Consumer ethics: The possible effects of terrorism and civil unrest on the ethical values of consumers

Research investigating the consumer's ethical beliefs, ideologies and orientation has been limited. Additionally, despite the repeated call in the literature for cross cultural research, virtually no studies have examined the ethical beliefs and ideologies of consumers from cultures other than those in North America. This study partially fills this gap in the literature by investigating the ethical beliefs, preferred ethical ideology, and degree of Machiavellianism of consumers from Egypt and Lebanon. The results indicate that consumers in Lebanon, which has been torn by civil unrest and terrorism, tend to be more Machiavellian, less idealistic, and more relativistic than their Egyptian counterparts. Additionally, the Lebanese consumers tend to be more accepting of questionable consumer practices.Mohammed Y. A. Rawwas is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Northern Iowa. His research has appeared in theJournal of Business Ethics, Journal of Hospital Marketing, Health Marketing Quarterly, Medical Marketing & Media, and national proceedings of the American Marketing Association.Scott J. Vitell is Associate Professor of Marketing and holder of the Michael S. Starnes Lecturship in Marketing and Business Ethics at the University of Mississippi. His work has previously appeared in theJournal of Macromarketing, theJournal of Business Ethics, Research in Marketing, theBusiness and Professional Ethics Journal and theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science as well as various other journals and proceedings.Jamal Al-Khatib is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire. His research has appeared in theJournal of Consumer Marketing, International Marketing Review andResearch in the International Business Disciplines as well as various national and regional proceedings.     

Beyond bean counting: Establishing high ethical standards in the public accounting profession

Business professions are increasingly faced with the question of how to best monitor the ethical behavior of their members. Conflicts could exist between a profession's desire to self-regulate and its accountability to the public at large. This study examines how members of one profession, public accounting, evaluate the relative effectiveness of various self-regulatory and externally imposed mechanisms for promoting a climate of high ethical behavior. Specifically, the roles of independent public accountants, regulatory and rule setting agencies, and undergraduate accounting education are investigated. Of 461 possible respondents, 230 questionnaires (a 49.6% response rate) indicated that the profession's own rule setting body (The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants) and the use of peer review were perceived as the most effective mechanisms, while government regulation was ranked least. Respondents also evaluated the extent to which ethics should be covered in the accounting curriculum. For every course, the CPAs believed a greater emphasis on ethics is appropriate than presently exists. Suggestions for more effectively integrating ethics into accounting courses are made. Finally, respondents were also asked whether in answering the questionnaire they used a definition of ethics as either the Professional Code of Conduct or a moral and philosphical framework for guiding beliefs. Those who viewed ethics as abiding by a professional code had more confidence in the mechanisms addressed in this study to aid the public accounting profession's ability to ensure high ethical standards of conduct. Methodological implications of this distinction for future studies in business ethics are discussed. Jeffrey R. Cohen is Assistant Professor of Accounting at Boston College. He received his Ph.D. from The University of Massachusetts at Amherst. He is a C.M.A. and a Peat Marwick Research Fellow. His articles have appeared in the Journal of Accounting Research, Decision Sciences and The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review. His work on Ethics has appeared in Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting, and The CPA Journal. Laurie W. Pant is Assistant Professor of Accounting at Boston College. She holds an M.B.A. and a D.B.A. from Boston University and an M.Ed. from Emory University. She serves on the editorial board of Issues in Accounting Education. Her articles on Ethics have appeared in Issues in Accounting Education, Management Accounting and The Organizational Behavior Teaching Review.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1989 American Accounting Association National Meeting.     

Risk Management for E-Cash Systems with Partial Real-Time Audit

We analyze coin-wallet and balance-wallet under partial real-time audit, and compute upper bounds on theft due to the fact that not all the transactions are audited in real time, assuming that everything else is perfect. In particular, we assume that the audit regime holds for innocent payees. Let v be the maximum allowed balance in a wallet, and 01 be the fraction of transactions that are audited in real time in an audit round. Assume one unit transactions. We show that the upper bound on expected theft for coin-wallet is lim₀^–2, while for plausible (similar) parameter choice the bound for a balance-wallet is O(exp(mv)), where 1<m. The former is nicely bounded for small transactions, however, the bound for balance-wallet can become huge in those cases where we require very small false alarm probability. We conclude that partial audit, may be suitable for coin-wallets with low denomination coins, and possibly for balance-wallet, when we may tolerate a relatively high false alarm rate, but it may be too risky for balance-wallet, where very low false alarm rate is required.     

