Prof. Dr. Sybille Sachs

Transkript

1 Marktorientierte ti t Stakeholder Prof. Dr. Universität Zürich

2 Course Outline Business & Society Neudefinition der Rolle der Unternehmung Einführung Normatives Stakeholder Management: Stakeholder View Corporate Social Responsibility & Performance Issue Management Business Ethics ab Ressourcenbasierte Stakeholder Marktliche Stakeholder ode Gesellschaftliche Stakeholder

3 Agenda Marktorientierte Stakeholder Gesellschaftliche Stakeholder Gastvortrag Michael Burkhardt, Sunrise 3

4 Markt- und Ressourcenansatz (Schwerpunkte) Marketbased View Branchenstruktur Positionierung Wettbewerbsvorteil Fähigkeiten / Kompetenzen Ressourcen Resource- based view 4

5 Basic Assumptions of the Industry Structuret View (ISV) based on Theory of the Firm Firm as an actor in the competitive environment Managers as key actors: seeking and exploiting favorable positions and creating, maintaining and exploiting imperfect competitive conditions Focus on rivalry and superior position against rivals and stakeholders: threat mentality Product-markets as coordination mechanism New developments: CSR, as a broad understanding of the interrelationship between a corporation and society Sachs & Rühli (2011) 5 Prof. Dr.

6 Branchenanalyse nach Porter (1980, 1985) Grundideen: Effizienzhypothese i der Marktorientierung ti Beiträge aus dem Gebiet der Industrieökonomik ik Porter hat ein Analysekonzept entwickelt, das von der Idee ausgeht, der strategische t Erfolg einer Unternehmung sei primär von der Branchenstruktur bestimmt. 6

7 Branchenanalyse nach Porter (1980, 1985) Die Wettbewerbs- und Konkurrenzanalyse sind daher die zentralen Elemente einer strategischen Umweltanalyse. 7

8 Branchenanalyse nach Porter (1980, 1985) Wettbewerbsintensität und Gewinne Gewinne Wettbewerbsintensität 8

9 Wettbewerbsanalyse nach Porter (1979; 1980) Die 5 Determinanten der Wettbewerbsintensität Potentielle neue Konkurrenten Bedrohung durch neue Konkurrenten Verhandlungsstärke der Lieferanten Lieferanten Wettbewerb in der Branche Rivalitäten unter bestehenden Unternehmen Verhandlungsmacht der Abnehmer Abnehmer Ersatzprodukte Bedrohung durch Ersatzprodukte und -dienste 9

10 Porters (1979, 1980) Wettbewerbs-determinanten Bedrohung durch neue Konkurrenten Eintrittsbarrieren Economies of scale Produktdifferenzierung Markenidentität Wechselkosten (switching costs) Kapitalanforderungen Zugang zum Vertrieb Absolute Kostenvorteile Lernkurven Zugang zu notwendigen Inputs Produktionsdesign mit tiefen Kosten Staatliche Politik Verhandlungsstärke der Lieferanten Determinanten der Lieferantenmacht Differenzierung von Inputs Wechselkosten der Lieferanten und Firmen in der Branche Präsenz von Ersatzinputs Lieferantenkonzentration Bedeutung der Menge für die Lieferanten Kosten relativ zum gesamten Einkauf in der Branche Auswirkungen der Inputs auf Kosten oder Differenzierung Bedrohung durch Vorwärtsintegration im Vergleich zur Gefahr der Rückwärtsintegration durch Firmen in der Branche 10 Rivalität unter bestehenden Unternehmen Rivalitätsdeterminanten Branchenwachstum Fixe (oder Lager-) Kosten / Mehrwert Zeitweilige Überkapazität Produktdifferenzierungen Markenidentität Wechselkosten (switching costs) Konzentration und Ausgewogenheit Informationelle Komplexität Vielfalt der Wettbewerber Unternehmensrisiken Austrittsbarrieren i Bedrohung durch Ersatzprodukte Determinanten von Ersatzprodukten Relativer Preis der Ersatzprodukte Wechselkosten (switching costs) B&S-Vorlesung, Neigung des Käufers Universität zum Ersatzprodukt Zürich - Prof. Dr. Verhandlungsmacht der Abnehmer Determinanten der Abnehmermacht Verhandlungsmacht Käuferkonzentration vs. Firmenkonzentration Kaufvolumen Switching costs des Käufers im Vergleich zu den switching costs der Unternehmung Käuferinformation Möglichkeit zur Rückwärtsintegration Ersatzprodukte

11 Strategy and Society (Porter & Kramer, 2006) a new way to look at the relationship between business and society that does not treat corporate success and social welfare as a zero-sum game. Porter and Kramer suggest a framework companies can use to identify all of the effects, both positive and negative, they have on society. Proponents of CSR have used four arguments: - Moral obligation; ; to do the right thing. - Sustainability; environmental and community stewardship. - License to operate; companies need tacit or explicit it permission from all stakeholders to do business. - Reputation; used by many companies to justify CSR initiatives. 11

