Stakeholders’ dialogue is part of capacity building programs set by organizations to manage change towards sustainable development. Building capacity involves several elements such as stakeholder’s education where the management takes time to make all the stakeholders be aware of organization goals and objectives (Von Krogh, Spaeth and Lakhani, 2003, p.60).
This ensures that all the stakeholders get to know perfectly well what is right for them regarding the organization. These stakeholders play different roles for the organization; therefore, they need to be educated on the importance of their responsibilities to the organization.
The organization should ensure proper training for the stakeholders to make sure that they honor their relationship with the company and do not foster perfect working relationships. Changes in business should be enhanced by stakeholders’ dialogue because it leads to enhanced transparency and information sharing. In addition, it is a source of inspiration to the society.
It is also underlined by Cohen and Prusak that every company is not just a group of different people, but a unity that should work as a team (2001, p. 4). That’s why when the society gets inspired to work together, organization goals can be obtained darned easily since unity makes it possible for all the concerned parties to work as a team.
Stakeholders’ dialogue includes engaging people in serious discussions with persons and institutions that have a stake in their activities. It involves a designed and facilitated process for groups to start up negotiations and detailed dialogues with people who are interested in their operations in one way or the other.
Since transparency is among the key issues for stakeholder dialogue, everyone feels comfortable when working with the organization (Scott, 2002, p.98). Stakeholders express their feelings to the organization managers, and in case, if there are some clarifications, they ensure that everyone receives dire satisfaction. However, this dialogue does not involve engaging shareholders in decision making process.
Stakeholders’ dialogue does not mean meeting every request by stakeholders, but involves the acknowledgement of their inputs. The organization managers consider shareholders’ inputs and only offer what is necessary for both parties.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is concerned with the way in which corporate operations impact the society and the environment (Scott, 2002, p.108). For example, the coal seam Gas will affect agricultural productive land hence the agricultural producers rejected the proposal and have to be listened.
This means that all the stakeholders of an organization remain updated on the activities of the organization and at times called upon by the managers to share their views with them. The main objective of such meetings is to improve working conditions because the stakeholders’ may come out with issues unfamiliar to the management.
When the issues come up during these meetings and the managers are considered to work on them, the company experiences marked changes since the problem may get a permanent solution. For example, agricultural producers who have a stake in the organization may raise complaints about adequate farm inputs which hinder their production.
The organization may come up with a strategy to subsidize these farm inputs for the producers to solve their problems (Post, Preston and Sachs, 2002, p. 58).
If there were no forum for negotiations, this problem would have remained an uphill task for the agricultural producers though it affects the organization in the long run. For example, if the company relied on agricultural products for its operations and they remain threatened by un-affordable inputs, the organization will be in a deficit of raw materials in such a case.
The idea of CSR results in organizations prosper in business since problems get highlighted in time and appropriate solutions are adopted. Thus, Patrick Cescau mentioned in Unilever’s CEO: Social innovation and sustainability the only game in town that CSR is of a great importance for the prosperous organizations to deal with some problem (Webb, 2007).
In fact, the quality of relationships between both companies and their employees with other stakeholders, such as their customers, suppliers, and public and government officials, determines their success in business. Organizations are to see themselves in relation to stake holders who come from diverse areas that include local and international states.
These transformations make companies to approach their business operations in terms of sustainable development. This is by putting into consideration the requests by the agricultural producers to alter the proposed projects in favor of their production. These changes can only be achieved if individual and institutional leaderships remain fostered towards achievements.
Corporate responsibility called corporate sustainability is a feature of business and society literature that has concern on the business ethics. These are the expected morals that a business should present to the society which includes several elements. Some of the elements in the business society involve the customers, suppliers as well the competitors (Post, Preston and Sachs, 2002, p. 68).
Therefore, every corporate organization should honor their clients and suppliers, and at the same time, according to the dire respect to their competitors, practicing healthy competition ensures that everyone remains in the market. For instance, before initiating the seam coal gas project, they should consider the implications on agriculture.
Corporate social performance gets evaluated in the business and society literature whereby corporate organizations are required to work with the stakeholders exceptionally well. This provides guidelines on how effective an organization can relate to its stakeholders respecting their organizational objectives and goals at the same time.
The process of stakeholders’ dialogue involves several steps. These steps help the managers of organizations to ensure that benefits of the dialogue are achieved. They, therefore, make sure that proper approach gets followed, and responses got from the stakeholders are observed. In this case, the stakeholder selected was agricultural producers.
This is done to satisfy their demands in the best way that is possible. The first step in the process of dialogue is the determination of the stakeholder; they should know how agriculture might be affected by the proposed project.
The organization must determine who in the stakeholders’ domain is vital for their lives. One should also take into account the level of interaction and emotional closeness with the stakeholder (Mair, Robinson and Hockerts, 2006, p.107). This means that the organization must know exceedingly well how they relate to the stakeholders before meeting them.