Women,unions, and social policy

We contend in this paper that the trade union role in social policy is expanding due to the debate on women's issues. The Centrale de l'enseignement du Québec is seen as a forerunner of this trend, with its policy positions on questions previously seen as personal. The method of promotion of these interests is also new, with caucusing and networking. The significance of these changes goes beyond unionized women workers and affects all women. Dr. Margaret Beattie is Professor adjoint at the Département de Service Social, Université de Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada. Her most important publication is: Women and Factional Politics in a Teacher's Union, Atlantis: A Women's Studies Journal (Fall 1982).     

Reactions to ethical dilemmas: A study pertaining to certified public accountants

This study discusses how perceptions of ethics are formed by certified public accountants (CPAs). Theologians are used as a point of comparison. When considering CPA ethical dilemmas, both subject groups in this research project viewed confidentiality and independence as more important than recipient of responsibility and seriousness of breach. Neither group, however, was insensitive to any of the factors presented for its consideration. CPA reactions to ethical dilemmas were governed primarily by provisions of the CPA ethics code; conformity to that code may well be evidence of higher stage moral reasoning.Gregory A. Claypool is Associate Professor of Accounting and Finance at Youngstown State University.David F. Fetyko is Professor of Accounting at Kent State University. Michael A. Pearson is Professor of Accounting at Kent State University. He is the author of Enhancing Perceptions of Auditor Independence, Journal of Business Ethics 4 (1985), 53–6, and Auditor Independence Deficiencies and Alleged Audit Failures, Journal of Business Ethics 6 (1987), 281–7.     

A framework for thinking about Group Decision Support Systems (GDSS)

Strategic problem solving in organizations is a social process that disturbs established social relationships. Maintaining a negotiated social order is crucial to political feasibility and to emotional commitment from the participants in relation to a solution package. However, Group Decision Support Systems that attend overly to managing social order risk group think through bounded vision. This may be avoided if emotional commitment is also encouraged through participants experiencing the problem situation from multiple perspectives and in relation to alternative solution strategies. Commitment depends upon both means/ends rationality and procedural rationality. This acknowledges the balance in providing support to a group with respect to the negotiation of social order, with the more traditional group decision support for socially negotiating order out of the problem situation. This article argues that effective Group Decision Support Systems must attend to both aspects of creating order. OR modelling methods and the support that can be provided by modern micro-computers offer a new way forward—models can be toys that a group can play with together, enabling them to create knowledge as well as use it.     

Norman Bowie and Richard Rorty on multinationals: Does business ethics need ‘metaphysical comfort?’

Norman Bowie wrote an article on the moral obligations of multinational corporations in 1987. This paper is a response to Bowie, but more importantly, it is designed to articulate the force and substance of the pragmatist philosophy developed by Richard Rorty. In his article, Bowie suggested that moral universalism (which he endorses) is the only credible method of doing business ethics across cultures and that cultural relativism and ethnocentrism are not. Bowie, in a manner surprisingly common among contemporary philosophers, lumps Rorty into a bad guy category without careful analysis of his philosophy and ascribes to him views which clearly do not fit. I attempt to provide both a more careful articulation of Rorty's views, and to use his pragmatism to illustrate an approach to business ethics which is more fruitful than Bowie's. This brand of philosophy follows the Enlightenment spirit of toleration and attempts to set aside questions of Truth, whether religious or philosophical, and have ethics centered around what James called that which is good in the way of belief. Rather than looking for metaphysical foundations or some type of external justification, ethicists perform their craft from within the cultural traditions, narratives and practices of their society.Andrew C. Wicks, M.A. in Religious Ethics. Currently a fourth year Doctoral Candidate in the Religious Studies Department at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.     

