Main Article Content

Rui Jorge Rodrigues da Silva
Pedro Borges


The Stakeholder Theory breaks away from classical notions of the management of the time to
bring ideas that are so innovative that they are still used today. The main one is the one that
proposes the extension of the conception of who are the key pieces for a company. The present
investigation sought to explore and analyze the literature related to the Stakeholder Theory,
using bibliometric analysis as methodology. This study aims to use a systematic approach to
perform the literature review and a mapping of the most relevant research studies. In this
sense, a rigorous research protocol based on scientific documents published in the Web of
Science database was used. The collected documents are located within a time basis between
1989 and 2020. In the result obtained (n=155), only articles that were analyzed using the R
Bibliometrix tool were included. The analysis of these publications points to a growing trend in
the publication of articles on the Stakeholder Theory. Through the bibliometric analysis of the
results of the global research we highlight the most cited authors, the publications of the authors
over time, and we also highlight the main research themes and countries where studies were
conducted. On the other hand, we also highlight the network of collaboration between
institutions, authors, and countries over time


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

Article Details

How to Cite
Rodrigues da Silva, R. J., & Borges, P. (2023). STAKEHOLDER THEORY—SYSTEMIC LITERATURE REVIEW. E3 — Revista De Economia, Empresas E Empreendedores Na CPLP, 9(1), 57–75.
Author Biographies

Rui Jorge Rodrigues da Silva, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro

Rui Silva (University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro –UTAD, CETRAD – Vila Real – Portugal. Email <> ) holds a PhD in Management from the University of Beira Interior (Covilhã – Portugal). He is assistant teach-er of Accounting, Accounting Management and Finance in UTAD (Portugal). He conducts research about Accounting, Gamification in Accounting, Universi-ty Partenerships, Strategic Management; Quality Systems; Write and Oral Ac-counting Students Communication in CETRAD (Centre for Transdiciplinary Development Studies, of UTAD. He has done fieldwork research in University (UTAD and Almeria) and Polytechnic Institute (Porto) about Accounting and Finance. He was awarded in 2018 best investi-gation project in In Doctoral Consortium – Universidade de Évora. He was awarded in 2018 the best conference paper in XX Seminário Hispano Luso de Economia Empresarial. Huelva, Spain. In 2019 he was awarded the best paper III International Forum on Management - Value Creation and Local Herit-age. In same year he was awarded the best paper in XX Luso Spanish Con-ference on Scientific ManagemenT. Bragança,Portugal. He is reviewer in sev-eral Scopus and JCR international journals.

Pedro Borges, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro

Phd Student

Master in Management

Economics Degree

Financial Director in UTAD


Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2011). Strategic management of stakeholders: Theory and practice. Long Range Planning, 44(3), 179–196.

Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science

Banerjee, S., Dasgupta, S., & Kim, Y. (2008). Buyer-supplier relationships and the stakeholder theory of capital structure. Journal of Finance, 63(5), 2507–2552.

Barney, J. B., & Harrison, J. S. (2020). Stakeholder Theory at the Crossroads Business & Society, 59(2), 203–212.

Bosse, D. A.; Coughlan, R. (2016). Stakeholder relationship bonds. Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), 1197–1222.

Bridoux, F., & Stoelhorst, J. W. (2014). Microfoundations for Stakeholder Theory: managing stakeholders with heterogeneous motives. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), 107–125.

Cervo, A.; Bervian, P., & Silva, R. (2007). Metodologia Científica. São Paulo: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Crane, B. (2020). Revisiting who, when, and why stakeholders matter: Trust and stakeholder connectedness. Business & Society, 59(2), 263–286.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. e. (1995). The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation - concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

Freeman, R. E., Phillips, R., & Sisodia, R. (2020). Tensions in Stakeholder Theory. Business & Society, 59(2, SI), 213–231.

Freeman, R. E.; Harrison, J. S. & Wicks, A. C. (2007). Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation, and Success. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

Freudenreich, B., Luedeke-Freund, F., & Schaltegger, S. (2020). A Stakeholder Theory Perspective on Business Models: Value Creation for Sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 166(1), 3–18.

Friedman, A. L. & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.

Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2002). Developing Stakeholder Theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39(1), 1–21.

Gibson, K. (2000). The moral basis of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 26(3), 245–257.

Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2013). Stakeholder Theory, Value, and Firm Performance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 97–124.

Harrison, J. S., Freeman, R. E., & Abreu, M. C. S. (2015). Stakeholder theory as an ethical approach to effective management: Applying the theory to multiple contexts. Revista Brasileira de Gestao de Negocios, 17(55), 858–869.

Hoerisch, J., Freeman, R. E., & Schaltegger, S. (2014). Applying Stakeholder Theory in Sustainability Management: Links, Similarities, Dissimilarities, and a Conceptual Framework. Organization & Environment, 27(4), 328–346.

Jawahar, I. M., & McLaughlin, G. L. (2001). Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: An organizational life cycle approach. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 397–414.

Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256.

Jones, T M, & Wicks, A. C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 206–221.

Jones, Thomas M, Harrison, J. S., & Felps, W. (2018). How applying instrumental stakeholder theory can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 371–391.

Laplume, A. O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R. A. (2008). Stakeholder Theory: Reviewing a Theory That Moves Us. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1152–1189.

Mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975.

Marcoux, A. M. (2003). A fiduciary argument against stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 1–24.

Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. & Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

Orts, E. W., & Strudler, A. (2002). The ethical and environmental limits of stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 215–233.

Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 403–445.

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

Pinto, J. (2019). Key to Effective Organizational Performance Management Lies at the Intersection of Paradox Theory and Stakeholder Theory. International Journal of Management Reviews, 21(2, SI), 185–208.

Plichta, J. (2019). The co-management and stakeholders theory as a useful approach to manage the problem of overtourism in historical cities—illustrated with an example of Krakow. International Journal of Tourism Cities, 5(4, SI), 685–699.

Richardson, R. (2008). Pesquisa social: métodos e técnicas. São Paulo: Atlas Editora.

Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social-responsibility disclosure - an application of stakeholder theory. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612.

Schaltegger, S., Hoerisch, J., & Freeman, R. E. (2019). Business Cases for Sustainability: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective. Organization & Environment, 32(3), 191–212.