12 Strategy and Society (Porter & Kramer, 2006) All four schools of thoughts share the same weakness: They focus on the tension between business and society rather than on their interdependence. Integrating Business and Society: broad understanding of the interrelationship between a corporation and society while at the same time anchoring it in the strategies and activities of specific companies. - Identifying the points of intersection - Choosing which social issues to address - Creating a corporate social agenda - Integrating inside-out and outside-in practices - Creating a social dimension to the value proposition 12

13 Strategy and Society (Porter & Kramer, 2006) Integrating business and social needs takes more than good intentions and strong leadership. It requires adjustments in organization, reporting relationships, and incentives. The most important t thing a corporation can do for society, and for any community, is contribute to a prosperous economy. Stop thinking in terms of corporate social responsibility and start thinking in terms of corporate social integration. 13

14 Strategy t and Society Porter (1985) 14

15 Das Stakeholdernetzwerk t k Unternehmen sind in ein Stakeholder Netzwerk eingebettet. Die Stakeholder dieses Netzwerkes haben nicht nur Beziehungen zur Unternehmung selbst, sondern pflegen auch untereinander Beziehungen. Diese Beziehungen können indirekt wiederum den Wertschöpfungsprozess des Unternehmens beeinflussen. 15

16 Stakeholder networks Sachs & Rühli (2011) 16 Prof. Dr.

17 ISV - License to compete as a perspective of the Stakeholder Paradigm The traditional ISV The License to compete perspective Distribution of the whole residual profit to shareholders (capital owners) Distribution of value to contributing stakeholders Exploitation of imperfect Superior value creation based on the markets and fighting for rents ability to realize cooperation advantages and to motivate value creation in and between the networks Positioning of the firm in the industry Positioning in and among the stakeholder networks: benchmarking Attractivenessofthe the industry Nature and attractiveness of stakeholder networks Contributions from direct and indirect Sachs & Rühli (2011) stakeholders 17 Prof. Dr.

18 Requirements in the perspective p of the license to compete Both firms and stakeholders should have opportunities and incentives to contribute their potentials to mutual value creation in order to develop superior value for all involved parties. Developing transparent benchmarks of stakeholder networks is essential so that firms and the stakeholders can favor specific networks for superior value creation. Competition is seen as a stimulant for the parties involved. Mutual value creation means the interaction of a cast of stakeholders as indispensable contributors t and receivers of benefit and risks. A one-sided orientation towards competition based on reaping rent has to be overcome in all markets. 18 Prof. Dr.

19 Gesellschaftliche h Stakeholder Prof. Dr. Universität Zürich

20 License to operate Social and political environment Corporations contribute to integration and growth of society Company activities must be accepted by social and political stakeholders 20 Prof. Dr.

21 Social and Political Stakeholders Regulators Society Politicians Government Union NGO Media Social partners Local communities 21

22 Agents Provocateur im Stakeholder-Netzwerk Ein Agent provocateur ist derjenige stakeholder im Netzwerk, welcher unvorhersehbar und grundsätzlich den Wertschöpfungsprozess einer Unternehmung beeinflussen kann - im positiven wie im negativen Sinne. 22

23 Wake-Up Call Brent Spar Between February and April media campaign initiated by Greenpeace Late April: Greenpeace activists occupy Brent Spar Brief second Greenpeace occupation because of the proceeding of the approved disposal plan 23

24 Wake-Up Call Brent Spar Massive public outrage in Europe Greenpeace as the information source despite some inadequate information Consumer boycotts in several countries Reaction of prominent politicians Shell: We will change... 24

25 Shells Stakeholder-Netzwerk im Fallbeispiel Brent Spar Gesellschaftliche h und politische Stakeholder German Government British Government Shell Customers UK G etc. Greenpeace Other Interest Media 25 Groups

26 Greater Transparency of Shell Importance of stakeholders high medium reactive proactive interactive Handling of soft issues Five areas of responsibilities (stakeholder groups): Shareholders Employees Customers Business partners Society low positive neutral negative Attitude of stakeholders 26

27 General Business Principles of Shell 1997 To society: to conduct business as responsible corporate members of society, to observe the laws of the countries in which they operate, to express support for fundamental human rights in line with the legitimate role of business and to give proper p regard to health, safety and the environment consistent with their commitment to contribute to sustainable development. 27

28 Reputation: A Licence to Operate Business Society Shell Energy Environment 28

29 Nutzen- / Risikenpotentiale von STH-Beziehungen Sozio- politische Stakeholder High Exposure Lobbying Politischer Druck Politisches Zusammenspiel Populäres Anliegen Sozialverantwortung Sponsoring 29

30 Vergleich Bruttoinlandprodukt Umsatz Bruttoinlandprodukt in Mia. $ (2004 bzw. 2005) Schweiz: 370 Belgien: 373 Österreich: 298 Umsatz in Mia. $ (2005) 400 Exxon Mobil: 357 Shell: 307 Wal-Mart: 285 Portugal: 189 Irland: 180 General Electric: 150 Nestlé: Staat Unternehmung 30

31 Wachstum der Anzahl NGOs mit ECOSOC-Konsultativ-Status* Number of NGOs 2,500 2,000 * ECOSOC: Economic and Social Council of the United States 1,500 1,000 All NGOs 500 General and Special Status General Status

32 Requirements in the perspective of the license to operate (I) (Sachs, Rühli 2011) The society is the end and the economy is the means for mutual value creation. The economy exists to serve the quality of life, and not to exploit human beings. For example this requires new incentive structures in firms and even in stakeholder organizations, replacing the one-sided financial incentives. Firms and stakeholders do not always possess the necessary organizational capabilities to fulfill their expectations ti and potentials ti in mutual value creation. The fostering of organizational capabilities of all involved parties in stakeholder networks is thus fundamental for mutual value creation. 32 Prof. Dr.