An ethical analysis of deception in advertising

This paper examines several issues regarding deception in advertising. Some generally accepted definitions are considered and found to be inadequate. An alternative definition is proposed for legal/regulatory purposes and is related to a suggested definition of the term deception as it is used in everyday language. Based upon these definitions, suggestions are offered for detecting and regulating deception in advertising. This paper additionally considers the grounds for the generally held but largely unquestioned assumption that deceptive advertising is unethical. It is argued that deceptive advertising can be shown to be morally objectionable, on the weak assumption that it is prima facie wrong to harm others. Finally, the implications of this analysis with respect to current regulation of deceptive advertising by the FTC are considered. Thomas L. Carson is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. He was previously Lecturer at the University of California at Los Angeles and was holder of an NEH Fellowship for College Teachers. His most important publication is The Status of Morality, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1984. Forthcoming (in Philosophy and Public Affairs) is: Bribery, Extortion, and The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.Richard E. Wokutch is Associate Professor of Management at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University where he teaches in the social issues and policy areas. He previously held positions as Visiting Assistant Research Professor at the Values Center, University of Delaware, and as Visiting Fulbright Research Fellow, Science Center, Berlin, West Germany. He has published several recent articles in the areas of bluffing and deception in business and ethical/social investing. James E. Cox, Jr., is Assistant Professor of Management and Marketing at Illinois State University. Formerly, he was at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (from September 1979 until August 1983). He was a fellow at the 1979 American Marketing Association Ph. D. Consortium and his research has been published in the Journal of Forecasting, the Journal of Marketing Education, the Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, and the Proceedings of the National Council of Physical Distribution Management. He is also co-author of the book Sales Forecasting Methods: A Survey of Recent Developments.     

The “Modified Vendetta Sanction” as a method of corporate-collective punishment

Shannon Shipp argues for the Modified Vendetta Sanction as a method of corporate-collective punishment. He claims that this sanction evades the difficulties of Peter French's Hester Prynne Sanction. In this paper I argue that, though the Modified Vendetta Sanction evades the problems that Shipp poses for it, it fails to evade some of the difficulties that I pose for French's method. Moreover, there are some difficulties that plague the Modified Vendetta Sanction which do not count against the Hester Prynne Sanction. Therefore, if my analysis holds, then Shipp's method neither improves significantly on the Hester Prynne Sanction nor is unproblematic in its own right. The significance of this paper is that it foils yet another attempt by some corporate punishment theorists to establish the plausibility of a method of corporate-collective punishment. J. Angelo Corlett has authored papers on ethics, social/political philosophy, history of philosophy, value theory, epistemology and metaphysics. His papers appear in such journals as the Public Affairs Quarterly, the Journal of Business Ethics, Business & Professional Ethics Journal, the American Psychologist, Idealistic Studies, the American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Medicine. He is the editor of and contributor to two forthcoming books: Equality and Liberty: Analyzing Rawls and Nozick and Analyzing Marx: The Moral Assessment of Capitalist Exploitation.     

Affirmative action: An ethical evaluation

This paper examines four major arguments advanced by opponents of race and gender conscious affirmative action and rebuts them on the basis of moral considerations. It is clear that the problem of past racial/gender discrimination has not disappeared; its effects linger, resulting in a wide disparity in opportunities and attainments between minorities/women and whites/males. Affirmative action, although not the perfect solution, is by far the most viable method of redressing the effects of past discrimination. Thus it cannot be dismissed lightly by way of arguing for mere colorblindness. Bill Shaw is Professor of Business Law at the University of Texas at Austin. He is on the editorial board of the American Business Law Journal and the Midwest Law Review. Among his most recent publications are The Legal Environment of Business (with Art Wolfe), Environmental Law: Text and Cases, The Global Environment: A Proposal to Eliminate Marine Oil Pollution (With Frank Cross and Brenda Winslett, The Natural Resources Journal), and Comparable Worth and Its Prospects (The Labor Law Journal). Professor Shaw would like to acknowledge the research assistance of Ms. Sohni Z. Yousuff.     

A reply to Thomas Mulligan's “critique of Milton Friedman's essay ‘The Social Responsibility of Business to Increase Its Profits’”

Professor Thomas Mulligan undertakes to discredit Milton Friedman's thesis that The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. He attempts to do this by moving from Friedman's paradigm characterizing a socially responsible executive as willful and disloyal to a different paradigm, i.e., one emphasizing the consultative and consensus-building role of a socially responsible executive. Mulligan's critique misses the point, first, because even consensus-building executives act contrary to the will of minority shareholders, but even more importantly, because he assumes that the mandate of a shareholder majority brings legitimacy to efforts of corporate managers to utilize corporate wealth in solving social problems. It is the role of our democratic institutions to deal with national agenda issues such as inflation, unemployment, and pollution, not that of the private sector. Corporations and private individuals do have a role to play in enhancing the quality of the human environment, however, and the author suggests a coherent means of developing that role in an effort rescue corporate social responsibility from Mulligan no less than from Friedman. Bill Shaw, Lynette S. Autrey Visiting Professor of Business Ethics at the Jesse H. School of Administration, Rice University, is Professor of Business Law at the University of Texas at Austin. He is staff editor of the American Business Law Journal and the Midwest Law Review. Among his most recent publications are The Structure of the Legal Environment (with Art Wolfe), Environmental Law: Text and Cases, The Global Environment: A Proposal to Eliminate Marine Oil Pollution (With Frank Cross and Brenda Winslett, The Natural Resources Journal), and Comparable Worth and Its Prospects (The Labor Law Journal).     

