Showing papers in "Business Ethics Quarterly in 2010"
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review literature relevant to the social scientific study of ethics and leadership, as well as outline areas for future study, and discuss ethical leadership and draw from emerging research on "dark side" organi- zational behavior to widen the boundaries of the review to include ethical leadership.
Abstract: The purpose of this article is to review literature that is relevant to the social scientific study of ethics and leadership, as well as outline areas for future study. We first discuss ethical leadership and then draw from emerging research on "dark side" organi- zational behavior to widen the boundaries of the review to include ««ethical leadership. Next, three emerging trends within the organizational behavior literature are proposed for a leadership and ethics research agenda: 1 ) emotions, 2) fit/congruenc e, and 3) identity/ identification. We believe each shows promise in extending current thinking. The review closes with discussion of important issues that are relevant to the advancement of research on leadership and ethics.
630 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors tested the relationship between three facets of personality (conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience) as well as moral identity on individuals' ethical ideology.
Abstract: Two studies tested the relationship between three facets of personality—conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience—as well as moral identity, on individuals’ ethical ideology. Study 1 showed that moral personality and the centrality of moral identity to the self were associated with a more principled (versus expedient) ethical ideology in a sample of female speech therapists. Study 2 replicated these findings in a sample of male and female college students, and showed that ideology mediated the relationship between personality, moral identity, and two organizationally relevant outcomes: organizational citizenship behavior and the propensity to morally disengage. Implications for business ethics are discussed.
131 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that punishment may not be the only "deontic" reaction, and that in fact, third-party observers of injustice may engage in moral self-regulation that would lead them to conclude that the most ethical response is to do nothing.
Abstract: The deontic model of justice and ethical behavior proposes that people care about justice simply for the sake of justice. This is an important consideration for business ethics because it implies that justice and ethical behavior are naturally occurring phenomena independent of system controls or individual self-interest. To date, research on the deontic model and third-party reactions to injustice has focused primarily on individuals’ tendency to punish transgressors. This research has revealed that witnesses to injustice will consider sacrificing their own resources if it is the only way to sanction an observed transgressor. In this paper we seek to extend this model by arguing that punishment may not be the only “deontic” reaction, and that in fact, third-party observers of injustice may engage in moral self-regulation that would lead them to conclude that the most ethical response is to do nothing. We provide preliminary evidence for our propositions using voiced cognitions data collected during a resource allocation task. Results indicate that deonance may be more complex than originally thought, and previous tests of the model conservative in nature.
113 citations
TL;DR: In a series of reports the United Nations Special Representative on the issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations has emphasized a tripartite framework regarding business and human rights that includes the state "duty to protect, the TNC "responsibility to respect, and appropriate remedies for human rights violations" as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: In a series of reports the United Nations Special Representative on the issue of Human Rights and Transnational Corporations has emphasized a tripartite framework regarding business and human rights that includes the state “duty to protect,” the TNC “responsibility to respect,” and “appropriate remedies” for human rights violations. This article examines the recent history of UN initiatives regarding business and human rights and places the tripartite framework in historical context. Three approaches to human rights are distinguished: moral, political, and legal. It is argued that the tripartite framework’s grounding of the responsibility of TNCs to respect human rights is properly understood as moral and not merely as a political or legal duty. A moral account of the duty of TNCs to respect basic human rights is defended and contrasted with a merely strategic approach. The main conclusion of the article is that only a moral account of the basic human rights duties of TNCs provides a sufficiently deep justification of “the corporate responsibility to respect human rights” feature of the tripartite framework.
109 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss some of the salient differences between these two approaches, and suggest some ways in which business ethicists could benefit from taking a more "political philosophy" approach to these questions.