The management should ensure that they get al the necessary information for a successful dialog, so they will understand all the issues that may arise. This helps them to be prepared to avoid a situation where managers are made to look incompetent. The managers should also ensure that they understand the relationship that exists between the organization and the stakeholders to be met for a dialogue.
This familiarizes the management with activities hence equipping them with the ability to attempt all issues raised by the relevant stakeholder. For example, if agricultural producers were to hold a dialogue with the management, they should make sure they understand the implication of the stakeholder to the organization.
For example, they should be equipped with all information regarding the agricultural producers so that any question brought into the table must receive an attempt to quell the stakeholder’s request.
The second step of the process involves thinking about the dialogue. This is to ensure that the management is prepared for a dialogue in advance. This preparedness involves analyzing the amount of information to be shared with the stakeholder. This is to ensure that the mutual relationship is not affected.
Managers should not lack the information about the organization, but they are not to give information that is unnecessary for the stakeholder. During preparations, managers should ensure that they have adequate facts addressing the best interests of both parties. If that is achieved, then managers enter into dialogue knowing that they have something suitable for their stakeholders (Mair, Robinson and Hockerts, 2006, p.107).
Then, when the management is prepared, they are ready to meet the stakeholder for a dialogue. The first and extremely wise thing to do is to give the stakeholder a chance to express his wishes. The managers should take time to listen carefully before making any formal utterance. Managers can be able to identify the key interests and expectations of the stakeholder after listening to them keenly.
The managers and the stakeholder argue to make clarifications on the expectations raised. Both parties negotiate on ways and means of meeting those expectations in the best way that is possible. When ways to improve the relationship between the two parties are reached, then the managers should present a test for commitment of the stakeholder to the organization (Baker, 2000, p. 79).
Dialogues are essential for CSR corporate sustainability because they act as tools for discovering ways of improving organizations’ relationship with stakeholders. This happens when stakeholders meet with managers to discuss their burning issues regarding their relationship with the organization. At the end of the meeting, both parties pave their way forward hence improving on their relationships (Hockerts, 2007, p.98).
These dialogues allow people who are the closest ones to the organization to share the information which they may have concerning the organization, hence enhancing working relations aimed at achieving mutual expectations. When organizations hold dialogues with its stakeholders, they strengthen the organization’s network of support though they bring benefits in all the areas of organization life.
However, stakeholders’ dialogue has some limitations that hinder perfect achievement of its set obligations. Some of the major threats to such dialogues are lacking seriousness among the stakeholders, and this happens when they raise issues that are not genuine. For example, agricultural producers can present their requests that unrealistic hence forcing the organization to withdraw from the dialogue.
Some other stakeholders may come out with demands that address their selfish interests leaving the question of mutual interest not met. These amounts to time wastage, and at times, the relationship between the stakeholder and the organization may even worsen due to issues raised during the dialogue (Hockerts, 2007, p.88).
Some managers fail to follow appropriate steps of conducting the dialogue because of meeting stakeholders without proper preparations. This is dangerous because stakeholders may put unexpected pressure to the mangers to agree on issues that do not favor the organization and may cause conflicts of interest.
For example, if managers fail to explain some fundamental problems in the agricultural production and meet in a panel with experts sent to represent the agricultural producers, they may enter into deals that only favor the producers.
Therefore, organizations must ensure that they operate within the principles of sustainable development by involving their stakeholders in operations of the organization. Stakeholders’ dialogue should be given priority and receive maximum support by the organizations’ management since it is the only way business can success with little or no hustle.
Stakeholders’ dialogues must receive careful treatment when it comes to conducting them because some parties may take advantage of the others creating unrealistic conclusions, which might be harmful to another partner.
Organizations should ensure that they work in accordance to the set codes of ethics to respect the society and other business partners. If this is achieved, business prosperity will be automatic, and organizations will reap the benefits of sustainable development.
References
Baker, W., 2000. Achieving success through social capital. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, D., & Prusak, L., 2001. In good company: How social capital makes organizations work. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hockerts, K., 2007. “Social Entrepreneurship.” In W. Visser, D. Matten, M. Pohl, & N.Tolhurst (Eds.), The A to Z of corporate social responsibility: A complete guide to concepts, codes and organizations. Hoboken: John Wiley.
Mair, J., Robinson, J., & Hockerts, K., (Eds.). 2006. Social Entrepreneurship. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Post, J. E., Preston, L. E., & Sachs, S., 2002. Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books.
Scott, S. 2002. Fierce conversations: Achieving success at work and in life, one conversation at a time. New York: Viking.
Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K., 2003. Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy, 32, pp. 1217-1241.
Webb, T., 2007. Unilever’s CEO: Social innovation and sustainability the only game in town. Ethical Corporation Web. Web.