Methodological Proposals

José Luis Retolaza (), Leire San-Jose () and Maite Ruíz-Roqueñi ()
Additional contact information
José Luis Retolaza: Deusto Business School, ECRI Ethics in Finance & Social Value
Maite Ruíz-Roqueñi: University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), ECRI Ethics in Finance & Social Value

Chapter Chapter 4 in Social Accounting for Sustainability, 2016, pp 15-26 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract A number of prior assumptions are needed to develop and consolidate any method for monetizing social value. Those assumptions may be implicit or explicit. We believe that explicitly expressing the assumptions that underlie the proposal for monetization is an essential step in enabling discussion to take place on elements that will be determinant in the resulting model. The model proposed here is based generically on two major research frameworks: the analytic-synthetic method, which consists of splitting a problem into its elementary component parts, analyzing them separately and then integrating them into a relational model; and cost-benefit analysis, which entails analyzing the gap between the inputs used and the outputs obtained, which enables efficiency analysis to be incorporate in the form of a ratio which, in the case of multiple factors, is developed in a Data Envelopment Analyst (DEA) framework. Four assumptions are made here: first, action research as a methodological process, with a mixed working team comprising persons who are active as actors in the organization investigated, in progressive improvement cycles normally on an annual basis. The second assumption is stakeholder theory, so each firm is considered as a network of stakeholders who contribute resources and risks for the joint generation of value which is subsequently passed on to the stakeholders as a whole. Social value, strictly speaking, is the value generated for stakeholders. The third assumption is a phenomenological outlook, under which the value variables identified are quantified in line with the value perceived by stakeholders. The fourth and final assumption is fuzzy logic, i.e. the values identified are not exact scores but centroid guidelines in a set of fuzzy data, on which upper and lower bounds of belonging are imposed.

Keywords: Analitic-sintetic methodology; Cost-benefit analysis; Efficiency analysis; Action research; Staeholder theory; Value for stakeholders; Phenomenology perspective; Fuzzy logic (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:spbrcp:978-3-319-13377-5_4

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783319133775

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13377-5_4

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in SpringerBriefs in Business from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().