Abstract: There is considerable overlap between the interests of business ethicists and those of political philosophers. Questions about the moral justifiability of the capitalist system, the basis of property rights, and the problem of inequality in the distribution of income have been of central importance in both fields. However, political philosophers have developed, especially over the past four decades, a set of tools and concepts for addressing these questions that are in many ways quite distinctive. Most business ethicists, on the other hand, consider their field to be primarily a domain of applied ethics, and so adopt methods and conceptual frameworks developed by moral philosophers. In this paper, we discuss some of the salient differences between these two approaches, and suggest some ways in which business ethicists could benefit from taking a more “political philosophy” approach to these questions. Throughout, we underline the importance of seeking greater compatibility among the principles used in normative theorizing about markets, regulations, corporate governance, and business practices.
106 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that corporate engagement with deliberative democracy can enhance the legitimacy of corporations but do not take into account the effects of institutional, material and discursive forms of power that determine legitimacy criteria.
Abstract: In this article I provide a critical perspective on governing the global corporation. While the papers in the 2009 special issue of Business Ethics Quarterly explore the political role of corporations I argue that they lack a sophisticated analysis of power across institutional and actor networks. The argument that corporate engagement with deliberative democracy can enhance the legitimacy of corporations does not take into account the effects of institutional, material and discursive forms of power that determine legitimacy criteria. As a result corporate versions of citizenship mediate versions of social responsibility and morality, which are reflected in the institutional and political economic norms that are produced by this power/knowledge. In order to overcome the limits of corporate social responsibility there is a need to develop more democratic forms of global governance of corporations. A radical revisioning of democratic governance would also need to overcome the limits posed by sovereignty and would require new forms of multi-actor and multi-level translocal governance arrangements in an attempt to create forms of power that are more compatible with the principles of economic democracy.
100 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that more adequate attention to the harmful upstream effects of downstream marketing and consumption decisions requires greater attention to stakeholder marketing and marketer efforts to help create responsible consumers.
Abstract: While considerable attention has been given to the harm done to consumers by marketing, less attention has been given to the harm done by consumers as an indirect effect of marketing activities, particularly in regard to supply chains. The recent development of dramatically expanded global supply chains has resulted in social and environmental problems upstream that are attributable at least in part to downstream marketers and consumers. Marketers have responded mainly by using corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication to counter the critique of CSR practice , but these claims of ethical corporate behavior often lack credibility and can result in a backlash against brands. The article argues that more adequate attention to the harmful upstream effects of downstream marketing and consumption decisions requires greater attention to stakeholder marketing and marketer efforts to help create responsible consumers. It concludes by identifying implications for further research in this important emergent area of marketing ethics.
100 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors survey theoretical accounts of exploitation in business, mainly through the example of low wage or sweatshop labor, and discuss which of these senses of exploitation are defensible as identifying clear moral wrongs that take place in the context of business and specifically, sweatshop labour.
Abstract: In this review, I survey theoretical accounts of exploitation in business, chiefly through the example of low wage or sweatshop labor. Labor of this kind is often described as self-evidently exploitative and immoral. But for defenders of sweatshops as the first rung on a ladder toward greater economic development, the charge that sweatshop labor is self-evidently exploitative is unconvincing. I aim to accomplish three tasks. First, I will provide an overview of the many different uses of the charge of exploitation in business practice through an examination of the uses of the term in the literature on sweatshop labor. Second, I will discuss which of these senses of exploitation are defensible as identifying clear moral wrongs that take place in the context of business and, specifically, sweatshop labor. Third, I will apply the lessons learned from my exploration of exploitation in sweatshop labor to other specific areas of business.
92 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors provide a useful research agenda for researchers in both strategic management and business ethics by suggesting that the two fields started with similar interests, diverged, and are beginning to converge again.
Abstract: This essay attempts to provide a useful research agenda for researchers in both strategic management and business ethics. We motivate this agenda by suggesting that the two fields started with similar interests, diverged, and are beginning to converge again. We then identify several streams that hold particular promise for developing our understanding of the relationship between strategy and ethics: stakeholder theory, managerial discretion, behavioral strategy, strategy as practice, and environmental sustainability.
