Corporate punishment: A proposal

Corporate Punishment: A Proposal is an exercise in logic and creative thinking. I shall argue that no good reasons exist for the supposition that corporations have rights independent of the rights and interests of the persons they serve and that the error of treating corporations as though they do have autonomous rights derives from a sloppy argument from analogy. I shall further argue that the analogy of corporations to citizens, though pushed too far by some courts and lawmakers, remains a useful analogy if its logical relations can be cleaned up and clarified. Finally, I shall conclude this essay by employing the refurbished analogy in such a way that it yields a proposal for more effective criminal punishment for corporate wrongdoing. Robert J. Rafalko received an A.B. in philosophy from the University of Scranton, Scranton, PA, an M.A. in philosophy from Tufts University, Medford, MA., and a Ph.D. in philosophy from Temple University, Philadelphia, PA. in 1984. He was the owner and operator of a retail bookstore. In 1982, Dr. Rafalko was the nominee of a major political party for the U.S. House of Representatives in the 10th Congressional District, Pennsylvania. Dr. Rafalko has taught philosophy at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. In 1988, he accepted an appointment at California State University, Bakersfield, CA, where he is currently teaching logic, political philosophy and business ethics. Dr. Rafalko is the author of an introductory logic textbook, Logic for an Overcast Tuesday, to be published by Wadsworth Publishing Co. in the winter of 1989–1990.     

Employers' pay practices and potential responses to “comparable worth” litigation an identification of research issues

Comparable worth is a controversial compensation strategy. In this paper, research issues that arise when employers perform point-based job evaluations, but deviate from them because of market factors, are discussed. Greater research attention to the actual operation of markets and to the consequences of conflicts in equity perceptions is encouraged. Marcia P. Miceli is Associate Professor of Management and Human Resources at Ohio State University. Her research interests are in the areas of compensation administration, professional dissent and whistle-blowing, and employee selection and recruitment. Her previous works in these areas have been published in Academy of Management Review, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of Applied Psychology, and Journal of Business Ethics. John D. Blackburn is Associate Professor at the College of Business at Ohio State University. He has won the Best Article Award — American Business Law Journal. He is the co-author (with Julius Getman) of Labor Relations: Law, Practice and Policy. Stephen L. Mangum is Assistant Professor of Management and Human Resources at Ohio State University. His research has been in the areas of economic development, employment and training programs, pay equity, and military manpower and has appeared in such journals as Journal of Development Economics, Journal of Collective Negotiations in the Public Sector, Armed Forces and Society and Challenge. He is author (with Dr. C. Y. Hsieh) of A Search for Synthesis in Economic Theory (New York: M. E. Sharpe, 1986).An earlier version of this paper was presented at a meeting of the Academy of Management. The authors thank Jerry Greenberg and Arnon Reichers for their helpful comments on an earlier draft.     

Tools-Я-us

Our methods of inquiry predetermine most of what we are able to know. While our modes of understanding ought to correspond to the complexities confronting us in our modern technological society, they do not. Soft systems methodology helps us focus on what is problematic and how it can be approached — and offers direction to exert moral control over our tools and technologies.

相似文献   

Consumer law and legal theory: Reflections of a common lawyer

The author analyses some new theories on consumer law from the viewpoint of a lawyer trained in common law and having been involved in Australian legal policy. He voices criticisms against consumer law theory which takes contract law as its starting point; without a precise definition of the consumer it cannot specify its scope of application. The author advocates a more interventionist approach which makes clear that the state has responsibility for the well-being of consumers in cases of power imbalance even if the approach is characterized as paternalistic.

---

Verbraucherrecht und Rechtstheorie — Überlegungen eines Praktikers

Zusammenfassung Der Verfasser untersucht neue Theorien zum Verbraucherrecht vom Standpunkt eines im common law trainierten und in der Australischen Rechtspolitik tätigen Praktikers. Er plädiert für ein pragmatisches Vorgehen. Er kritisiert Verbraucherrechtstheorien, die vom Vertrags- und Wettbewerbsrecht ausgehen, weil sie den Begriff des Verbrauchers nicht erfassen, ohne den aber der Anwendungsbereich von Schutzvorschriften nicht festgeschrieben werden kann. Trotz aller Paternalismuskritik zieht er ein Bekenntnis zur staatlichen Verantwortlichkeit für die Verbraucherwohlfahrt vor, weil sonst das Problem ungleicher Machtverteilung nicht gelöst werden kann.

---

---

John Goldring is Foundation Dean and Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Wollongong, N.S.W., Australia, and a part-time member of the Australian Law Reform Commission.     

Confronting chaos

While it is common to observe that our society and world are becoming increasingly complex and fast paced, most of our theories provide no bases upon which to develop appropriate strategies. The need for developing holistic strategies is becoming urgent in two related areas: major interactive technologies and morality. Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at Oregon State University. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Antioch College (1965) and his M.B.A. in Finance (1975) and Ph.D. in Business, Government and Society (1980) from the University of Washington. His primary research interests are in the areas of moral philosophy and General Systems Theory. His most important publications are The Three Faces of Thinking, Journal of Higher Education (1986) and Prisoner's Paradoxes, Journal of Business Ethics (1988).     

An application of Bloom's taxonomy to the teaching of business ethics

Benjamin S. Bloom and a large committee of educators did extensive research to develop a taxonomy of global educational goals and of ways to measure their achievement in the classroom. The result was a taxonomy of three domains: Cognitive, Affective, and Motor Skills. This paper examines the cognitive and affective domains and applies them to teaching business ethics. Each of the six levels of the cognitive domain is explained. A six-step case method model is used to illustrate how the six cognitive levels might be used and tested in the classroom. The five levels of the affective domain are also described. They are illustrated behaviorally in terms of a student's increasing interest, motivation and commitment to business ethics. M. Francis Reeves is professor of philosophy at Bentley College in Waltham, Massachusetts. He is author of an introductory textbook in philosophy entitled Problems of Philosophy and Society: A Conversation with Plato, published by the University Press of America (1988). He is currently a gadfly at Bentley in the departments of Law, Accountancy, and Computer Information Systems assisting them in integrating business ethics into their functional courses. His current research interests are in business ethics and case method teaching.     

Ethical encounters of the second kind

When our society holds widely shared norms and values, we can agree on what constitutes unethical business practices. To the extent our social consensus is unraveling, agreement becomes increasingly problematic. Unfortunately, mainstream Western moral philosophy offers no guidance in this situation. We must therefore begin to focus on the types of social relationships that must exist for there to be agreement on what is right, good and just. This line of argument is, at best, merely suggested in discussions and articles on business ethics. Jonathan B. King is Associate Professor of Managment at the College of Business at Oregon State University. He received his B.A. in philosophy from Antioch College (1965); subsequently served for eight years as an officer in the United States Navy; received his M.B.A. (1975) and Ph.D. (1980) in Business, Government and Society from the University of Washington. His primary research interests are in the areas of epistemology and moral philosophy — e.g., the contribution of the liberal arts to interpretive thought, the sociology of moral knowledge, and the organizational distortion of information. His most important publications are: Teaching Business Ethics, Exchange1984 and A Case for the Humanities Perspective, Organizational Behavior Teaching Journal1984     

The ethics of insurance professionals: Comparison of personal versus professional ethics

This paper considers the level of ethics for insurance professionals for professional situations (measured with three insurance scenarios) compared to personal (consumer) situations (measured by Muncy and Vitell's 1992 Consumer Ethics Scale). The results of the study illustrate that there are significant differences in the ethical behavior of insurance professionals in professional versus personal situations. The authors found that insurance professionals are more likely to actively engage in unethical behavior in order to benefit professionally than in a personal setting. In general, however, the average respondent was unlikely or extremely unlikely to engage in unethical conduct. The managerial implications and need for future research in this area are discussed.K. L. Eastman is an Assistant Professor of Risk Management and Insurance at Florida State University. He received his doctorate from the University of Pennsylvania.J. K. Eastman is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at Valdosta State University. She earned her doctorate from Florida State University.A. D. Eastman is a doctoral candidate in Risk Management and Insurance at Florida State University.     

Critical theory and curriculum practice in STS education

The STS education movement is identified and related to the critique of technology of the 1960s–1970s. The critics of technology included the system of education in their critiques. There is a practical tension or contradiction in attempting to develop their insights within the curriculum routines of the schools and colleges. This tension is explored under six categories: reductive knowledge, socialization of technical modes of thinking, technicalized processes of learning, the loss of meaning, radical monopoly over learning, and the socialization of secular values.Leonard J. Waks has earned Ph.D.'s in philosophy (Wisconsin, 1968) and organizational psychology (Temple, 1984). He has taught philosophy at Purdue, Stanford, and Carnegie Mellon, and been a member of the faculty of the Graduate School of Education at Temple University. Since 1985 he has been Professor of Science, Technology and Society at Penn State.     

A game-theoretic analysis of professional rights and responsibilities

Professions are granted autonomy by society, to regulate their own affairs. In return for the economic benefits autonomy grants to professions, society expects professions to act in a socially responsible manner. This paper presents a game-theoretic analysis of the relationship between society and professions, which shows that the relationship is unstable in the face of opportunities for professions to renege on the social contract. It also shows how periodic controversies regarding the degree to which professionals act in the public interest are expected to occur periodically, and how they are resolved.James C. Gaa is a member of the Accounting Area and an associate member of the Philosophy Department at McMaster University. He holds Ph.D. degrees from Washington University (Philosophy) and the University of Illinois (Accountancy). His recent research has focused on public policy and ethical issues in financial accounting and auditing. He also has publications in philosophy of science and ethics.     

Reinvigorating the development of Community product safety policy

This paper examines the present state of Community product safety policy. It shows that important initiatives to extend enforcement practice across borders have come from below and argues that such developments deserve respect from Community policy makers as evidence of responses to real problems. However, the paper argues that the Community needs to build on these existing examples of cross-border co-operation in order to establish a broader product safety policy and — more compelling given the current Community agenda — in order to secure effective market integration. The paper concludes by contending that the development of product safety policy illustrates the shared approach to shaping the Community which should form the model for future progress.

---

Die Wiederbelebung der Entwicklung der Produktsicherheitspolitik durch die Europäische Gemeinschaft

Zusammenfassung Der Autor beschäftigt sich mit dem gegenwärtigen Zustand der Produktsicherheitspolitik der Gemeinschaft. Er zeigt, daß wichtige Initiativen zur Ausweitung der Durchsetzungspraxis über Grenzen hinweg von unten gekommen sind und tritt dafür ein, daß die für Verbraucherpolitik Zuständigen in der Gemeinschaft solche Entwicklungen als Reaktionen auf wirklich existierende Probleme respektieren. Er tritt ferner dafür ein, daß die Gemeinschaft auf den existierenden Beispielen von grenzüberschreitender Kooperation aufbauen soll, um eine breitere Produktsicherheitspolitik zu errichten und — was angesichts der derzeitigen Tagesordnung der Gemeinschaft noch wichtiger ist — um eine effektive Marktintegration zu gewährleisten. Abschließend sieht der Beitrag die Entwicklung der Produktsicherheitspolitik als Muster für künftigen Fortschritt bei der Bildung der Gemeinschaft.

---

---

Stephen Weatherill is Lecturer in Law at the University of Nottingham, Department of Law, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, U.K.     

Management-think

This paper provides a comprehensive review of the philosophical foundations of business management. The need for such a review is established. Emphasis is placed upon the role of management ethos in such a philosophy. Philosophical concepts (such as the concept of an intention) which are widely applied in management, but not explored in the management literature, are examined. While the emphasis is on philosophical concepts, the material presented is applicable in the practice of management. Mark Pastin is Director of the Center for Private and Public Sector Ethics and Professor of Management at the Arizona State University. He received the National Endowment for the Humanities Fellowship, and was a Research Fellow of the Center for Metropolitan Research of John Hopkins University. His most important publications are Strategic Planning for Science The Research System in the 1980s, ed. by John Logsdon (Franklin Institute Press, 1982), Ethics and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Business Horizons (December 1980), The Multi-Perspectival Theory of Knowledge, Midwest Studies in Philosophy: Volume V (University of Minnesota Press, 1980), and Meaning and Perception, Journal of Philosophy (October 1976).     

In defense of sharks moral issues in hostile liquidating takeovers

In this essay we defend the view that from a purely rule-utilitarian perspective there is no sound argument favoring the immorality of hostile liquidating buyouts. All arguments favoring such a view are seriously flawed. Moreover, there are some good argument favoring the view that such buyouts may be morally obligatory from the rule-utilitarian perspective. We also defend the view that most of the shark repellents in the market are immoral. If we are right in our arguments there is no justification, moral or otherwise, for any form of legislation that would constrain the practice of hostile liquidating buyouts. Robert Almeder earned his Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania, is co-editor of Business Ethics (Prometheus Press, 1987), is on the Editorial Board of Journal of Business Ethics, and teaches at Georgia State University.David Carey earned his Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Pittsburg. He has written extensively on Business Ethics and is currently teaching philosophy at Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington.     

Learning to solve the right problems: The case of nuclear power in America

Three general types of problems entail different strategies. Continuing to seek solutions to tame problems when we face messes, let alone wicked problems, is potentially catastrophic hence fundamentally irresponsible. In our turbulent times, it is therefore becoming a strategic necessity to learn how to solve the right problems.

But then, you may agree that it becomes morally objectionable for the planner to treat a wicked problem as though it were a tame one, or to tame a wicked problem prematurely, or to refuse to recognize the inherent wickedness of social problems. Rittel and Webber (1973).

Jonathan King is Associate Professor of Management at the College of Business at Oregon State University. His primary research interests are in the areas of moral philosophy and modern technology. His most important publications are Confronting Chaos and Common Knowledge of the Second Kind,Journal of Business Ethics (1989).     

Self-interest and community

In advocating that we extend our experiment in political democracy in America to include economic democracy as well, the Bishops' Letter assumes the basic social nature of man. This leaves an enormous gap between the values and attitudes they recommend and the private and individualistic view of man that undergirds our traditional economic thinking.This essay attempts to bridge that gap in terms of a theory of practice, individual in emphasis, but bringing out the enabling conditions of any and all practice without which practice would not be possible. It is suggested that these presuppositions of practice function normatively in all practice, economic as well as other types, and ought to be of interest to the practice of any adequately self-interested individual. They constitute a large part of what we used to call the public interest. James B. Wilbur is Professor of Philosophy at State University College at Geneseo. He has written several articles on business ethics and he is co-author of The Worlds of the Early Greek Philosophers with H. Allen.     

The ethics of leveraged management buyouts revisited

Although previous ethical analyses of management buyouts have presented useful insights, they have been flawed in three major ways. First, they define the transaction too narrowly, emphasizing the going private aspect and ignoring the leveraged aspect. Leveraging alters the nature of the transaction substantially and warrants additional ethical analysis. Second, these previous analyses ignore the impact of buyouts on non-stockholder constituents of the firm, an omission which renders their implicit utilitarian approach incomplete. Third, these analyses do not include Rawlsian, libertarian, or Kantian perspectives on ethics. This paper addresses these shortcomings and finds the ethical status of leveraged management buyouts to be highly suspect. Thomas M. Jones is a Professor of Organization and Environment in the School of Business Administration at the University of Washington in Seattle. He has written on such subjects as business ethics, corporate social responsibility, corporate governance, boards of directors, shareholder litigation, and business and society paradigms. His work has appeared in the Academy of Management Review, California Management Review, Boston University Law Review and the Hastings Law Journal.Reed O. Hunt, III is currently working for the Seattle Office of Peterson Consulting Limited Partnership, a national business dispute resolution consulting firm.     

Bluffing: Its demise as a subject unto itself

Business bluffing as a subject has been mentioned in various journals for at least the past 16 years. Its treatment has become one of apparent serious intent to identify it as a subject matter unto itself. Definitionally and theoretically, its essence has been specified but seemingly without due regard to its true nature. Business bluffing is an act of puffing at best and misrepresentation or fraud at worst. In either case, its legality and morality are already well defined and discussions of the subject should be directed along these established pathes.

相似文献   

Risk,commitment, and project abandonment

This article deals briefly with the most loathsome of business topics — the admission of failure. Rather than actively encouraging project Anti-champions, many organizations experiencing financial duress inadverdently stifle opposing opinion. In some cases recognition is delayed until it is too late. This is unfortunate since failure can be managed like any other business situation. Companies with CEOs that foster open communications between finance and operations are more likely to avoid escalating commitment to failed projects.Prudence is a rich, ugly old maid courted by incapacity. William Blake Mike Devaney is Associate Professor of Finance at South-East Missouri State University. His primary research interest is real estate finance. He has published in the Journal of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, Journal of Real Estate Research, and The Appraisal Journal to name a few. He also enjoys writing on popular business myth and has published on this subject in Business and Society Review as well as others.     

Consumers and the internal market for services: Shortcomings of the “new approach” of the Community

The paper discusses the new approach of the Community in the area of services, namely the principle that every service — like every good — should be allowed to circulate freely in the entire Internal Market provided it meets the standards of EEC law and of the country of origin. There are some exceptions to this principle, especially in the insurance area (market segregation in the industry's interest). The paper points out that the new approach might endanger consumer protection of Member States unless adequate standards of the receiving country exist. ECLG makes a number of suggestions to overcome the lacunae left by the new approach, especially by opting for minimal harmonisation, by applying rules of private internal law under the Rome Convention, and by providing for safeguard clauses.

---

Verbraucher und Binnenmarkt für Dienstleistungen: Mängel der sog. neuen Konzeption der Gemeinschaft

Zusammenfassung Die Gemeinschaft versucht in Vewirklichung der Grundfreiheiten des durch die Einheitliche Akte geänderten EWG-Vertrages die Vollendung des Binnenmarktes auch im Dienstleistungsbereich. Dabei sind unterschiedliche Herangehensweisen denkbar, nämlich das Prinzip der Minimalharmonisierung, die Marktsegmentierung oder die sog. neue Konzeption. Letztere findet sich vor allem im Banken- und Rundfunkbereich; dancah soll es für den Marktzutritt im gesamten Binnenmarkt ausreichen, daß die (angeglichenen) Standards des Ursprungslandes eingehalten werden. Die ECLG befürchtet einen Abbau des Verbraucherschutzes bei einer konsequenten Durchführung dieses Prinzips und macht Gegenvorschläge. Diese beziehen sich auf eine verstärkte Durchsetzung des Prinzips der Minimalharmonisierung, auf die Notwendigkeit der Anwendung der Regeln des Internationalen Privatrechts nach dem Römischen Schuldrechtsübereinkommen von 1980, und durch Verankerung von Schutzklauseln.

---

---

The European Consumer Law Group (ECLG) is a group of lawyers and law scholars in the EEC and EFTA countries, concerned with legal aspects of consumer protection. Correspondence regarding the paper should be directed to: Professor Norbert Reich, Centre for European Legal Policy, Universitätsallee GW 1, D-2800 Bremen 33, Federal Republic of Germany.     

Paternalism in the marketplace: Should a salesman be his buyer's keeper?

The marketplace has become increasingly sophisticated. Products and services are more complex resulting in greater customer reliance on salespersons for guidance. The salesperson's role presumes superior knowledge with respect to the buyer because he is consulted as an expert on the quality and uses of his product. Thus, it is important that a tacit professional ethic for sales be established to protect customers from possible exploitation. The purpose of this article is to propose a realistic professional ethic for sales — limited paternalism. Limited paternalism implies that a salesman should be his buyer's keeper in the sense that he should serve the interests of his customers by identifying their needs, while disclosing all relevant information about products or services in order to facilitate mutual exchange to mutual advantage.James M. Ebejer, after studying psychology and philosophy as an undergraduate, received his M.B.A. from Oakland University in 1986. Mr. Ebejer has recently begun a sales career in the ROLM Systems Marketing Division of IBM.Michael Morden received his Ph.D. from Columbia University and is serving as a Visiting Assistant Professor at Oakland University where his courses include Medical Ethics and Business Ethics.