  Investigating the optimal nature of social interactions among generic actors
(e.g., people or firms), aiming to achieve specifically-agreed objectives, has
been the subject of extensive academic research. Using the relational models
theory - comprehensively describing all social interactions among actors as
combinations of only four forms of sociality: communal sharing, authority
ranking, equality matching, and market pricing - the common approach within the
literature revolves around qualitative assessments of the sociality models'
configurations most effective in realizing predefined purposes, at times
supplemented by empirical data. In this treatment, we formulate this question
as a mathematical optimization problem, in order to quantitatively determine
the best possible configurations of sociality forms between dyadic actors which
would optimize their mutually-agreed objectives. For this purpose, we develop
an analytical framework for quantifying the (meta)relational models theory, and
mathematically demonstrate that combining the four sociality forms within a
specific meaningful social interaction inevitably prompts an inherent tension
among them, through a single elementary and universal metarelation. In analogy
with financial portfolio management, we subsequently introduce the concept of
Social Relations Portfolio (SRP) management, and propose a generalizable
procedural methodology capable of quantitatively identifying the efficient SRP
for any objective involving meaningful social relations. As an important
illustration, the methodology is applied to the Triple Bottom Line paradigm to
derive its efficient SRP, guiding practitioners in precisely measuring,
monitoring, reporting and (proactively) steering stakeholder management efforts
regarding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Environmental, Social and
Governance (ESG) within and / or across organizations.