90 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the consequences of ethical leadership on leader promotability were examined using a sample of managers from two independent organizations and they found that ethical leaders were increasingly likely to be rated by their superior as exhibiting potential to reach senior leadership positions.
Abstract: Despite sustained attention to ethical leadership in organizations, scholarship remains largely descriptive. This study employs an empirical approach to examine the consequences of ethical leadership on leader promotability. From a sample of ninety-six managers from two independent organizations, we found that ethical leaders were increasingly likely to be rated by their superior as exhibiting potential to reach senior leadership positions. However, leaders who displayed increased ethical leadership were no more likely to be viewed as promotable in the near-term compared to those who displayed less ethical leadership. Our findings also show ethical culture and pressure to achieve results are important contextual factors that moderate the relationships between ethical leadership and leader promotability to senior leadership roles.
79 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that corporations have a duty to promote just institutions and that such a duty necessarily must be grounded in positive obligation, i.e., it cannot be advanced by reference to the negative duty to do no harm.
Abstract: Do corporations have a duty to promote just institutions? Agreeing with Hsieh’s recent contribution, this article argues that they do. However, contrary to Hsieh, it holds that such a claim cannot be advanced convincingly only by reference to the negative duty to do no harm. Instead, such a duty necessarily must be grounded in positive obligation. In the search of a foundation for a positive duty for corporations to further just institutions, Stephen Kobrin’s notion of “private political authority” offers a promising connecting point. Political authority implies political responsibility; Political obligation, however, includes more than merely not doing any harm—it is essentially positive obligation. The implications of the new political responsibilities of multinational corporations may even go far beyond the particular duty to promote just institutions; they may be symptomatic for a much more profound shift from an individual to a collective age.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe the changing institutional context of global business and suggest ways in which both business ethics and international business may inform each other more fruitfully, in order to support constructive engagement between these two disciplines imperative.
Abstract: The literatures of business ethics and international business have generally had little influence on each other. Nevertheless, the decline in the power of nation states, the emergence of non-governmental organizations, the proliferation of self-regulatory bodies, and the changing responsibilities, roles, and structure of multinational corporations make constructive engagement between these two disciplines imperative. This changing institutional landscape creates many areas of common concern. In this article, we describe the changing institutional context of global business and suggest ways in which both business ethics and international business may inform each other more fruitfully.
TL;DR: This article investigated the role of resource valence in intergen- erational attitudes and allocations and found that, compared to bene! ts, allocating burdens intergenerationally increased concern with one's legacy, heightened ethical concerns, intensifying moral emotions (e.g., guilt, shame), and led to feelings of greater responsibility for and fairness with future generations.
Abstract: In six experiments, we investigated the role of resource valence in intergen- erational attitudes and allocations. We found that, compared to bene! ts, allocating burdens intergenerationally increased concern with one's legacy, heightened ethical concerns, intensi! ed moral emotions (e.g., guilt, shame), and led to feelings of greater responsibility for and af! nity with future generations. We argue that, because of greater concern with legacies and the associated moral implications of one's decisions, allocating burdens leads to greater intergenerational generosity as compared to bene! ts. Our data provide support for this effect across a range of contexts. Our results also indicate that the differential effect of bene! ts versus burdens in intergenerational contexts depends on the presence of two important structural characteristics that help enact concerns about legacies, including (1) future impact of decisions, and (2) a self-other tradeoff. Overall, our ! ndings highlight how considering resource valence brings to the fore a number of key psychological characteristics of intergenerational decisions—especially as they relate to legacies and ethics. In 1888, following his brother's death, Alfred Nobel, the inventor of dynamite, was read- ing what was supposed to be his brother's obituary in a French newspaper. Nobel realized that the newspaper editor had confused the two brothers and consequently had written an obituary for Alfred instead. The headline proclaimed, "The Merchant of Death is Dead!" describing a man who had gained his wealth by helping people to kill one another. Nobel was deeply troubled and it is believed that this glimpse of what might have been his nega- tive legacy was pivotal in motivating him to leave nearly his entire fortune following his actual death eight years later to fund annual awards, the Nobel Prizes, for those whose work most bene! ted humanity.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review recent developments in ethical pluralism, ethical particularism, Kantian intuitionism, rights theory, and climate change ethics, and show how human rights can be grounded in human agency.
