yrXNR2ZJsdVS42lmj7pRs9wiU1Lb7rNZm1scXVI9kpdOzz6nkPyenc7HT0E4-f7x9H1OMh5JNsgKbISUp1mPEk4YJmJECETEGeQlUxGOtK6SEWh8zCRBRQhpmWcZoJlOWPA02hIzvq9K2veO3StWlYux7rWDZrOKUik7ySMhUdP_6AL09nGf-cpYLGUoUg8BT2VW-OcxVKtbLXU9lMBU1vLqresvGW1taw2PhP2GefZZob21-Z_Qid9aOFaY3-uhFwKISWPvgDYaIi5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1810677258</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword?</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global (ProQuest)</source><source>Art, Design & Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Springer Link</source><source>BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate)</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Dembek, Krzysztof ; Singh, Prakash ; Bhakoo, Vikram</creator><creatorcontrib>Dembek, Krzysztof ; Singh, Prakash ; Bhakoo, Vikram</creatorcontrib><description>Porter and Kramer (Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92, 2006; Harv Bus Rev 89(1/2), 66–77, 2011) introduced 'shared value' as a 'new conception of capitalism,' claiming it is a powerful driver of economic growth and reconciliation between business and society. The idea has generated strong interest in business and academia; however, its theoretical precepts have not been rigorously assessed. In this paper, we provide a systematic and thorough analysis of shared value, focusing on its ontological and epistemological properties. Our review highlights that 'shared value' has spread into the language of multiple disciplines, but that its current conceptualization is vague, and it presents important discrepancies in the way it is defined and operationalized, such that it is more of a buzzword than a substantive concept. It also overlaps with many other (related) concepts and lacks empirical grounding. We offer recommendations for defining and measuring the concept, take a step toward disentangling it from related concepts, and identify relevant theories and research methods that would facilitate extending the knowledge frontier on shared value.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-4544</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0697</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2554-z</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBUEDJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Assessed values ; Base of the pyramid ; Business and Management ; Business entities ; Business Ethics ; Business models ; Capitalism ; Concept formation ; Confucianism ; Corporate responsibility ; Corporate social responsibility ; Corporations ; Economic development ; Economic value ; Education ; Epistemology ; Ethics ; Green businesses ; Literature reviews ; Management ; Management theory ; Ontology ; Philosophy ; Property ; Quality of Life Research ; Relationship banking ; Social innovation ; Social responsibility ; Society ; Stakeholders ; Strategic management ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of business ethics, 2016-08, Vol.137 (2), p.231-267</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1810677258/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1810677258?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,11715,11933,12874,12888,21415,21422,27899,27957,27958,33258,33259,33646,33647,34020,34021,34810,34811,36085,36086,36095,36096,43768,43983,44235,44396,44398,58593,58826,74578,74825,75085,75250,75252</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dembek, Krzysztof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Prakash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhakoo, Vikram</creatorcontrib><title>Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword?</title><title>Journal of business ethics</title><addtitle>J Bus Ethics</addtitle><description>Porter and Kramer (Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92, 2006; Harv Bus Rev 89(1/2), 66–77, 2011) introduced 'shared value' as a 'new conception of capitalism,' claiming it is a powerful driver of economic growth and reconciliation between business and society. The idea has generated strong interest in business and academia; however, its theoretical precepts have not been rigorously assessed. In this paper, we provide a systematic and thorough analysis of shared value, focusing on its ontological and epistemological properties. Our review highlights that 'shared value' has spread into the language of multiple disciplines, but that its current conceptualization is vague, and it presents important discrepancies in the way it is defined and operationalized, such that it is more of a buzzword than a substantive concept. It also overlaps with many other (related) concepts and lacks empirical grounding. We offer recommendations for defining and measuring the concept, take a step toward disentangling it from related concepts, and identify relevant theories and research methods that would facilitate extending the knowledge frontier on shared value.</description><subject>Assessed values</subject><subject>Base of the pyramid</subject><subject>Business and Management</subject><subject>Business entities</subject><subject>Business Ethics</subject><subject>Business models</subject><subject>Capitalism</subject><subject>Concept formation</subject><subject>Confucianism</subject><subject>Corporate responsibility</subject><subject>Corporate social responsibility</subject><subject>Corporations</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Economic value</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Green businesses</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Management theory</subject><subject>Ontology</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Property</subject><subject>Quality of Life Research</subject><subject>Relationship banking</subject><subject>Social innovation</subject><subject>Social responsibility</subject><subject>Society</subject><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>Strategic management</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0167-4544</issn><issn>1573-0697</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1Lw0AQhhdRsFZ_gAdhwYuX6E6ym028iBa_oCLU6nXZJJM2Jc3W3cRif71bIiIenDnM5XlnhoeQY2DnwJi8cMCEgICBCEIheLDZIQMQMgpYnMpdMmAQy4ALzvfJgXML5ksAH5DJuGrR6razSCf4UeGampK-zLXFgr7pusNLek2nczQW2yrXNR2ZJsdVS42lmj7pRs9wiU1Lb7rNZm1scXVI9kpdOzz6nkPyenc7HT0E4-f7x9H1OMh5JNsgKbISUp1mPEk4YJmJECETEGeQlUxGOtK6SEWh8zCRBRQhpmWcZoJlOWPA02hIzvq9K2veO3StWlYux7rWDZrOKUik7ySMhUdP_6AL09nGf-cpYLGUoUg8BT2VW-OcxVKtbLXU9lMBU1vLqresvGW1taw2PhP2GefZZob21-Z_Qid9aOFaY3-uhFwKISWPvgDYaIi5</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Dembek, Krzysztof</creator><creator>Singh, Prakash</creator><creator>Bhakoo, Vikram</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K8~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword?</title><author>Dembek, Krzysztof ; Singh, Prakash ; Bhakoo, Vikram</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Assessed values</topic><topic>Base of the pyramid</topic><topic>Business and Management</topic><topic>Business entities</topic><topic>Business Ethics</topic><topic>Business models</topic><topic>Capitalism</topic><topic>Concept formation</topic><topic>Confucianism</topic><topic>Corporate responsibility</topic><topic>Corporate social responsibility</topic><topic>Corporations</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Economic value</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Green businesses</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Management theory</topic><topic>Ontology</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Property</topic><topic>Quality of Life Research</topic><topic>Relationship banking</topic><topic>Social innovation</topic><topic>Social responsibility</topic><topic>Society</topic><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>Strategic management</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dembek, Krzysztof</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Prakash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhakoo, Vikram</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>DELNET Management Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health Management Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database (Proquest)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of business ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dembek, Krzysztof</au><au>Singh, Prakash</au><au>Bhakoo, Vikram</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of business ethics</jtitle><stitle>J Bus Ethics</stitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>137</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>267</epage><pages>231-267</pages><issn>0167-4544</issn><eissn>1573-0697</eissn><coden>JBUEDJ</coden><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>Porter and Kramer (Harv Bus Rev 84(12):78–92, 2006; Harv Bus Rev 89(1/2), 66–77, 2011) introduced 'shared value' as a 'new conception of capitalism,' claiming it is a powerful driver of economic growth and reconciliation between business and society. The idea has generated strong interest in business and academia; however, its theoretical precepts have not been rigorously assessed. In this paper, we provide a systematic and thorough analysis of shared value, focusing on its ontological and epistemological properties. Our review highlights that 'shared value' has spread into the language of multiple disciplines, but that its current conceptualization is vague, and it presents important discrepancies in the way it is defined and operationalized, such that it is more of a buzzword than a substantive concept. It also overlaps with many other (related) concepts and lacks empirical grounding. We offer recommendations for defining and measuring the concept, take a step toward disentangling it from related concepts, and identify relevant theories and research methods that would facilitate extending the knowledge frontier on shared value.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s10551-015-2554-z</doi><tpages>37</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0167-4544 |
| ispartof | Journal of business ethics, 2016-08, Vol.137 (2), p.231-267 |
| issn | 0167-4544 1573-0697 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1878788265 |
| source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ABI/INFORM Global (ProQuest); Art, Design & Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); ABI/INFORM Global; Politics Collection; Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); PAIS Index; Springer Link; BSC - Ebsco (Business Source Ultimate); JSTOR |
| subjects | Assessed values Base of the pyramid Business and Management Business entities Business Ethics Business models Capitalism Concept formation Confucianism Corporate responsibility Corporate social responsibility Corporations Economic development Economic value Education Epistemology Ethics Green businesses Literature reviews Management Management theory Ontology Philosophy Property Quality of Life Research Relationship banking Social innovation Social responsibility Society Stakeholders Strategic management Studies |
| title | Literature Review of Shared Value: A Theoretical Concept or a Management Buzzword? |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T15%3A39%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Literature%20Review%20of%20Shared%20Value:%20A%20Theoretical%20Concept%20or%20a%20Management%20Buzzword?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20business%20ethics&rft.au=Dembek,%20Krzysztof&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.volume=137&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=267&rft.pages=231-267&rft.issn=0167-4544&rft.eissn=1573-0697&rft.coden=JBUEDJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10551-015-2554-z&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24755774%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-8dbf19a9b48841efb52e1b516b1bf073a3aad95dac287d1d2e9f69b50bc001493%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1810677258&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24755774&rfr_iscdi=true |