Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

To sustain themselves, organizations “require a continuing provision of resources and continuing cycle of transactions with the environment from which these resources are derived” (Pfeffer, 1981, p. 101). The resources in these transactions can be characterized as the stakes in an ongoing negotiation process between an organization and its environment. Specifically, “a stake is anything—tangible or intangible, material or immaterial—that one person or group has that is of value to another person or group” (Heath, 1997, p. 28). Exchanging or withholding such stakes provides a means of influence among organizations and their stakeholders.

Typically, the exchange of stakes is interpreted as a ratio. In other words, did both parties derive approximately equal benefits from the exchange, or did one party acquire a considerable advantage from the transaction? Ideally, stakes are exchanged in a harmonious and collaborative manner that is perceived as just and beneficial to all parties. This harmonious exchange allows for the ongoing mutual accommodation among organizations and their stakeholders.

From a public relations perspective, organizations engage in strategic issues monitoring and analysis to develop an awareness of essential stakes, their availability, and their possible manipulation by external audiences. In addition to identifying desirable or essential stakes and groups, organizational analysis includes consideration of

the willingness of stakeholders to grant or withhold their stakes. How willing are they to exchange them? What can be done to increase the chances they will be granted rather than withheld? What operations or policies increase favorable exchange? (Heath, 1997, p. 117)

The ability to control critical stakes reflects an organization's power base. As long as an organization, whether for profit or nonprofit, is dependent on another organization or group to function or thrive, it is dependent on negotiating the exchange of stakes.

Although stakes take many forms, each stake cannot and should not “be equally involved in all processes and decisions” (Donaldson & Preston, 1995, p. 67) within an organization. The stakes held by organizations and their relevant environments are prioritized according to three general criteria: (a) the perceived value of a given stake, (b) the willingness or ability of groups to grant or withhold those stakes that are perceived to have value, and (c) the scarcity or availability of a resource from multiple sources.

Stakes, whether tangible or intangible, are held on a voluntary or involuntary basis. Tangible stakes that are held on a voluntary basis involve the strategic acquisition or inherent possession of a desirable resource. For example, purchasing stock in a company is a strategic acquisition of a stake in a company. Owning land that is appealing to others for development or mineral rights is an example of a voluntary and tangible stake with value to other groups or organizations that may rise or fall in various circumstances. Tangible and involuntary stakes emerge when the actions of one group or organization have the potential to infringe on the comfort, safety, or values of another group. For example, the construction of a nuclear power plant may be advantageous to a power company and some of its customers. At the same time, however, the plant may put thousands of residents at an increased risk of health problems or, in the case of catastrophic failure, diminish property values and complicate future development in the area.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading