Business Ethics in Modern Spain

The leading academic in Spanish Business Ethics offers a brief history of his subject in Spain and reflects on the evolution taking place in the 1990s. Professor Argandoña is Secretary General of IESE (Instituto de Estudios Superiores de la Empresa) in Barcelona, the International Graduate School of Management of the University of Navarra, Av. Pearson 21, 08034 Barcelona, Spain. He is also a member and Honorary Treasurer of the European Business Ethics Network (EBEN) and an Associate Editor of this Review.     

Ethics and management: A controversial issue

This paper is a part of a broader research project which aims to examine how ethical paradigms are related to theories of organization and management. Using an analysis of various studies on the issue of Business Ethics as its point of departure the paper points out that there are two converging lines of thought. The first emphasizes that management should be reexamined in the light of the cultural changes taking place and maintains that management is a key factor in this change. The second proposes that ethics in general (and Business Ethics in particular) should be understood to mean more than simply applying certain values and stresses that this definition of ethics should be rethought in order to foster a closer relationship between ethics and the decision-making processes.Josep M. Lozano teaches Social Philosophy and Business Ethics at ESADE (Barcelona). He hasLicenciatura degrees in Philosophy and Theology and is currently working on his doctorate, researching the correlation between concepts of ethics and management. He is a regular contributor to a number of Spanish journals, writing on cultural analysis, ethics and theology. He is the author of three books which are systematic studies of these subjects.     

The individual investor in securities markets: An ethical analysis

In this paper we consider whether one type of individual investor, which we call at risk investors, should be denied access to securities markets to prevent them from suffering serious financial harm. We consider one kind of paternalistic justification for prohibiting at risk investors from participating in securities markets, and argue that it is not successful. We then argue that restricting access to markets is justified in some circumstances to protect the rights of at risk investors. We conclude with some suggestions about how this might be done.Robert E. Frederick is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Bentley College and Assistant Director of the Center for Business Ethics. Before coming to Bentley College he worked at a large financial institution for nine years, where he was Vice President for Administrative Services. Dr. Frederick has authored or co-authored over fifteen articles and has co-edited four books. He has consulted on business ethics for several major corporations. W. Michael Hoffman is the founding Director of the Center for Business Ethics, and Professor and Chair of the Department of Philosophy at Bentley College, Waltham, MA. He was President of the Society for Business Ethics in 1989. He has authored or edited ten books, including Business Ethics: Readings and Cases in Corporate Morality (McGraw-Hill, 1984; 1990) and published over thirty articles. He has consulted on business ethics for many major corporations and institutions of higher learning, and he serves on the board of several journals.     

Are deontology and teleology mutually exclusive?

Current discussions of business ethics usually only consider deontological and utilitarian approaches. What is missing is a discussion of traditional teleology, often referred to as virtue ethics. While deontology and teleology are useful, they both suffer insufficiencies. Traditional teleology, while deontological in many respects, does not object to utilitarian style calculations as long as they are contained within a moral framework that is not utilitarian in its origin. It contains the best of both approaches and can be used to focus on the individual's role within an organization. More work is needed in exposing students and faculty to traditional teleology and its place in business ethic's discussions.Dr. James E. Macdonald received a Master of Business Administration, a Ph.D in Philosophy, and a J.D. He is a founding member of the Business Ethics section of the Academy of Legal Studies in Business and past-president of the Rocky Mountain Academy of Legal Studies in Business.Professor Caryn L. Beck-Dudley received a Juris Doctorate. She is a member of the Business Ethics sections of the Academy of Legal Studies in Business and the Society of Business Ethics. She has published several articles and in 1993 she received the Holmes-Cardozo award from the Academy of Legal Studies in Business for outstanding paper submitted and presented at the national meeting. She is currently secretary-treasure of the Academy of Legal Studies in Business.     

Business ethics in Italy: The state of the art

Up until now, the work which has been done in Italy might be considered of a preparatory nature. In 1985 and in 1986, the association of Catholic businessmen produced two documents on the ethical implications of economic activity. But in those years, the world of big business, had not yet realised how central the argument was becoming.The first significant signs of interest for business ethics appeared in 1987. In June, 1988, the first Italian National Conference on Business Ethics took place in Milan. The main outcome of that conference has been the constitution of the Italian Chapter of the European Network. In 1988, I founded the first issue of the journal entitled Etica degli-Affari. Promotional efforts have developped along two lines. The first regards programs of executive training and, eventually, consulting. In the second place, efforts are being made to elaborate and introduce codes of ethics in Italian corporations. There are, however, some very fundamental difficulties involved in the promotion of Business Ethics in Italy. The first problem is the fact that Italy is a country with a low ethical temperature. We don't have a strong sense of national identity, nor do we have a strong sense of the state. The second difficulty has to do with the business environment — the Italian business community itself. As a self-conscious, self-aware nucleus of a sector of society, the Italian business community is a very recent, and rather minoritarian social phenomenon.I personally feel that a certain protagonism on the part of prominent business leaders who are quite sensitive to the theme of ethics would prove to be very influential and greatly accelerate the process.Mario Unnia is managing director of Prospecta, a research firm, Milan, Italy. He has lectured and published extensively in the fields of Business and Public Policy, Corporate Culture and Labour Relations. He has founded and is chairman of the Italian Business Ethics Network. He is editor of Etica degli Affari.     

Ethics and the gender equality dilemma for U.S. multinationals

U.S. multinational enterprises must now follow the policies of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in their overseas operations, at least with respect to U.S. expatriate employees. Doing so in a culture which discourages gender equality in the workplace raises difficult issues, both practically and ethically. Vigorously importing U.S. attitudes toward gender-equality into a social culture such as Japan or Saudi Arabia may seem ethnocentric, a version of ethical imperialism. Yet adapting to host country norms risks a kind of moral relativism. This article supports the view that MNEs which promote workplace equality in a host country such as Japan, which is actively involved in the international economic and political community, is not ethical imperialism in any pejorative sense and is preferable to a moral relativism or social contract approach.We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, and endowed by their creator with certain rights — life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776 All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948Don Mayer teaches Legal Environment of Business at Oakland University School of Business Administration. He received his L.L.M. in International and Comparative Law. Professor Mayer's work has appeared in the American Business Law Journal, the Midwest Law Review, and the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. An article entitled Sovereign Immunities and Moral Community appears in the October 1992 issue of theBusiness Ethics Quarterly.Anita Cava teaches Business Law and Business Ethics at both the graduate and undergraduate level at the University of Miami's School of Business Administration. She received her B.A. with Distinction and her J.D., Professor Cava has published in the area of ethics in law reviews and business journals.     

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.     

The influence of stated organizational concern upon ethical decision making

This experimental study evaluated the influence of stated organizational concern for ethical conduct upon managerial behavior. Using an in-basket to house the manipulation, a sample of 113 MBA students with some managerial experience reacted to scenarios suggesting illegal conduct and others suggesting only unethical behavior. Stated organizational concern for ethical conduct was varied from none (control group) to several other situations which included a high treatment consisting of a Code of Ethics, an endorsement letter by the CEO and specific sanctions for managerial misconduct. Only in the case of suggested illegal behavior tempered by high organizational concern were managers influenced by organizational policy to modify the morality of their actions. However, the responses to the illegal scenarios were significantly more ethical than the reactions given to the unethical (but not illegal) situations. The implications of these findings are then discussed. Gene R. Laczniak is Professor of Business at Marquette University (Milwaukee, WI) and he is co-author of Marketing Ethics (with P. E. Murphy), Boston: Lexington Books, 1985. He has also written various articles on Business Ethics. Edward J. Inderrieden is Assistant Professor of Management at Marquette University.     

A validation and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale

Reidenbach and Robin (1988, 1990) proposed and refined a multidimensional ethics scale. This study replicates and extends their work by examining the generalizability of the scale beyond marketing to accounting, and to subjects from across the United States and other countries. Results indicate that, in general, the scale holds for this different sample and context. However, an additional utilitarian construct emerged in the current study as important for accounting academics in their ethical decision-making. We also found that when we refined Reidenbach and Robin's measure of intention to make a particular choice, a social desirability bias or halo effect was identified. Methodological implications for business ethics research are also presented.Jeffrey R. Cohen is Associate Professor of Accounting at Boston College. He is a C.M.A. and a KPMG Peat Marwick Faculty Fellow. His articles have appeared in theJournal of Accounting Research, Decision Sciences andThe Organizational Behavior Teaching Review. His work on Ethics has appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting, andThe CPA Journal.Laurie W. Pant is Associate Professor of Accounting at Suffolk University. She holds an M.B.A. and a D.B.A. and an M.Ed. She serves on the editorial board ofIssues in Accounting Education. Her articles on Ethics have appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting andThe Organizational Behavior Teaching Review.David Sharp is Assistant Professor of Accounting at University of Western Ontario. He holds a Ph.D. and an M.Sc. He serves on the editorial board of theJournal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation. His articles have appeared inThe Midland Corporate Finance Journal andSloan Management Review.     

Cultural and socioeconomic constraints on international codes of ethics: Lessons from accounting

This paper provides a framework for the examination of cultural and socioeconomic factors that could impede the acceptance and implementation of a profession's international code of conduct. We apply it to the Guidelines on Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by the International Federation of Accountants (1990). To examine the cultural effects, we use Hofstede's (1980a) four work-related values: power distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism, and masculinity. The socioeconomic factors are the level of development of the profession and the availability of economic resources. We evaluate the applicability and relevance of the accounting guideline, and discuss the implications for accounting and other professions.Jeffrey R. Cohen is Assistant Professor of Accounting at Boston College. He is a CMA and a KPMG Peat Marwick Faculty Fellow. His articles have appeared in theJournal of Accounting Research, Decision Sciences, The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting. His work on ethics has appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting andThe CPA Journal.Laurie W. Pant is Associate Professor of Accounting at Suffolk University. She holds an MBA and DBA and an M.Ed. She is a CMA and serves on the editorial board ofIssues in Accounting Education. Her articles have appeared inJournal of Business Ethics, Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting, The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting.David J. Sharp is Assistant Professor of Accounting at the University of Western Ontario. He received his Ph.D. and M.Sc. He is an ACMA and serves on the editorial board ofJournal of International Accounting Auditing and Taxation. His articles have appeared in theMidland Corporate Finance Journal, Sloan Management Review, andThe International Journal of Accounting.     

A comment on ‘A Multidimensional Scale for Measuring Business Ethics: A Purification and Refinement’

This comment is offered in response to Hansen's A Multidimensional Scale for Measuring Business Ethics: A Purification and Refinement. Five issues arising from Hansen's purification and refinement efforts are addressed. These include the issues of parsimony, predictive validity, collinearity, reliability, and what we see as a confusion between normative and positive theory.Dr. R. Eric Reidenbach is Professor of Marketing, and Director of the Center for Business Development and Research at The University of Southern Mississippi. He has written extensively on business and marketing ethics.Dr. Donald P. Robin, Professor of Business Ethics and Professor of Marketing, is coauthor with R. Eric Reidenbach of two recent books on business ethics with Prentice-Hall. He is a frequent lecturer on business ethics and is the author of several articles on the subject.     

Business ethics — A developmental perspective: The evolution of the free and mature corporation

Ethics in Business organizations is a multidimensional process involving decision-making, leadership and institution building. The relatively simpler ethics of day-to-day decisions has to be reflected upon in the context of corporate desire for continuity, embedded in the values of a progressive society. At the operating level, the multivalence of decision situations is emphasized in place of the simple good — bad or cost — benefit dichotomies. A decision tree framework is presented to reflect the richness of the decisions. At the corporate level, the concept of responsive strategy as a synthesis of vision, power, and responsibility is proposed. In this, the crucial role of leaders cannot be over-emphasized. Finally, at the societal level, the evolution of capitalism and its corporate forms is seen as a milestone in people's search for enlightened ways to achieve refined ends. As more businesses assert their rightful roles in society, progressive institutional forms more in tune with the values of the twenty-first century should emerge.L. L. Jayaraman is Associate Professor of Management at Montclair State College, New Jersey, U.S.A. He holds a Ph.D. and a Post-graduate Diploma in Management. His research interests include Corporate Strategy and Business Ethics. Recent publications includeHow to Compete in the Global Economy: A Fresh Look at Business Strategy, in the January 1993 issue of theAmerican Business Review. During the Summer of 1992, he was a visiting professor at the School of Management, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Federal Republic.Byung K. Min is Associate Professor of Management and Chairman of the Department of Management at Montclair State College, New Jersey, U.S.A. He holds a Ph.D. His research interests cover Corporate Strategy, Business Ethics, Organizational Behavior and Management Information Systems. His article has appeaed in theJournal of Applied Psychology.     

