arbiter
JournalsAccount

Who Counts? A Compassionate Critique of Stakeholder Theory in Information Systems

Margeret Hall et al.

Communications of the Association for Information Systems2025https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05729article
AJG 2ABDC A
Weight
0.41

Abstract

Stakeholder Theory (ST) provides a valuable lens for understanding how firms create value, but it also surfaces how an emphasis on power, legitimacy, and urgency can marginalize vulnerable groups. This commentary argues that IS scholars, by adhering to corporate-driven definitions of stakeholder legitimacy, risk entrenching systems of exclusion rather than challenging them. Firms prioritize principal stakeholders, and shareholders and IS research often mirrors these priorities, reinforcing structures that disadvantage those who would benefit most from inclusive digitization. Drawing on observations from an upskilling program embedded in a homeless shelter, this analysis highlights how IS scholarship can either perpetuate or dismantle marginalizing systems. By critically reflecting on whose interests are served in IS research and practice, this commentary calls for a shift toward more inclusive, justice-oriented approaches that extend beyond performative inclusion and address the structural barriers that exclude society’s most vulnerable.

2 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05729

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{margeret2025,
  title        = {{Who Counts? A Compassionate Critique of Stakeholder Theory in Information Systems}},
  author       = {Margeret Hall et al.},
  journal      = {Communications of the Association for Information Systems},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1cais.05729},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Who Counts? A Compassionate Critique of Stakeholder Theory in Information Systems

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.41

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.25 × 0.4 = 0.10
M · momentum0.55 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.