Canonical Definition
Respect for stakeholders is the principle that professional activities affect multiple parties—including clients, employees, communities, and the public—whose legitimate interests deserve consideration in decision-making. It does not require that all interests are equally weighted, but it does require that they are identified, acknowledged, and addressed in a manner proportionate to their significance.
Explanation
Stakeholders are not limited to those who pay for a service. They include anyone materially affected by professional activities. Respect does not mean agreement or accommodation of every request; it means that the existence and legitimacy of stakeholder interests are recognised. This principle intersects with transparency (stakeholders can only protect their interests if they are informed) and accountability (someone must be answerable for how stakeholder interests are handled).
How It Appears in Practice
The following patterns are commonly associated with this principle. They are descriptive observations, not prescriptive requirements.
- Stakeholder identification is conducted early in projects and revisited as circumstances change.
- Communication with stakeholders is clear, timely, and appropriate to their level of involvement.
- Decisions that significantly affect stakeholders are explained, and feedback mechanisms are available.
- Power asymmetries between practitioners and stakeholders are acknowledged and managed.
Common Misinterpretations
- Respect for stakeholders does not mean satisfying all stakeholder demands. Competing interests must be balanced, and not all demands are legitimate or feasible.
- It is not limited to customer satisfaction. Stakeholders include employees, communities, future users, and others.
- Respect does not require consensus. It requires consideration.
Tensions and Trade-offs
This principle may interact with competing considerations in the following ways:
- Competing stakeholder interests: The interests of different stakeholder groups may conflict, requiring prioritisation.
- Stakeholder identification: It may be difficult to identify all affected parties, particularly in complex or long-term projects.
- Paternalism vs. autonomy: Deciding what is in stakeholders' best interest risks overriding their own judgment.
Scope and Limits
- This principle does not prescribe how competing stakeholder interests should be prioritised.
- It does not address the legal rights of stakeholders, which are governed by applicable law.
- It acknowledges that the identification and weighting of stakeholder interests involves judgment and may vary by context.