Ethics in education: A comparative study

This study reports the results of a survey designed to assess the impact of education on the perceptions of ethical beliefs of students. The study examines the beliefs of students from selected colleges in an eastern university. The results indicate that beliefs which students perceive are required to succeed in the university differ among colleges. Business and economics students consistently perceive a greater need for unethical beliefs than students from other colleges. Michael S. Lane is an Associate Professor of Management at West Virginia University. He is the coauthor of Corporate Goal structures and Business students: A Comparative Study of Values, Journal of Business Ethics (1989). Dietrich L. Schaupp is Professor of Management at West Virginia University. He is the coauthor of Pygmalion Effect: An Issue for Business Education and Ethics, Journal of Business Ethics (1988).     

Corporate democracy and the rights of shareholders

Some have argued that because of weaknesses in corporate democracy, there is widespread abuse of shareholders' rights in American securities markets. I describe a number of horror stories that shareholders might tell to support this claim. Then I argue that despite appearances to the contrary, there is not widespread abuse of shareholders' rights in American securities markets. This is because (i) corporations, when doing things that look abusive, are generally violating neither the legal rights nor the charter rights of shareholders and (ii) shareholders — in their role as shareholders — have no other rights than these. William B. Irvine is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Wright State University. He is the author of The Ethics of Investing, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 6, no. 3.     

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.     

The association between corporate social-responsibility and financial performance: The paradox of social cost

It is generally assumed that common stock investors are exclusively interested in earning the highest level of future cash-flow for a given amount of risk. This view suggests that investors select a well-diversified portfolio of securities to achieve this goal. Accordingly, it is often assumed that investors are unwilling to pay a premium for corporate behavior which can be described as socially-responsible.Recently, this view has been under increasing attack. According to the Social Investment Forum, at least 538 institutional investors now allocate funds using social screens or criteria. In addition, Alice Tepper Marlin, president of the New York-based Council on Economic Priorities has recently estimated that about $600 billion of invested funds are socially-screened (1992). MOSES L. PAVA is Associate Professor of Accounting and the Alvin Einbender Chair in Business Ethics at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests include financial reporting and business ethics. He has recently published articles in the Journal of Accountancy, Management Accounting, The Financial Executive, and Journal of Applied Business Research. His first book, The Shareholder's Use of Corporate Annual Reports, was published in 1993. JOSHUA KRAUSZ is Gershon and Merle Stern Professor of Banking and Finance at the Sy Syms School of Business, Yeshiva University. His research interests are in the areas of financial analysis, ethics and social responsibility, financial accounting, options and derivatives, price behavior, capital budgeting and taxation. He has published in The Review of Economics and Statistics, The Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Accounting Horizons, Applied Economics, The Journal of Extractive Industries Accounting, and The Mid-Atlantic Journal of Business.     

A Business Ethics Experiential Learning Module: the Maryland Business School Experience

In this paper we describe the principal activities of the initial implementation in May of 1996 of one of the Experiential Learning Modules (ELMs) entitled Business Ethics (UMCP 1995, p. 7) that is part of the full-time MBA program at the College of Business and Management (Maryland Business School) of the University of Maryland at College Park (UMCP). Additionally, we briefly consider the location of this Business Ethics ELM in the curriculum of the Maryland Business School's full-time MBA program. We also outline how the Business Ethics ELM was developed. Further, we provide a discussion and a short conclusion.     

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).     

A paradigm for design,promulgation and enforcement of ethical codes

The paper explores the promise of ethical codes as a means to control unethical behavior in business. After a review of arguments for ethical codes from outside the business system, the paper outlines the arguments for codes from inside the business system at the level of the industry, firm and individual executive.The paper then discusses the problems of code design — the dilemma between specific practices and general precepts — and offers a model for a thoroughgoing code. This is followed by a discussion of the problems of promulgation and code enforcement.In conclusion, the paper summarizes the limitations of ethical codes and the arguments which have been made against them. Earl A. Molander is Associate Professor of Management at Portland State University. He is the author of Responsive Capitalism,and co-author of Is the Ethics of Business Changing, which appeared in Harvard Business Review.     

Bribery,consent and prima facie duty: A rejoinder to Carson

Responding to my paper Bribery Tom Carson argues that bribe takers violate promisory obligations in a wider range of cases than I acknowledge and insists that bribe taking is prima facie wrong in all contexts. I argue that he is wrong on both counts. Michael Philips is a Professor of Philosophy at Portland State University. Recent papers by him have appeared in the Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Ethics, Philosophical Studies, Nous, Law and Philosophy, The Journal of Business Ethics, and several other journals. He is currently at work an a book in moral theory.