Idea principal Comentario personal

1. "The Principle of Who or What Really

Counts." That is, who (or what) are the
stakeholders of the firm? And to whom
(or what) do managers pay attention?
The first ques-tion calls for a normative
theory of stakeholder identification, to
explain logically why managers should
consider certain classes of entities as
stakeholders. The second question calls
for a descriptive theory of stake-holder
salience, to explain the conditions under
which managers do con-sider certain
classes of entities as stakeholders.
Managers to be key players within an
organization are what we assume is mainly what
to do correctly and what is not done correctly are
therefore most important that should pay
attention to the various explanatory series put up
of a better way, one should also consider
identifying where strict logic and take risks to win
or lose and termed it a game where the only
thing we know is that you can lose that if taking
into account the main performance of the entire
company
2. As owners and nonowners of the firm; as
owners of capital or owners of less
tangible assets; as actors or those acted
upon; as those existing in a voluntary or
an involuntary relationship with the firm;
as rights-holders, contractors, or moral
claimants; as resource providers to or
dependents of the firm; as risk-takers or
influencers; and as legal princi-pals to
whom agent-managers bear a fiduciary
duty.
Looking on one side wider and more focused on a
business we can deduce that all persons within
the company should be interested in what
happens in and out of this one, and that any crisis
will affect all but most of the manager as that the
main risk asumidor. A company has made its
classification according to the command of each
person so that in this way has its obligations with
different companies or trusts collectors
responsible for managing the money or property
in some cases of companies.
3. Dunfee argue that stakeholder theory
must articulate a "normative core," they
are looking for a compelling reason why
some claims and some relationships are
legitimate and worthy of management
attention and why others are not. They
discount the importance of power in
stakeholder-manager relations, arguing
that the important thing is whether the
stakeholder has legitimate (e.g., moral,
legal, and property-based) claims
The company main interested party must be
under a set of rules that will govern in the best
way, also be mentioned that if the decisions
made by the principal actor is the manager and is
legitimized by personal morality, professional
ethics so that this property based. All managers
are looking for a personal interest but without
leaving aside the most important thing and have
personally grateful to all the people under his
command and this is done respecting all human
rights.
4. In sum, we argue that stakeholder theory
must account for power and urgency as
well as legitimacy, no matter how
distasteful or unsettling the results.
Managers must know about entities in
their environment that hold power and
have the intent to impose their will upon
the firm.
Knowledge of the competition is the best thing a
manager can do to grow and remain in the
market because through this you can set a price
control of goods or services to offer in the market
and not only that the perfect knowledge of all
personnel (employees) under his command to
thereby exert a perfect control on the inside of
the company as part of having a good internal
control may come to have a control in the
environment surrounding the company