Abstract: We review recent developments in ethical pluralism, ethical particularism, Kantian intuitionism, rights theory, and climate change ethics, and show the relevance of these developments in ethical theory to contemporary business ethics. This paper explains why pluralists think that ethical decisions should be guided by multiple standards and why particularists emphasize the crucial role of context in determining sound moral judgments. We explain why Kantian intuitionism emphasizes the discerning power of intuitive reason and seek to integrate that with the comprehensiveness of Kant’s moral framework. And we show how human rights can be grounded in human agency, and explain the connections between human rights and climate change.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review and build on intergenerational and behavioral ethics research to consider how the motivation to build a lasting legacy can impact ethical behavior in intergenerative decision making.
Abstract: In this article, we review and build on intergenerational and behavioral ethics research to consider how the motive to build a lasting legacy can impact ethical behavior in intergenerational decision making. We discuss how people can utilize their relationships to organizations to craft their legacies. Further, we elucidate how the legacy motive can enhance business ethics, incorporating theory and empirical ! ndings from research on intergenera- tional decision making, generativity, and terror management theory to develop the legacy construct and to outline the psychological underpinnings of motivations to leave a positive legacy. We discuss the ways in which legacies can provide a link between life-meaning and pro-social motivation, and we consider the ways in which individuals' social environments can moderate the intensity of the legacy motive and can impact legacy-building behavior by determining the types of legacies that are valued. Finally, we highlight the implications of these ideas for ethical behavior and sustainable decision making in business contexts. All of the philanthropy you see—the buildings named after people for giving $50 million to this museum or to Columbia (University)—is a result of one man after another trying to conquer his mortality. (Konigsberg, 2008) T HIS RATHER STRONG STATEMENT is attributed to Dr. T. Byram Karasu, a psychoanalyst to Wall Street ! nanciers and other wealthy individuals, who was interviewed in the New York Times in the summer of 2008 to discuss his experience of treating narcissistic disorders in wealthy patients. It highlights two important points for understanding the psychology of leaving a legacy. First, individuals' awareness of their own mortality can produce feelings of anxiety that motivate efforts to ex- tend the self into the future. Second, even individuals so obsessed with themselves that they require psychological evaluation and treatment will make sacri! ces in the present to provide bene! ts to others in the future. We de! ne a legacy as an enduring meaning attached to one's identity and manifested in the impact that one has on others beyond the temporal constraints of the lifespan. When an individual leaves a legacy, that individual has established an impact that lasts beyond his or her living existence on this planet. In this way, legacies are vehicles that extend one's identity and one's life's work and meaning into the future to outlive the physical self. In business contexts, legacy-building, or behavior designed to craft one's impact on future generations, often takes the form of working to ensure the long-term viability of an organization, leaving the organization stronger, more productive, and more deeply connected to the shared values of the group's stakeholders than one found
TL;DR: In the field of finance, the recent financial debacle has led to a reexamination of financial regulation and of the fundamental nature and purpose of the industry, leading to questions concerning board processes and individual board beliefs and behaviors as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Corporate governance and finance are dynamic academic fields that offer myriad opportunities for business ethics analysis. Within the corporate governance triad in recent years, shareholders have increased their power over boards of directors and executives through both regulation and movements to change corporate by-laws. The impact of board characteristics on firm performance has proven elusive, leading to questions concerning board processes and individual director beliefs and behaviors. At the same time, CEOs have lost considerable power, leaving many struggling to regain their control and maintain their compensation levels, while others adopt a stewardship approach to their posts. In the field of finance, the recent financial debacle has led to a reexamination of financial regulation and of the fundamental nature and purpose of the industry. All of these issues provide business ethicists fodder for investigation and analysis.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors call for business ethics scholars to focus more attention on how individuals and organizations respond in the aftermath of unethical behavior, which is drawn from restorative justice, which moves beyond traditional approaches that emphasize retribution or rehabilitation to include restoring victims and other affected parties, reintegrating offenders and facilitating moral repair in the workplace.
Abstract: We call for business ethics scholars to focus more attention on how individuals and organizations respond in the aftermath of unethical behavior. Insight into this issue is drawn from restorative justice, which moves beyond traditional approaches that emphasize retribution or rehabilitation to include restoring victims and other affected parties, reintegrating offenders, and facilitating moral repair in the workplace. We review relevant theoretical and empirical work in restorative justice and develop a conceptual model that highlights how this perspective can enhance theory and empirical research in business ethics. We specifically identify topic areas that we believe have particular promise for business ethics scholars to pursue. We close our paper by discussing implications of the restorative justice approach for practicing managers.
TL;DR: The authors examines the presuppositions and theoretical frameworks of the post-Westphalian approach to international business ethics and compares it to the more philosophically oriented moral theory approach that has predominated in the field.
Abstract: This article examines the presuppositions and theoretical frameworks of the “new-wave” “Post-Westphalian” approach to international business ethics and compares it to the more philosophically oriented moral theory approach that has predominated in the field. I contrast one author’s Post-Westphalian political approach to the human rights responsibilities of transnational corporations (TNCs) with my own “Fair Share” theory of moral responsibility for human rights. I suggest how the debate about the meaning of corporate human rights “complicity” might be informed by the fair share theory. While I point out that Post-Westphalians and moral philosophers may have fundamental disagreements about basic concepts such as legitimacy, justice, and democratic deliberation, I conclude that the Post-Westphalians have made a major contribution to the expansion of the field by presenting business ethicists with an opportunity to inform and guide debates about the potential future course of transnational governance.
TL;DR: Nielsen as mentioned in this paper discusses the characteristics and extent of the 2007-2009 economic crisis and analyzes how the ethics issues of the economic crisis are structurally related to a relatively new form of capitalism, high-leverage finance capitalism.
Abstract: In this updated and revised version of his 2008 Society for Business Ethics presidential address, Richard Nielsen documents the characteristics and extent of the 2007–2009 economic crisis and analyzes how the ethics issues of the economic crisis are structurally related to a relatively new form of capitalism, high-leverage finance capitalism. Four types of high-leverage finance capitalism are considered: hedge funds; private equity-leveraged buyouts; high-leverage, subprime mortgage banking; and high-leverage banking. The structurally related problems with the four types of high-leverage finance capitalism converged in something of a perfect economic storm. Explanations for the crisis are offered in the context of the type of the high-leverage finance capitalism system that permitted and facilitated the economic crisis. Ethics issues and potential reforms are considered that may be able to mitigate the destructive effects of what Schumpeter referred to as the “creative destructive” effects of evolutionary forms of capitalism while realizing the Aristotelian economic ideal of creating wealth in such a way as to make us better people and the world a better place.
TL;DR: A fundamental question of global business ethics is, "When moral business conduct standards conflict across borders, whose standards should prevail?" as mentioned in this paper, which is a question that many who ask it do so with a culturally-specific lens shaped by prevailing conditions of Western economic strength.
Abstract: A fundamental question of global business ethics is, “When moral business conduct standards conflict across borders, whose standards should prevail?” Western scholarship and practice tends to depict home country standards as “higher” or more “restrictive” or “well-ordered” than the “lower” standards of emerging market actors. As much as the question appears culturally neutral, many who ask it do so with a culturally-specific lens shaped by prevailing conditions of Western economic strength. However, the dominant economic powers of the future are not likely to be the same North American and Western European markets that have reigned supreme in the recent past. As corporations increasingly re-examine their political roles in global governance, we need also to re-examine the moral authority of global ethical norms so they do not merely reflect the dominant ideologies of the most economically powerful market actors.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors consider issues of diffusion of responsibility and plausible deniability in such relationships and isolate three sources of denial of attributions of responsibility: connection, control and knowledge.
