Ethics and incentives: an evaluation and development of stakeholder theory in the health care industry.
This paper utilizes a qualitative case study of the health care industry and a recent legal case to demonstrate that stakeholder theory's focus on ethics, without recognition of the effects of incentives, severely limits the theory's ability to provide managerial direction and explain managerial behavior. While ethics provide a basis for stakeholder prioritization, incentives influence whether managerial action is consistent with that prioritization. Our health care examples highlight this and other limitations of stakeholder theory and demonstrate the explanatory and directive power added by the inclusion of the interactive effects of ethics and incentives in stakeholder ordering.
Elms
Heather
H
Berman
Shawn
S
Wicks
Andrew C
AC
D000288:Administrative Personnel / Q000523:psychology; D002204:Capitation Fee / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D016265:Conflict of Interest; D003657:Decision Making; D003695:Delivery of Health Care / Q000191:economics / Q000458:organization & administration; D040861:Ethics, Business; D004991:Ethics, Institutional; D018588:Fee-for-Service Plans / Q000191:economics; D006801:Humans; D008318:Malpractice; D008329:Managed Care Programs / Q000191:economics; D018803:Models, Economic; D017146:Models, Organizational; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D009042:Motivation; D010816:Physician Incentive Plans / Q000191:economics / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D010817:Physician-Patient Relations; D010820:Physicians / Q000191:economics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology*; D036301:Qualitative Research; D012051:Reimbursement Mechanisms / Q000191:economics; D040841:Resource Allocation; D014481:United States