33 Requirements in the perspective of the license to operate (II) (Sachs, Rühli 2011) The forms and kinds of products and services, and the solutions of issues should reflect the sustainable improvement of the quality of life for all human beings and the sustainability of the natural world, and not a systematic advantage for firms or one stakeholder over others, for long periods of time. 33 Prof. Dr.

34 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight INTENSION The article propagates a new kind of thinking in the economy called shared value. The aim is to leave the way of the outdated neoclassical thinking. It also wants that state-led regulation is decreasing. The authors propose that business shall take the lead in a re-established thinking of a harmonic relationship between business and society. Acting in this way would lead to larger profit for both, business and society. For more details see under proposition. 34

35 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight METHOD The paper is conceptual. Some references to theoretical ti literature t are made. There is no empirical research. Different illustrative examples from companies practices are given. 35

36 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight PROPOSITION I Old thinking in companies The authors want to show that capitalism is in need of a next evolutionary step. They state that business has been viewed as a major cause of social, environmental, and economic problems (64). Trust and legitimacy of business has fallen to deep levels. The reason is to be found in an outdated approach to value creation [ ]. [Companies] continue to view value creation narrowly, optimizing short-term financial performance [ ] (64). 36

37 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight PROPOSITION II Shared value New forms of creating value are needed. According the authors The solution lies in the principle of shared value, which involves creating economic in a way that also creates value for society by addressing its needs and challenges. Business must reconnect company success with social progress (64). By bringing business and society together again business has to take the lead. The concept of shared value [ ] leads to a bigger pie of revenue and profits [ ] (65). Therefore it is possible that both, business and society profit more. Moreover, the concept is based on need of growth: It enables achieving the objective of economic growth by reconnecting business and society. 37

38 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight PROPOSITION III No trade-offs: Harmonic relationship between business and society (1) It is important to recognize that economic benefits are going harmonically hand in hand with societal benefits according to the shared value-idea (and not, as stated by neoclassical theory that more societal benefit leads to a lower economic one [negative relationship]). In this way it is possible to move beyond trade-offs between these two kinds of benefits because they have a positive relationship. 38

39 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight PROPOSITION IV No trade-offs: Harmonic relationship between business and society (2) Furthermore, the authors say that governments also support trade-off thinking by regulating through laws: Governments and NGOs often assume that trade-offs between economic and social benefits are inevitable, exacerbating these trade-offs through their approaches (72). As example they name the command-and-control approach often applied in the environmental policy. 39

40 4E-Analyse Creating Shared Value (Porter/Kramer 2011) Insight APPLICATION The illustrative examples try to show existing cases that have implemented the concept of shared value (or at least something similar). But it is, out of different reasons, difficult to judge if the given examples really have implemented what the authors call shared value. The main reason is that the concept is on a quite high abstraction level where many specifications aren t made yet (definitions, precise roles of and relations between actors). Without this it is not possible to operationalize the concept and to give, based thereon, concrete guidelines for implementing it in practice. Thus for an application to be possible, it is necessary to explicate the concept more in detail. 40

41 Literaturt Obligatorische Literatur: Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2006): Strategy t & Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility, Harvard Business Review, 84(12): Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2011): Creating Shared Value, Harvard a Business Review, 89(1/2):

42 Literaturt Zitierte und empfohlene Literatur Porter, M. E. (1979): How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy, t Harvard Business Review, March-April: Porter, M. E. (1980): Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors. o Free Press: New York. Porter, M. E. (1985): Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance. Free Press: New York. Porter, M. E. (1991): Towards a Dynamic Theory of Strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 1(Special Winter Issue): Porter, M.E. (1996): What is Strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6): Porter. M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2006): Strategy & Society. Harvard Business Review, Dec. 2006: Post, J. E., Preston, L. E. & Sachs, S. (2002): Redefining the Corporation: Stakeholder Management and Organizational Wealth. Stanford: Stanford University Press: Kapitel 2. Sachs, S., Rühli, E. & Kern, I. (2007): Lizenz zum Managen. Mit Stakeholdern zum Erfolg: Herausforderungen und Good Practices. Bern: Haupt. 42

43 Literaturt Zitierte und empfohlene Literatur Sachs, S., Rühli, E. & Maurer, M. (2006): Strategic Management: A new Challenging Perspective. Paper presented at the 66th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management (AoM), Atlanta, Georgia. Sachs, S., Rühli, E. (2011): Stakeholders Matter A New Paradigm for Strategy in Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 43