Abstract: As value chains become longer with increases in outsourcing and subcontracting, the challenges of fixing responsibility become more difficult. Using concepts from the literature on social networks, this paper considers issues of diffusion of responsibility and plausible deniability in such relationships. Specifically, this paper isolates three sources of denial of – or defense against – attributions of responsibility: connection, control and knowledge. It goes on to consider the effects on network density and actor centrality as third parties (tertius illuminans) alter the structure of these networks. Finally, preliminary conclusions are considered including suggestions for addressing these new challenges as well as the potential for conceptual cross-fertilization between network analysis and organizational ethics.
TL;DR: In this paper, critical genealogy is used to demonstrate that the norms that discourage lateral hiring are constructions used by powerful employers to control the turnover of their employees, making them subjects of their employer's power rather than free and autonomous people in their own right.
Abstract: Lateral hiring is the intentional action of one employer to identify, solicit, and hire an individual or group of employees currently employed by another firm, a practice often pejoratively labeled “poaching.” We use the method of critical genealogy to demonstrate that the norms that discourage lateral hiring are constructions used by powerful employers to control the turnover of their employees, making them subjects of their employer’s power rather than free and autonomous people in their own right. We suggest instead that ethical responsibility for entertaining or rejecting lateral hiring offers rests with the focal employee(s). We conclude that the form and symmetry of loyalty between employees and their current employers are the determinants of the appropriateness of an employee’s decision to entertain and accept outside offers. These conclusions imply responsibilities for employers to forge (and employees to honor) symmetrical relational loyalty in the workplace, but not for alternate employers to refrain from making lateral hiring offers.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors include six articles that fall within the domain of behavioral ethics and that focus on three themes: moral aware-ness, ethical decision making, and reactions to unethical behavior.
Abstract: Behavioral ethics is an emerging fi eld that takes an empirical, social scientifi c approach to the study of business ethics. In this special issue, we include six articles that fall within the domain of behavioral ethics and that focus on three themes—moral aware- ness, ethical decision making, and reactions to unethical behavior. Each of the articles sheds additional light on the specifi c issues addressed. However, we hope this special issue will have an impact beyond that of the new insights offered in these articles, by stimulating even more research in this burgeoning fi eld.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors investigate when people are most likely to demand social accounts for the unfair offer and when social accounts will have the highest impact on interpersonal trust in bargaining and find that the need for and impact of social accounts are highest when the intentions of the other party are uncertain.
Abstract: Unfair offers in bargaining may have disruptive effects because they may reduce interpersonal trust. In such situations future trust may be strongly affected by social accounts (i.e., apologies vs. denials). In the current paper we investigate when people are most likely to demand social accounts for the unfair offer (Experiment 1), and when social accounts will have the highest impact (Experiment 2). We hypothesized that the need for and impact of social accounts will be highest when the intentions of the other party are uncertain. The results provided support for this reasoning.
TL;DR: The authors discusses different forms that business ethics has taken in relation to the goal of businesses acting ethically and argues that a major challenge current business ethics faces is the lack of an account of business organizations as they ethically develop and change both individually and systemically within social and political conditions.
Abstract: Business ethics has made important strides over the past decades, but it has also suffered significant failures as witnessed by the long line of business scandals in the past half century. This paper discusses different forms that business ethics has taken in relation to the goal of businesses acting ethically. In the end, it maintains that a major challenge current business ethics faces is the lack of an account of business organizations as they ethically develop and change both individually and systemically within social and political conditions. Even if business ethicists can rationally defend what businesses should be doing, unless we can relate this to how businesses can come to operate in those ways, our normative argu- ments will lack power, persuasiveness, and effectiveness. Only if we are able to provide this analysis will our normative ethics fulfill the practical task it has taken upon itself.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an instrumental approach to deception, which incorporates the notion that bargainers will use deception as a means to reach their goals in bargaining but will refrain from using deception when they have alternative means of reaching their goals.