Business regulation,business ethics and the professional employee

The differences in business reactions to legal regulation, and the nature of business moralities, are examined through the eyes of an expert group — in-house lawyers. The research indicates that lawyers inevitably provide a degree of control through their technical expertise, but that they also identify strongly with their companies and emphasise shared ethics rather than ethical differences between lawyers and their employers. This can partly be explained by their integration with the company but also rests on the problematic nature of law and regulatory controls in relation to organisations within the community. In-house lawyers therefore reject a policing role in favour of a counselling role. Since they perceive themselves as part of a shared culture of ethics, they also avoid a leadership role. However, the article suggests that the nature of legal judgment should assist lawyers towards such a role, while recognising that organisational statesmanship must be constrained by organisational culture and the wider community culture of ethical standards. Dr Karl J. Mackie is Director of the Centre for Legal Studies in the University of Nottingham, where he lectures in employment law and in management skills development. Lawyers in Business: and the Law Business is published by Macmillan (London) 1989. Dr Mackie is a member of the Business Strategy Network and a consultant in business strategy.This paper has been adapted from Mackie, Lawyers in Business: and the Law Business (1989), (London: Macmillan), ch. 10.     

Business ethics: Conflicts,practices and beliefs of industrial executives

This paper presents the responses of 118 executives to a mail survey which examined their views of business ethics and various business practices. In addition to identifying various sources of ethical conflict, current business practices are also examined with respect to how ethical or unethical each is believed to be. Results are also presented which outline executive responses to four ethical business situations. Overall conclusions to the study are outlined, as well as future research needs.Scott J. Vitell is Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Mississippi. His most important publications include A General Theory of Marketing Ethics (1986) (with Shelby D. Hunt) and Marketing's Contribution to Economic Development: A Look at the Last 30 Years (1985) (with Van R. Wood). Troy A. Festervand is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Mississippi. Dr. Festervand obtained his Ph.D. in 1980 from the University of Arkansas. His publications have appeared in the Akron Business and Economic Review, Journal of Small Business Management, and elsewhere. He is active in a number of organizations and a frequent participant at professional meetings.     

Lying and intentions

In this essay I criticize recent attempts to prove that the concept of lying does not include the intent to deceive. I argue that examples by Isenberg and Carson fail to prove that one can lie without intending to deceive and, furthermore, that untoward consequences would follow if these authors were correct. I conclude that since intending to deceive is indeed a necessary condition of lying, the class of statements that constitute lies is smaller than what Isenberg et al. would suggest. Hence the class of deceptive advertisements is also correspondingly smaller. Gary E. Jones is Associate Professor at the Philosophy Department of the University of San Diego. He won the Review of Metaphysics Dissertation Essay Contest, 1977 and he holds fellowship of the University of Cincinnati and the University of Tennessee. His most important publications are The State and the Right to Health Care (in Philosophical Quarterly), Rights and Desires (in Ethics), Vindication, Hume, and Induction (in Canadian Journal of Philosophy), Engelhardt on Abortion and the Euthenasia of Defective Infants (in Linacre Quarterly) and Clendinnen, Jackson and Induction (in Philosophy of Science).     

The indefensibility of insider trading

The article, Inside Trading Revisited, has taken the stance that insider trading is neither unethical nor economically inefficient. Attacking my arguments to the contrary developed in an earlier article, The Ethics of Inside Trading (Journal of Business Ethics, 1989) this article constructs careful arguments and even appeals to Adam Smith to justify its conclusions. In my response to this article I shall clarify my position as well as that of Smith to support my counter-contention that insider trading is both unethical and inefficient. Patricia H. Werhane is the Henry J. Wirtenberger Professor of Business Ethics at Loyola University, Chicago. She is the author or editor of seven books including Ethical Issues in Business,edited with Tom Donaldson, in its third edition, Persons, Rights, and Corporations, Profits and Responsibility,and Philosophical Issues in Human Rights,edited with David Ozar and A. R. Gini. She is past president of the Society for Value Inquiry, founding member, past president and Executive Director of the Society of Business Ethics, and Chairperson of the Ethics Advisory Council of Arthur Andersen & Co. She serves on the editorial boards of the Journal of Business Ethics,the Journal of Value-Based Management, and Public Affairs Quarterly,and is Editor-in-Chief of Business Ethics Quarterly.Her book, Adam Smith and his Legacy for Modern Capitalismis forthcoming with Oxford University Press.     

