The wide-definition of the stakeholder theory includes any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the corporation including competitors. The narrow-definition limits the stakeholder to those "groups that are vital to the survival and success of the corporation (Rodewald 32). The stakeholders in the narrow definition include employees, owners, suppliers, customers, and the local community. The ethical challenge becomes to manage and balance the needs of all the stakeholders. Freeman knows his proposal "essentially redefines the purpose of the corporation (Hoffman 142)." There is a challenge to meet the claims of all groups knowing that there is always one group who benefits from the expense of other groups. .
The most persuasive arguments in support of the stakeholder concept are rooted in the theories of duties and rights. Generally, duties are considered to be the flip-side of moral rights. It holds the idea that a person, by virtue of being a person, possesses intrinsic moral right. The first formulation of ethical behavior is that we should act in such a way that we would have all moral agents act. The second holds that all individuals have equal moral worth and a have intrinsic right to be treated as ends in them and not as a means to an end. It is important to stress, however, that rights-based concepts are not the only arguments that could be advanced in support of the stakeholder position. There are also a number of alternative theoretical bases, including the theories of procedural and distributive justice, virtue ethics and the duty of care. .
The opposing view, the traditional Agent-of-capital view argues that corporate managers should intend on maximizing profits while obeying they law and customary moral standards of honesty, fidelity, and fairness (Rodewald 24). People engaged in business should also refrain from unfair and anti-competitive business practices, and a division of moral labor should exist between business and government.