Abstract: In the current paper we present an instrumental approach to deception. This approach incorporates the notion that bargainers (a) will use deception as a means to reach their goals in bargaining but (b) will refrain from using deception when they have alternative means to reach their goals. We demonstrate that different goals can lead to differences in the use of deception (Experiment 1). Furthermore, we demonstrate that reactions to deceit can also be understood from an instrumental perspective (Experiment 2).
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that we need to expand the rather restricted perspectives that these frameworks provide, in order to explore new conceptual foundations that will not only enable us to travel the confines of the different disciplines involved with the study of the changing role of business in shaping the global rules of the game, but that can also systematically connect normative and positive research questions at the conceptual level.
Abstract: Although a research focus on the increasing involvement of corporations in shaping and maintaining the global rules of the game points out promising avenues for future research, it simultaneously makes clear how little currently established, mostly managerial conceptual frameworks have to offer in making sense of these developments. It is argued that we need to expand the rather restricted perspectives that these frameworks provide, in order to explore new conceptual foundations that will not only enable us to travel the confines of the different disciplines involved with the study of the changing role of business in shaping the global rules of the game, but that can also systematically connect normative and positive research questions at the conceptual level. Three directions for this search for new foundations are briefly explored.
TL;DR: The potential for symbiosis between the two fields is vast and inspiring, even though it has only been unleashed partially and incidentally thus far as mentioned in this paper, and the boundaries of that potential contribution are.
Abstract: Organization theory and business ethics are essentially the positive and normative sides of the very same coin, reflecting on how human cooperative activities are organized and how they ought to be organized respectively. It is therefore unfortunate that—due to the relatively impermeable manmade boundaries segregating the corresponding scholarly communities into separate schools and departments, professional associations, and scientific journals—the potential symbiosis between the two fields has not yet fully materialized. In this essay we make a modest attempt at establishing further connectivity by surveying the terrain covered by the two disciplines jointly, as if the boundaries between them did not matter. We commence by providing a concise overview of the organization theory discipline for interested non-specialists from the field of business ethics. Next, we proceed to point out four research themes commonly investigated by members of both communities, and also a variety of organization-theoretical perspectives on each. In the final part of this essay we explore what organization theory has to offer business ethics, and what the boundaries of that potential contribution are. We warn skeptical readers in advance that the spirit and tone of our essay is most definitely upbeat, as we are convinced that the potential for symbiosis between the two fields is vast and inspiring, even though it has only been unleashed partially and incidentally thus far.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe some of the recent trends in legal scholarship and explore its implications for three significant aspects of business ethics research, namely, methodology, theory, and policy.
Abstract: Legal scholars and business ethicists are interested in many of the same core issues regarding human and firm behavior. The vast amount of legal research being generated by nearly 10,000 law school and business law scholars will inevitably influence business ethics research. This paper describes some of the recent trends in legal scholarship and explores its implications for three significant aspects of business ethics research—methodology, theory, and policy.
TL;DR: The first issue of Business Ethics Quarterly was launched in 1991, and since 1991 a plethora of such principles have been developed to serve as guidelines and evaluative mechanisms for global corporate responsibilities as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: The first issue of Business Ethics Quarterly was launched in 1991. At that time there were few general principles that could serve as guidelines for global business. However, since 1991 a plethora of such principles have been developed to serve as guidelines and evaluative mechanisms for global corporate responsibilities. But operationalizing these principles in practice has been a challenge for most transnational corporations and even for smaller, more local enterprises. This is because, in some cases, the principles ask too much of companies. In other cases, the principles are ambiguous. And in still other cases, the principles, written by and large from a Western, rights-based perspective, cannot be operationalized in some cultural or religious settings. In this paper I will outline a series of dilemmas multinational enterprises face in the global market place, even when they sincerely sign on to one or another set of principles. These problems are not insurmountable, but in the imperfect world of commerce, require that our expectations of corporate responsibilities be satisficing rather than absolutist.