‘I am we’ consciousness and dialog as organizational ethics method

There is a practical five-step method of ethics dialog developed by John Woolman, an 18th c. businessman and ethical activist, that was used by Robert K. Greenleaf, a 20th c. A.T.&T. Corporate Vice-President, that includes: (a) friendly, emotive affect; (b) discussion of mutual commonalities; (c) discussion of issue entanglements; (d) discussion of potential experimental solutions; and, (e) trial and feedback discussion. This method of dialog appears to proceed with a type of consciousness considered by John Woolman and Bernard Lonergan as one where the I is conscious that I and Others are part of a more foundational, larger and prior We. This type of dialog is different than Socratic dialog. The corresponding type of consciousness is different than the more derivative, e.g., two allies being united in their response to a common goal. It is also different than Buber's I and Thou appreciative consciounsess of the interestingness, value, diversity, and uniqueness of others. Woolman dialog as seen in four cases appears to be a concrete method that has some value both as an end in itself and as instrumental means that can: be issue effective, help build ethical organization/community culture, and help facilitate peaceful, evolutionary change and development. Limitations of the method are also considered. The method may also be a several hundred year anticipation of experiment based pragmatist philosophy that is anthropologically sensitive to cultural entanglements.

John Donne (17th c.)

Richard P. Nielsen is a professor in the Department of Organizational Studies, School of Management, Boston College. Related articles of his include: Dialogic Leadership As Organizational Ethics Action (Praxis) Method, Journal of Business Ethics(October 1990); Negotiating As An Ethics Action (Praxis) Strategy, Journal of Business Ethics(May 1989); Changing Unethical Organizational Behavior, Academy of Management Executive(May 1989); Arendt's Action Philosophy and the Manager as Eichmann, Richard III, Faust, or Institution Citizen, California Management Review(Spring 1984); and Cooperative Strategy, Strategic Management Journal(September–October 1988).     

The influence of organizational rank and role on marketing professionals' ethical judgments

The author examines empirically the extent to which marketing professionals of different organizational ranks (lower versus upper) and roles (executive versus research) differ in ethical judgments. For organizational rank, the results indicate that marketing professionals of lower organizational rank do not differ from those of upper organizational rank in ethical judgments. For organizational role, the results suggest that marketing professionals of executive role differ in an overall sense from marketing professionals of research role in ethical judgments. In general, marketing professionals of executive role reflect higher ethical judgments than those of research role. Ishmael P. Akaah is Professor of Marketing at Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. Professor Akaah's articles have appeared in the Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Health Care Marketing, Journal of Business Research, International Marketing Review, Journal of Global Marketing, Journal of Business Logistics, Journal of Direct Marketing, and Proceedings of the American Marketing Association, and elsewhere. His current research interests include consumer decision processes, marketing ethics, and international marketing strategy.     

Ethics and the professional responsibility of lawyers

Applied ethics is sometimes understood on the engineering model: As engineers apply physics to human problems, so philosophers apply ethics to dilemmas of professional practice. It is argued that there is nothing in ethics comparable to physics. Using legal ethics as an example, it is suggested that political philosophy provides a better approach to understanding professional ethics. If, for example, the adversary system is a legitimate social institution, and if attorneys must adhere to certain principles in order for that institution to fulfill its purposes, then attorneys may be said to be subject to those ethical principles. Kenneth Kipnis is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Hawaii at Manoa. He is the author of Legal Ethics (Prentice-Hall, 1986), editor of several volumes on legal, social and political philosophy, and co-author of the Code of Ethical Conduct of the National Association for the Education of Young Children.     

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   

What is business in America?

This paper, presented at the Conference on Value Issues in Business at Millsaps College, is divided into three parts. The first sketches the logic of the evolution of U.S. business and suggests reasons for its remarkable success. The second assesses the power of U.S. business in modern society, both from an economic and political perspective. The third attempts to formulate the underlying philosophy of U.S. business using ideals such as the work ethic, entrepreneurism, democracy, and equality. Some of these ideals, the paper suggests, are irreconcilable. Thomas J. Donaldson is Associate Professor of Philosophy at Loyola University of Chicago. His publications in the area of business ethics include numerous articles and two books, Ethical Issues in Business co-edited with Patricia Werhane, and Corporations and Morality.